SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
federal communications commission
'A Defining Test': Press Freedom Group Urges New Democratic Majority to Impeach Trump's FCC Chair
"Few individuals have been more instrumental to the White House’s campaign to weaken the First Amendment than Brendan Carr," said Reporters Without Borders.
Nov 10, 2026
A leading press freedom organization on Monday urged Democratic lawmakers to impeach US President Donald Trump's Federal Communications Commission chairman when they take control of Congress in January, pointing to the official's efforts to "intimidate and punish" media outlets that publish criticism of the White House.
The demand marked the first time that Reporters Without Borders, known internationally as Reporters sans frontières (RSF), has called for the removal of a US official in the group's 40-year history, the organization said in a statement. Clayton Weimers, executive director of RSF North America, said the "severity and persistence" of FCC Chair Brendan Carr's alleged wrongdoing "demand an extraordinary response."
RSF points to Carr's erosion of the FCC's independence from the executive branch and eager willingness to act as the president's attack dog, pursuing investigations into networks that Trump has publicly targeted.
"When Trump took office, Carr reinstated complaints against and announced inquiries into broadcasters that questioned the Trump administration’s policies, from public service media NPR and PBS to major private channels ABC, CBS, and NBC," the group noted. "Carr’s relentless investigations have also targeted local stations, such as California radio station KCBS, which has faced politically motivated scrutiny for its reporting."
RSF also pointed to Carr's threat earlier this year to pull the broadcast licenses of networks accused by the administration of "news distortions"—a threat that came in direct response to Trump's complaint about media coverage of his illegal war on Iran.
"Few individuals have been more instrumental to the White House’s campaign to weaken the First Amendment than Brendan Carr," Weimers said on Monday. "The incoming Congress now faces a defining test of its commitment to the Constitution and the freedoms it guarantees. Press freedom cannot be defended through words alone."
In addition to his attacks on journalism and legally dubious effort to roll back limits on media consolidation, RSF argued that Carr "likely violated the Hatch Act" by hailing his government work at a political rally for Republican US Senate candidate Dan Sullivan in Alaska. RSF and the Democracy Defenders Fund filed a formal complaint last month demanding an investigation into Carr's appearance at the rally.
RSF's call for Carr's impeachment came days after Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) demanded that the FCC chair hand over records as part of an investigation into "how the president and the Federal Communications Commission’s actions erode and undermine freedom of speech and freedom of the press and bear on the laws governing media consolidation."
Jessica González, co-CEO of the advocacy group Free Press Action, welcomed Blumenthal's investigation and argued that Carr's actions "should lead to his removal from office, by impeachment if necessary."
"Carr’s capricious abuse of the law has no place in a legitimate democracy," said González. "Over the past two years, Carr has regularly violated his oath to support and defend the Constitution. He’s been more than happy to browbeat and jawbone broadcasters into silence, though his claims have zero legal merit."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘This Is Dangerous’: Alarm as Trump FCC Chair Threatens Broadcasters Over Poll Coverage
"We are sliding into a dictatorship," said one critic.
Oct 21, 2026
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr on Wednesday threatened broadcasters that cover what he described as "fake polls," which he said hurt "voter turnout and enthusiasm."
In a social media post, Carr attacked news outlets for "amplifying or airing these polls without regard to basic journalistic ethics and without informing the public that those polls lack a scientific, accurate, or even real basis."
Carr did not provide a single specific example of a "fake" opinion poll, nor did he name a broadcaster who has promoted one. President Donald Trump, who nominated Carr to head the FCC, has repeatedly decried polls as "fake" as they've shown his approval ratings at record lows.
Later in the post, Carr hinted that the FCC would take direct action against broadcasters for informing their viewers about opinion polls.
"The FCC takes these issues seriously," said Carr. "Broadcasters are prohibited by the terms of their federal licenses from engaging in news distortion or promoting broadcast hoaxes. It is important that broadcasters comply with their public interest obligations."
