SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Jenn Ettinger, 202-265-1490 x 35
On Thursday, more than 50 groups representing a wide range of women's, media and social justice organizations, including Free Press, sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission urging the agency to make diversity issues a priority in its upcoming media ownership review. The letter comes as the FCC hosts a hearing on media ownership in Atlanta on Thursday evening.
On Thursday, more than 50 groups representing a wide range of women's, media and social justice organizations, including Free Press, sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission urging the agency to make diversity issues a priority in its upcoming media ownership review. The letter comes as the FCC hosts a hearing on media ownership in Atlanta on Thursday evening. The event, featuring FCC Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Michael Copps, will be held on the campus of Georgia Tech from 5-8 p.m. The event is free and open to the public.
Free Press Senior Adviser Joseph Torres, who will be a panelist at the FCC event, made the following statement:
"It matters who controls our airwaves. Women and people of color deserve better opportunities to become broadcasters and to serve local communities. Unfortunately, policies that once existed to bolster ownership diversity are now gone. What's more, the FCC has allowed fewer and fewer companies to control more of the public airwaves. Allowing more consolidation will only further erode the diversity of our media system."
Thursday's letter follows one sent to the FCC two weeks ago by a coalition of major civil rights groups that urged the FCC to address longstanding inequality in broadcast ownership.
The signers of Thursday's letter ask that the FCC evaluate the impact of its media ownership rules on ownership opportunities for women and people of color; take proactive measures to promote ownership of broadcast stations by underrepresented groups; and guard against further erosion of media ownership among these groups by maintaining existing media ownership limits.
The full text of the letter is below.
The Honorable Julius Genachowski
Chairman
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554
Re: MB Dkt 09-182, 2010 Quadrennial Review - Review of the Commission's Broadcast Ownership Rules and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
Dear Chairman Genachowski:
We, the undersigned organizations, urge the Federal Communications Commission to make diversity a central focus of its upcoming Quadrennial Media Ownership Rule Review.
The strength of our country lies in the diversity of our people. Our media system will better serve the public interest when it draws on the diverse backgrounds, perspectives and talents of the population. Unfortunately, ownership of the nation's media outlets consistently fails to reflect this diversity.
Women and people of color historically have been grossly underrepresented in ownership of radio and television stations -- media forms that use the public airwaves and rank as our nation's most popular and influential outlets. Women comprise over 51 percent of the population yet hold only 6 percent of radio and TV station licenses.And while people of color make up over 36 percent of the U.S. population, they hold just over 7 percent of radio licenses and 3 percent of TV licenses.[1]
The continued absence of FCC action in the face of deep and intractable ownership disparities is unacceptable. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed that "ownership diversity is an important aspect of the overall media ownership regulatory framework."[2] Yet the FCC has failed to adopt proactive policies to remedy these disparities. Furthermore, it has persistently neglected even to examine or address the impact of existing media market consolidation on broadcast ownership opportunities for women and people of color. The FCC must take care not to repeat the mistakes of prior administrations by "pun[ting] yet again on this important issue."[3]
Most importantly, while the FCC assesses the impact of its media ownership rules and pursues more active measures to address longstanding disparities in broadcast media ownership, it must not undercut the benefits of such measures by allowing greater consolidation of broadcast outlets.
Existing media concentration levels already limit ownership opportunities for historically underrepresented groups. Excess consolidation has crowded out female and minority owners, who tend to be single-station owners who cannot compete with consolidated groups for programming and advertising revenue. Allowing increased consolidation in local media markets would raise station prices and further diminish the already limited number of stations available for purchase. This would leave women and people of color with fewer opportunities to become media owners and promote diverse programming in local communities.
In conclusion, we urge the FCC to do the following:
Absent these measures, ownership levels among underrepresented groups will continue to decline and the promise of a diverse media system that serves the information needs of all people will continue to elude our nation.
Respectfully submitted.
