So is the NPR and the BBC, so I'm not sure how much this means.
It's best to take what everyone says with a grain of salt and piece things together from the evidence presented. I certainly don't believe everything posted by any of the outlets.
ZH definitely plays more fast and loose with things, though.
"NPR differs from other non-profit membership media organizations, such as AP, in that it was established by an act of Congress[2] and most of its member stations are owned by government entities (often public universities)."
"Typically, NPR member stations receive funds through on-air pledge drives, corporate underwriting, state and local governments, educational institutions, and the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). In 2009, member stations derived 6% of their revenue from federal, state and local government funding, 10% of their revenue from CPB grants, and 14% of their revenue from universities.[24][41]"
Depending on whether the universities are public or private, this accounts for something approaching 30% of their budget.
So that 2% figure doesn't really give the full picture.
Moreover, I've never said that was a bad thing, in fact I've argued against it. There are plenty of these all over the world and I take what everybody says with a grain of salt and look at the evidence presented rather than the opinions given.
Much of it is bonkers-insane, ah, bullshit of a different flavour.
People wouldn't be reading the second, if they didn't print the first.