Carr's post drew a swift rebuke from Democratic FCC commissioner Anna Gomez.
"Pollsters who intentionally mislead the public should answer for it," wrote Gomez, "but broadcasters who report publicly available polling data should never be punished when a poll is wrong. FCC rules on news distortion or hoaxes do not apply to a station that reports this data in good faith."
Steve Herman, former White House bureau chief at Voice of America, wrote in a social media post that Carr's assertions about "news distortion" are "stretching specific regulations far beyond their legal definitions," as "the FCC can't mandate how a broadcaster contextualizes a poll."
"The FCC threatening broadcasters for airing specific political data is a chilling content-based restriction on speech," Herman added, "which federal courts subject to extreme judicial review and the commission would almost certainly lose such cases, according to First Amendment scholars."
Former TV meteorologist Chris Gloninger predicted that Carr's post would have a chilling effect on local news stations.
"Holy shit, this is dangerous," Gloninger wrote. "Two weeks before an election, the FCC chair is threatening broadcaster licenses over polls he calls 'fake.' No GM will risk that, so polls vanish."
Mark Jacob, former metro editor at the Chicago Tribune, called Carr "anti-free-speech" for "threatening to punish news outlets that publish polls showing Trump's deep unpopularity."
"We are sliding into a dictatorship," Jacob said, "and it would be helpful if major media would do their duty and warn the public."
Adam Klasfeld, editor-in-chief at All Rise News, described Carr as the president's "censorship czar" who is warning news outlets against "the dissemination of data disfavored by the state."
Princeton historian Kevin Kruse argued Carr's threats warranted his impeachment and removal from office.
"The president shouting 'fake news' is bad enough," wrote Kruse, "but the FCC commissioner threatening to punish broadcasters for promoting 'fake news' like 'the president is historically unpopular' is so much worse."
Carr's post drew ridicule from Democratic strategist Adam Parkhomenko, who informed the FCC chair that "it’s not illegal to tell the American people that Trump is a failed president."
Max Steele, senior director of communications at gun safety advocacy organization Everytown, similarly ridiculed Carr.
"It is ILLEGAL to say the brave and smart President Trump is at historic polling lows!!!" he wrote sarcastically.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Risk Here Is Severe': Schumer Warns Trump FCC Against Approving AI Robocalls Ahead of Midterms
"Putting Americans in a position where they can be fed misinformation through AI-generated deception ahead of a crucial election is yet another attempt by Republicans to mislead voters."
Oct 19, 2026
The leader of the Senate Democratic caucus on Monday urged the Republican-controlled Federal Communications Commission to reject a petition by a right-wing group to allow unsolicited, artificial intelligence-generated robocalls ahead of next month's midterm elections.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) warned that granting Club for Growth's request would mean "unleashing a Pandora’s box of election mis- and disinformation made more believable with AI." Monday is the final day for public comment on the group's petition.
"The FCC MUST reject the request made by a Republican group that would allow political groups to make robocalls to cellphones without people’s permission," Schumer wrote in a social media post. "Putting Americans in a position where they can be fed misinformation through AI-generated deception ahead of a crucial election is yet another attempt by Republicans to mislead voters."
"The risk here is severe," Schumer added. "The approaching election is a reason to preserve safeguards, not suspend them."
Club for Growth—a conservative nonprofit that pushes for tax cuts, deregulation, and school privatization—petitioned the FCC in August for an exemption from federal rules to permit "political calls that utilize artificial intelligence" without prior express consent. The group argued that existing regulations barring such calls "chill important political speech, creating serious First Amendment problems."
Leading consumer advocacy groups countered in a submission to the FCC earlier this month that "political robocalls are deeply invasive of privacy and removing the prior express consent requirement is wholly inconsistent with the public interest and the objectives of the [Telephone Consumer Protection Act]."