Access Humboldt
Alliance for Community Media
American Association of University Women
Asian American Journalists Association
Bitch Media
Center for Media Justice
Center for Social Inclusion
Common Cause
Digital Sisters
Ella Baker Center for Human Rights
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
Feminist Majority Foundation
Free Press
Future of Music Coalition
Hollaback!
Institute for Local Self-Reliance
International Museum of Women
Media Access Project
Media Alliance
Media Council Hawai'i
Media Equity Collaborative
Media Literacy Project
MomsRising
National Alliance for Media Art & Culture
National Association of Black Journalists
National Association of Hispanic Journalists
National Council of Negro Women
National Council of Women Media and Technology Task Force
National Council of Women's Organizations
National Hispanic Media Coalition
National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association
National Organization for Women Foundation
National Women's Law Center
Native American Journalists Association
Native Public Media
New Moon Girls
People TV
People's Production House
Prometheus Radio Project
Rainbow PUSH Coalition
Reclaim the Media!
Reel Grrls
Southern Connecticut State University Sexuality and Gender Equality Center
Southern Connecticut State University Women's Studies Program
SPARK Movement
Teen Voices Magazine
UNITY: Journalists of Color
Women, Action, & the Media
Women In Media & News
Women's Media Center
Women Who Tech
[1] S. Derek Turner, Out of the Picture 2007: Minority & Female TV Station Ownership in the United States, 2007, https://www.freepress.net/files/otp2007.pdf, and S. Derek Turner, Off the Dial: Female and Minority Radio Station Ownership in the United States, 2007, https://www.freepress.net/files/off_the_dial.pdf.
[2]Prometheus Radio Project v. FCC, 652 F. 3d 431, 472 (3d Cir. 2011)
[3]Id. at 471.
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490One advocacy group leader highlighted that "$200 billion is enough to materially change the lives of Americans," from establishing universal pre-K education to building over 100,000 housing units.
As US President Donald Trump on Thursday confirmed reporting that he's seeking $200 billion more from Congress to continue waging his unpopular war of choice on Iran, Rep. Ilhan Omar was among those forcefully pushing back.
"We're told there's no money for universal healthcare or to end hunger in this country. But somehow $200 billion more for war will likely move through Congress without question," said the progressive Minnesota Democrat, who fled civil war in Somalia as a child. "Not another penny for another endless war."
Since Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu started bombing Iran late last month—creating a spiraling crisis that has now killed and injured thousands of people across the Middle East, plus damaged civilian infrastructure in multiple countries—anti-war lawmakers and organizations have delivered similar messages.
"While they kick 17 million Americans off their healthcare, Republicans want to spend billions on Trump's reckless war of choice," Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in early March. "Hell no."
Last week, shortly after Pentagon officials told Congress that just the first six days cost Americans more than $11.3 billion, over 250 groups collectively told lawmakers on Capitol Hill to "vote against any additional funding for Trump's unconstitutional war."
At the time, the reported figure was a quarter of what it is now: $50 billion. The coalition noted that the funding "would be enough to restore food assistance for 4 million Americans that was taken away in the tax and budget reconciliation bill, establish universal pre-K education, and pay for the annual construction of more than 100,000 units of housing, among other possible priorities."
After Trump confirmed that he wants four times more than expected, one coalition member, the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project, took to social media to highlight other ways the money could be spent to improve the lives of working Americans, from school meals and paid leave to funding all levels of education.
Another coalition member, Public Citizen, released a Thursday statement in which co-president Robert Weissman ripped Trump's spending request as "grotesque beyond words."
According to Weissman:
It should properly be understood not just as a request to replenish supplies, but to expand, escalate, and perpetuate the illegal, unconstitutional, unpopular and devastating war on Iran. Congress should understand that approving any portion of this funding opens the gates for one, two, and potentially many more war funding requests in the future.