"Political robocalls are widely regarded as an annoyance and cause visceral anger among many, in addition to being a vehicle for spreading AI-generated misinformation and delusions," the groups wrote. "Furthermore, the prohibition on automated calls to cellphones without prior express consent is one of the few protections in the TCPA that applies to small businesses that rely on cell phones to operate. Many small businesses must answer every incoming call to avoid missing a potential customer, and granting the waiver petition will result in more unwanted calls that waste small businesses’ time and money."
Schumer told Reuters on Monday that "there is absolutely no excuse to relax" the TCPA standards and "allow special interests to flood our cellphone lines with deepfakes or dark-money-funded AI voices" just two weeks ahead of the midterm elections.
Anna Gomez, the FCC's lone Democratic commissioner, said in a CNN appearance on Monday that "no consumer wants" robocalls and that they are the top complaint the agency hears from the public.
"This dark money group wants permission from the FCC to flood cellphones with these ads generated using artificial intelligence," said Gomez, adding that the agency's Republican commissioners "should not do this."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Coalition Files Emergency Motion to Stop Trump FCC From Unleashing Media Consolidation Spree
"The FCC simply cannot ignore the laws Congress makes just because the current agency head wants to."
Oct 10, 2026
A coalition of nonprofit groups and labor unions filed an emergency petition on Friday aimed at blocking the Federal Communications Commission's recent repeal of a decades-old rule that limited consolidation among television broadcasters, a move that would allow media conglomerates to seize even more control over local news stations.
The petition states that the Republican-controlled FCC's decision—pushed by Chair Brendan Carr and approved in August in a 2-1 vote along party lines—was "plainly contrary to law and violates core administrative law principles." The filing notes that Congress enacted the rule barring any single TV broadcaster from reaching more than 39% of US households—and only Congress can roll it back.
"The FCC simply cannot ignore the laws Congress makes just because the current agency head wants to," said Matt Wood, vice president of policy at Free Press, one of the groups that joined the new motion. "Chairman Carr serves only [President] Donald Trump, not the people of this country. Carr threatens broadcasters when their coverage angers the administration, but tosses them bones like this repeal when the biggest broadcast conglomerates toe the line."
The petition was submitted days after the FCC published the final text of its order repealing the National Television Multiple Ownership Rule, which Carr's FCC effectively ignored earlier this year when it approved Nexstar’s $6.2 billion acquisition of rival TV company Tegna—a deal that Trump vocally supported. Free Press noted that the merger would "give Nexstar access to 80% of US households over the nation’s broadcast airwaves."
Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders North America, said Friday that repealing the 39% cap "eliminates the only meaningful limit on TV ownership consolidation in the US, reducing media pluralism, eliminating choices for news consumers, and threatening jobs in an industry already reeling from widespread layoffs and closures."
"If allowed to move forward, this policy will benefit a small handful of powerful owners of media conglomerates, while harming journalists, local and independent TV stations, and, not least of all, the American people," said Weimers.
Cable industry groups are also taking action against the FCC over its move to repeal TV ownership constraints. Ars Technica reported earlier this month that "cable lobby groups notified the Federal Communications Commission that they will sue the agency to block its controversial repeal of the National Television Ownership Rule."
The industry's filing states that the FCC's repeal "arbitrarily and capriciously ignores the harms that will surely follow from allowing broadcast station groups to exceed the National Cap, in the form of increased retransmission consent fees for multichannel video programming distributors... and higher monthly TV bills for consumers."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Complaint Demands Broadcasters Stop Airing Trump's Illegal Taxpayer-Funded Ads
"This administration's repeated and flagrant violations of the law, including the Hatch Act, are an affront to taxpayers and our democracy."
Sep 29, 2026
The watchdog group Public Citizen this week filed a pair of complaints urging regulators and broadcasters to pull President Donald Trump's unlawful taxpayer-funded campaign advertisements off the air and demanding a federal investigation into them.
In recent weeks, amid mounting speculation that Republicans could lose their congressional majorities in the November midterm election, television stations have aired short videos that the White House claims are "public service announcements" but which a range of critics contend are obvious campaign ads—and illegal, as they clearly state they are "paid for by the US government."
Public Citizen's Tuesday complaint to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and broadcasters highlights that "at least three campaign ads, paid for by taxpayer dollars, appear to violate the federal law against using taxpayer funds to finance propaganda (5 USC §3107) and related provisions of the appropriations laws as well as the Hatch Act (5 USC §7324)."
While "broadcast stations are strictly prohibited from censoring or rejecting ads sponsored by legally qualified political candidates," the complaint notes, they also "may be held liable for airing any advertisement that is in violation of federal law," which "explicitly prohibits using appropriated public funds for government propaganda, self-aggrandizement, or partisan political advertising."
The group urges the FCC and FTC "to direct broadcasters to stop broadcasting these apparently illegal campaign advertisements and call on individual broadcasters to cease airing the campaign advertisements," emphasizing the responsibility of both agencies and broadcasters "to keep the airwaves fair and honest and operate in the 'public interest, convenience, and necessity.'"
The first ad, initially posted to the White House YouTube account earlier this month, features Trump pledging to "defeat communism, socialism, and Marxism, in America," and the song "Love Me" by JMSN, who did not sign off on its use. The second one aired Friday and includes clips from the president's Fourth of July weekend speech at Mount Rushmore. A third, resembling one of Trump's 2024 campaign ads, was played during "Saturday Night Live," "Fox News Sunday," and several football games.
The administration's decision to reject widespread criticism and air yet another "piece of taxpayer-funded political propaganda during the mass-viewing moment of Sunday football is appalling and alarming," declared Public Citizen co-president Lisa Gilbert. "These illegal ads should immediately be pulled from the air, and the White House's many apparent violations of the law should be investigated."
After the first ad, Public Citizen submitted a complaint to the US Office of Special Counsel (OSC) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) Forensic Audits and Investigative Service. The group sent another on Monday, arguing that the new "Final Battle" ad is a "brazen" violation of federal law that "doesn't even mention a pending government action. It simply tries to stir up hysteria among voters and depicts Trump as a great hero working to save the nation from grave threats."
"Like the other previous two campaign advertisements Trump and the White House are billing to taxpayers, these ads are designed to boost the character of Donald Trump, generally void of any legitimate government purpose, target the voting public shortly before the 2026 midterm elections, and constitute violations of the law against using government resources for propaganda purposes and the Hatch Act," the group continued.
"Public Citizen is once again writing your offices requesting an investigation into who produced these ads and at what cost to taxpayers, and to take appropriate remedial actions to enforce the federal law," the organization added.
Leading Democrats in the US Senate and House of Representatives said Monday that the White House used funding allocated for US Customs and Border Protection to pay for the ads. Government ethics experts, lawmakers, and other critics have ripped the ads, with some even pointing to them as further evidence that Trump should be impeached a historic third time.
"This administration's repeated and flagrant violations of the law, including the Hatch Act, are an affront to taxpayers and our democracy," said Craig Holman, a government ethics expert with Public Citizen. "The FCC and other oversight agencies are charged with ensuring this type of abuse of taxpayer funds does not happen. But that system only works if they take action."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Outrageous': Sanders Slams FCC for Approving Saudi and UAE Ownership of Paramount-Warner Bros.
"We don't need Middle East dictators to control American media."
Sep 18, 2026
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Friday joined a growing chorus of critics angered by the Federal Communications Commission's approval of foreign investment in the company that would be created if Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery are allowed to merge.