How dare the administration propose this gargantuan sum to expand an illegal war of choice at the same time it has rammed through deep cuts in healthcare and food assistance, refuses to spend foreign assistance at a cost of millions of lives, and has cut spending on protecting clean air, maintaining our national parks, investing in health research, protecting consumers from fraud, and so much more.
$200 billion is enough to materially change the lives of Americans and truly make our country stronger. It would be enough to restore food assistance to the 4 million Americans and Medicaid to the 15 million Americans who will lose those crucial supports under the Republican reconciliation bill; establish universal pre-K education; pay for the annual construction of more than 100,000 units of housing; double the budget of the Environmental Protection Agency; and expand Medicare to cover dental, vision, and hearing.
Weissman argued that "every member of Congress should announce, right now, that they will reject this monstrous war funding proposal, before it is formalized."
Despite rising casualties across the Middle East and polls showing that the US assault on Iran is unpopular, even with Trump voters, a few Democrats voted with nearly all Republicans in the Senate and House of Representatives earlier this month to reject war powers resolutions intended to end Trump's Operation Epic Fury. The upper chamber blocked a similar effort late Wednesday.
Berlin says it needs to focus on its defense in a separate ICJ case in which Nicaragua accuses Germany of supporting Israel's genocidal war on Gaza.
Germany said Wednesday that it will drop its planned intervention in the International Court of Justice genocide against Israel so that it can better focus on its own defense in a separate ICJ case filed by Nicaragua accusing Berlin of enabling Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza via arms sales.
Deputy German Foreign Minister Josef Hinterseher said during a press conference in Berlin that his country "will not intervene" on Israel's side in the South Africa v. Israel genocide case filed at the Hague-based tribunal in December 2023.
This is a marked departure from Germany's January 2024 announcement that it would intervene on behalf of Israel in the case, arguing that the genocide allegation made by South Africa had "no basis whatsoever."
Nearly two dozen nations, most recently the Netherlands, Namibia, and Iceland, have either formally intervened on the side of South Africa or announced their intent to do so. The Herero and Nama peoples of modern-day Namibia suffered a genocide during the region's colonization by Germany in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
A handful of countries including the United States, Hungary, and Fiji have also intervened on behalf of Israel.
In 2024, Nicaragua filed a case against Germany at the ICJ, arguing that the European nation “has not only failed to fulfill its obligation to prevent the genocide committed and being committed against the Palestinian people... but has contributed to the commission of genocide in violation" of the Genocide Convention.
Germany has provided financial, military, diplomatic, and political support to Israel. It also temporarily halted financial contributions to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) based on unsubstantiated Israeli claims that a dozen of its worjers were involved in the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023.
Unlike Germany, the US and Israel are not members of the ICJ. The US quit the tribunal after it ruled against the Reagan administration in Nicaragua v. United States, a 1984 ruling that determined the US illegally supported Contra terrorists and mined Nicaraguan harbors.
However, under the court's territorial jurisdiction powers, countries that are not members of the court can still be brought before it for crimes committed in member states.
Further complicating matters, Germany is one of numerous countries which have intervened in Gambia v. Myanmar, which the African nation filed at the ICJ in 2019 amid the Burmese junta's ongoing genocide against Rohingya Muslims.
The ICJ has issued several provisional orders in South Africa v. Israel, including directives to prevent genocidal acts and allow aid into the besieged Gaza Strip amid a burgeoning famine. Israel has been accused of ignoring these orders.
The US under the Biden and Trump administrations pressured ICJ members to refrain from intervening on behalf of South Africa. The Trump administration has also sanctioned members of the International Criminal Court (ICC)‚ which in 2024 issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza.
In Germany, as in several other Western nations, authorities have cracked down on pro-Palestine protests, free expression of support for Palestinian rights, and criticism of Israel. Critics say the persistent framing of German national identity around enduring guilt for the Nazis' wholesale slaughter of 6 million Jews during the Holocaust is driving overzealous policing of dissent and conflation of pro-Palestinian activism with antisemitism.