Led by Chair Brendan Carr, an appointee of President Donald Trump, the FCC on Thursday approved Paramount's petition to allow foreign investors to hold over 25% of ownership. The commission concluded it would be in the "public interest" to greenlight a plan for 49.5% foreign ownership, including 38.5% from investment funds based in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
"Trump's FCC just approved Trump pal David Ellison's deal to allow Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE to own nearly 50% of a merged Paramount-Warner Bros," Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote on social media Friday, referring to Paramount's chair and CEO—and the son of billionaire Republican megadonor Larry Ellison.
The merged company would include CBS, CNN, HBO, the Discovery Channel, BET, Fandango, MTV, Nickelodeon, Paramount, PlutoTV, Showtime, TBS, The CW, TNT, Warner Bros., and more, the senator noted. He added: "Outrageous: We don't need Middle East dictators to control American media."
Anna Gomez, the sole Democratic commissioner, was similarly critical: "The FCC just let some of the most repressive governments in the world indirectly control nearly all of a combined Paramount-Warner Bros. An investment this large in one of America's biggest media companies doesn't just buy equity, it secures influence over what gets said and made."
"That's why I called for this new and novel issue to go to a full commission vote given what's at stake," she noted. "Instead, the FCC snuck this ruling out as a staff-level decision, with no public vote and no accountability for a call of this magnitude."
Welcoming Gomez's comments, Michael Sozan pointed to his and Andrew Miller's June article for the Center for American Progress highlighting that "the three Middle Eastern authoritarian regimes have deep financial relationships with Trump and his family, and... long records of human rights abuses and engage in media censorship."
"These autocracies could leverage Paramount's news outlets and other media properties to advance their own interests at the expense of the United States' national security and foundational rights, including press freedoms," the pair warned. "Given these factors, these foreign ownership levels are another reason why regulators must rigorously review this merger and take all lawful actions to block it."
As the Los Angeles Times reported:
Several groups, including the 1st Amendment nonprofit Free Press, asked the FCC to consider additional safeguards to shield the news organizations—CNN and CBS—from foreign control. One suggestion was to spin off CBS and CNN into a subsidiary that would be wholly owned by Americans.
Paramount and the FCC were dismissive, arguing "the concerns raised in the record... are speculative and unsupported," according to the FCC ruling.
While a Paramount spokesperson welcomed the FCC's decision not to block the plan—and pointed out that "when the proposed transaction with Warner Bros. Discovery closes, the Ellison family and RedBird will collectively hold the largest equity stake in the combined company and 100% of the voting shares, with no other equity participant having any governance rights"—fresh outrage mounted over the already widely criticized $111 billion merger.
Lee Hepner, an antitrust lawyer and senior legal counsel for the American Economic Liberties Project, addressed the questions: "But it's just indirect equity interests, right? What about the condition that the Saudis, UAE, and Qatar cannot interfere with or even comment on any decisions related to content?"
As he explained: "The only way that firewall is conceivably enforceable is if the FCC assigns an independent monitor to sit in on every meeting, taps every burner phone, and is invited to every Signal chat between any representative of Paramount and its new financial backers. The point is not that that should happen, but that this condition is patently unenforceable. Which is all to say, the FCC just approved the sale of a crown jewel of the entertainment and media industry to foreign interests that relish in exercising economic, political, and regional military leverage over the United States. All based on a pinky promise."
"The reality is that ownership alone, even of nonvoting, indirect equity interests, creates its own financial leverage and influence," he warned. "To the extent Paramount's new owners are prohibited from exercising influence, it's patently paradoxical. Paramount won't approve anything that risks losing half of its financial backing, including criticizing a regime that not too long ago ordered the execution of a Washington Post columnist, Jamal Khashoggi, who became an international figurehead for politically persecuted journalists."
"Does anyone think CBS' new leadership has the will, much less fortitude, to prioritize truth over financial ruin?" he added. "If this all sounds like a total mess, that's because it is. And it only becomes doubly worse if Paramount acquires Warner Bros.-Discovery."
Due to legal pushback from state attorneys general and unions, the merger—which some opponents have condemned as an "existential" threat—is on hold until the outcome of a trial scheduled to begin in March.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Jimmy Kimmel Pulls Talarico Interview From Broadcast, Moves it to YouTube, Amid Trump FCC Threats
"Another day, another chilling effect on broadcast speech," said one free speech advocate, who added that "nothing about the FCC’s actions is normal—or legal."
Sep 10, 2026
Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel told viewers Wednesday night that his show was pulling an interview with Democratic Texas Senate nominee James Talarico from ABC stations amid threats from President Donald Trump's Federal Communications Commission, which press freedom groups are describing as another effort by the administration to "chill" the speech of the president's critics.
“Out of consideration for our local stations, especially our ABC affiliates in Texas who would have to deal with this nonsense, my interview tomorrow with James Talarico will not air on television,” the host said on Wednesday’s episode of “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”
He added that the interview “will be posted on YouTube instead. It will not be on TV.”
It's the second time a major US network has opted to spike a late-night interview with Talarico following FCC pressure. In February, CBS lawyers preemptively stopped Stephen Colbert from conducting an interview with the candidate over what they said were fears of retaliation from the agency, whose chair, Brendan Carr, has threatened to strip broadcast licenses from networks that give Trump unfavorable coverage.
Carr has confirmed that the FCC had opened an investigation and started an "enforcement proceeding" into ABC over whether Talarico's appearance on "The View" violated the equal-time rule, which requires that broadcast stations that host political candidates must give their opponents an equal opportunity to appear as well.
Late-night shows have long been considered exempt from this rule as “bona fide news interview” programs. But a public notice issued by the FCC Media Bureau in January stated that programs that advance “partisan” goals, including talk shows, would no longer be considered as such. Carr has said programs he considers to be “fake news” may not qualify for an exemption.
Kimmel on Wednesday emphasized the "unusual circumstances" of his network's decision to cancel the interview with Talarico.
"For the whole 20-plus years of our show, I've been interviewing Americans who are running for office with no problem at all... from Hillary Clinton, to Ted Cruz, to Donald Trump himself," he said.
Kimmel noted that when he interviewed Trump during his first presidential run in 2015, he seemed to have no issue with political candidates appearing on his show and eagerly returned for more interviews.
"For some reason, and I can't seem to figure out what that reason is, something has changed," Kimmel joked. "Now that he's president, his FCC has threatened me, threatened our show, threatened our network, ABC, our affiliates, our local stations—based on simple, traditional editorial decisions, guest bookings it would seem they don’t like."
For that reason, he said, if viewers "want to learn about a candidate for the Senate tomorrow, you will have to go to the 'Jimmy Kimmel Live' YouTube channel."
"Thank goodness we have that," Kimmel said. "Because in the America we have right now, that is the best that we can do, until November, of course."
In August, ABC parent company Disney sued the FCC on First Amendment grounds following the agency’s unusual request for its eight ABC stations to submit their broadcast renewal requests several years in advance, which it described as part of a “retaliatory campaign” against the network's negative coverage of Trump.
The complaint notes that ABC has felt compelled to alter its editorial judgment in order to avoid further retaliation, including passing on interviews with several other political candidates it felt would invite Trump's ire and choosing to air a lie-filled Trump address about supposed election fraud, which it noted it "ordinarily would not have done."
Last September, ABC briefly removed Kimmel from the air following direct threats from Carr to strip ABC stations of their broadcast licenses, which came after a critical monologue from the late-night host about Trump and Republicans in the wake of the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
The complaint notes Carr’s use of explicit coercion to pressure ABC to remove Kimmel, including telling the network that it could proceed “the easy way or the hard way."
Kimmel emphasized what he said was the political nature of the pressure campaign against him and the network, which has continued even after he was reinstated. Republicans, he said, "are very nervous about the midterms and very rightly so," as they are "in serious danger of losing 'bigly.'"