This perceived moral burden, say observers, risks stifling legitimate political debate, curtailing free speech, and criminalizing solidarity with Palestinians under the pretext of historical responsibility. This has driven German actions from secretly funding Israel's development of nuclear weapons over half a century ago to brutally assaulting and arresting pro-Palestine protesters—including women, elders, minors, and people with disabilities—after the October 2023 attack.
German police punch an anti-genocide woman in front of the cameras.
[image or embed]
— Antifa_Ultras (@antifa-ultras.bsky.social) October 7, 2025 at 2:20 PM
Amnesty International's latest annual human rights report on Germany notes "excessive use of force by police during peaceful protests by climate activists and supporters of Palestinians’ rights," as well as Berlin's "irresponsible arms transfers" to not only Israel but also Saudi Arabia.
"To pull the region back from the brink and prevent the further loss of civilian life and destruction of vital public infrastructure, renewed diplomatic efforts are critical."
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk renewed his call for achieving peace through diplomacy on Thursday, highlighting how the US-Israeli war on Iran is having a disproportionate impact on civilians across the Middle East.
"The human cost of this reckless war is alarming. Hostilities are being waged without regard to the immediate and long-term consequences for civilians across the entire region," Türk said in a statement as the US and Israel bombed Iran, retaliatory Iranian strikes hit fossil fuel facilities throughout the region, and Israeli forces attacked alleged Hezbollah targets in Lebanon.
"Attacks on energy infrastructure—including South Pars in Iran and Ras Laffan in Qatar—will only compound hardship," the UN official warned. "Disastrous humanitarian, economic, and environmental consequences will be triggered if such attacks continue, resulting in deep harm to civilians—potentially for years to come."
On Wednesday, Israel struck Iran's South Pars gas field and Qatar said that Iranian missiles caused "extensive damage" to the world's largest liquefied natural gas export facility. US President Donald Trump then threatened to "massively blow up the entirety" of the Iranian site if attacks on Qatari energy infrastructure continued.
According to the Iranian Red Crescent Society, US and Israeli attacks over the past few weeks have already damaged at least 67,414 civilian locations, including homes, schools, medical facilities, energy installations, courthouses, and UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization World Heritage sites.
"All parties to this conflict are bound by their obligations—irrespective of the conduct of any other party—and must take all feasible measures to avoid harm to civilians and damage to civilian objects," Türk stressed. "In times of war, the rule of law, due process, and other human rights obligations continue to apply. The ugly reality of war is not a carte blanche to violate human rights."
The high commissioner declared that "to pull the region back from the brink and prevent the further loss of civilian life and destruction of vital public infrastructure, renewed diplomatic efforts are critical."
He also acknowledged an upcoming Muslim holiday: "Many across the region and beyond will be observing Eid al-Fitr this weekend in circumstances of hardship, uncertainty, and fear. I extend my Eid wishes to all those who observe it, and my heartfelt solidarity to all those enduring the hardships of conflict and instability."
Citing the Iranian Health Ministry, Drop Site News reported Thursday that "at least 1,444 people have been killed and 18,551 injured" across Iran. Reuters noted that as of Wednesday, the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency put the death toll in Iran even higher, at 3,134. The Lebanese Ministry of Public Health said Thursday that Israeli attacks this month have killed 1,001 people and wounded 2,584 across Lebanon.
Additionally, Iranian missiles have killed at least 15 Israeli civilians and four Palestinian women in the illegally occupied West Bank, according to Reuters. The Israeli military has confirmed the deaths of two soldiers in Lebanon, and the Pentagon has verified that 13 US service members are dead, and another 200 have been wounded.
Despite the rising body count, and polling that shows the war is unpopular with the US public, including Trump voters, the president is seeking another $200 billion dollars from Congress, which has not authorized the war on Iran.
Responding to that request, US Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said that "the best way to end this war, protect our troops, save civilian lives, and rein in a lawless administration is to cut off funding. I'm a hell no."