"They are in danger of losing a Senate seat in Texas of all places," he said to cheers from the crowd, "where James Talarico is leading a piece of human silly putty named Ken Paxton there," according to several recent polls.
Press freedom and civil liberties organizations described Carr's threats to networks as part of an effort to chill critical speech on behalf of the president, one that is ratcheting up as the midterms approach.
Timothy Karr, the senior director of strategy and communications for Free Press, told Common Dreams that Carr's "unconstitutional crusade against a free press has a clear bias against individuals and outlets that President Trump doesn't like."
"Combine that with Trump's desperation in the face of electoral polling that shows people ready to change political course come November, and you can see the real reason driving Carr's reckless fixation with silencing opposing views," Karr said.
Karr argued that networks were unnecessarily casting aside their rights to editorial judgment out of fear of retaliation.
"For years, the FCC has been very clear that bona fide news interviews, including on late-night talk shows, are entitled to editorial discretion," Karr said. "Carr's ongoing efforts to take this discretion away are part and parcel of his campaign to transform broadcast media into full-time megaphones for Trumpist propaganda."
He said, "What's doubly worrying is that many of these broadcast networks are too eager to cave to Trump and Carr's demands when the First Amendment is clearly on their side."
Jenna Leventoff, senior policy counsel for the ACLU, concurred, telling Common Dreams that the FCC "abusing its rules to chill speech" is "particularly problematic before an election, when voters need more information, not less."
Bob Corn-Revere, the chief counsel for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), told Common Dreams it was “another day, another chilling effect on broadcast speech," adding that ”nothing about the FCC’s actions is normal—or legal.“
Shiva Stella, the legal director at Public Knowledge, emphasized that networks capitulating helps to cement a climate of fear.
"This is a classic chilling effect," Stella told Common Dreams. "Once the FCC threatens stations over editorial decisions, it does not need to repeat the threat every time. Broadcasters begin changing their programming to avoid retaliation."
“The FCC needs to stop using its power to bully news organizations into silencing voices it simply disagrees with,” added Tim Richardson, journalism and disinformation program director at PEN America, in a statement to Common Dreams.
“When broadcasters alter decisions because they fear government retaliation," he said, "that damage extends beyond a single program and threatens the independence of the entire press and the public’s access to information. Which, unfortunately, seems to be the intent in this case.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Threatens NBC's Welker With 'Punishment' for Doing Her Job
"Trump, like all authoritarians, wants to silence those who disagree with him," Sen. Bernie Sanders said in response.
Aug 30, 2026
President Donald Trump took to Truth Social on Sunday to threaten NBC journalist Kristen Welker with "rebuke or punishment" from the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC, after she accurately reported that his endorsement had netted "mixed" results for Republican candidates this election cycle.
In a second post on Sunday, Trump also lashed out against reported polling results, writing, "THE FAKE POLLS USED BY OUR CROOKED MEDIA ARE OUT OF CONTROL, AND SOMETHING MUST BE DONE ABOUT IT. FCC TO THE RESCUE!"
"Trump, like all authoritarians, wants to silence those who disagree with him," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote on social media in response. "Now he's trying to punish an NBC journalist for reporting on his mixed endorsement record. Sorry, Mr. President. In America, we believe in democracy and the First Amendment. FIGHT BACK."
Welker made the remarks that enraged Trump during a pre-"Meet the Press" promotion on NBC's Washington, DC affiliate station. They were backed up by NBC reporting that six candidates Trump endorsed for House and governor had lost their Republican primary races in August.
"Trump makes clear that he thinks it's the government's role to go after journalists who anger him."
"Kristen Welker, the Unpopular 'Hostess' of the once great Meet the Press, now considered Meet the Fake Press, just stated that Donald Trump has 'mixed results' on his Endorsements of Candidates, when the recent WINS of Darline Graham and Mike Mazzei, stand at 100% for the US Senate, and 98% for the US House, recently and over the longterm. How can anyone be allowed to say this, working for freely given Public Airwaves? Results are attached. Because of this purposeful inaccuracy, she will be reported to the FCC for rebuke or punishment," Trump wrote.
He also appealed to the head of the FCC directly, saying, "I hope that Chairman Brendan Carr, and the fine people of his Commission, will take this Threat to our Country very seriously."
"Trump is getting more explicit about weaponizing the FCC," CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter noted in a thread on social media. While he pointed out that the FCC cannot legally punish Welker and has limited power by design, its chair Carr "has been responsive to Trump's posts in the past..."
Indeed, Carr has a history of targeting Trump critics.
In September of 2025, he pressured ABC into briefly removing Jimmy Kimmel from the air following remarks he made surrounding the Trump administration's response to conservative activist Charlie Kirk's death.
In March, Carr wrote a post on social media that appeared to threaten to revoke the broadcasting licenses of news outlets that criticized Trump's war on Iran, responding directly to Trump's own social media rant against war coverage.
In April, he ordered Disney's eight ABC stations to file their broadcast renewal requests years early, prompting ABC and Disney to file a First Amendment lawsuit against the FCC earlier this month. The renewal requests, which Carr denies were retaliatory, came a day after Trump again criticized Kimmel for making jokes about First Lady Melania Trump.
Stelter concluded: "Trump invoked Carr's name, complimented the 'fine people' of the FCC, and said he hopes the commission will 'take this Threat to our Country very seriously.' ABC is already in court fighting the FCC's unprecedented actions; it's reasonable to think NBC will be targeted next."
Chief White House correspondent for The New York Times Pete Baker wrote on social media that, with his threats against Welker, "Trump makes clear that he thinks it's the government's role to go after journalists who anger him."
"Are there really any Americans left who think this man is paying any attention to any problem any person in the United States is having right now," Trump biographer Seth Abramson wrote on social media in response to Trump's tirade. "As far as I can tell there's not a single second of his day taken up by anything but what personally interests and enriches him."
Keep ReadingShow Less
ABC Hits Trump FCC With First Amendment Suit Over 'Deeply Un-American' Effort to Strip Broadcast Licenses
"At long last! A broadcast network has found a backbone," said one First Amendment advocate.
Aug 18, 2026
ABC and its parent company Disney filed a First Amendment lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday over what it called a "deeply un-American" effort by the Trump administration to punish broadcasters for airing speech critical of the president.
The suit comes in response to an April order by the FCC requiring Disney's eight ABC stations to file their broadcast renewal requests years ahead of schedule. As the Knight First Amendment Institute pointed out, it's the first time the FCC has ordered a broadcast station to submit early license renewals in more than 50 years.
The unusual request came after President Donald Trump had repeatedly suggested that networks giving him "negative coverage" should have their broadcast licenses "terminated."
ABC has argued that the license renewal demand is part of an effort to "attack" its First Amendment-protected speech.
"Government censorship is deeply un-American," the lawsuit, filed before the US District Court for the District of Columbia, said. "Acting through the Federal Communications Commission, the administration has waged a retaliatory campaign against ABC for a single reason: it disapproves of what ABC broadcasts."
ABC specifically has found itself in the crosshairs of FCC Chair Brendan Carr, who used license authority to pressure the network to remove late-night host Jimmy Kimmel from the air briefly last year following a critical monologue about Trump and Republicans following the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
The lawsuit quotes what ABC said were blatant efforts by Carr to "coerce" the network into pulling Kimmel, including his ultimatum, "We can do this the easy way or the hard way."
It also notes that the request for the early renewal order was issued just one day after Trump went on another social media tirade against Kimmel over jokes he made about First Lady Melania Trump, which the president claimed inspired an assassination attempt at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Trump said that Kimmel should “be immediately fired by Disney and ABC.”
Carr has defended the FCC's orders to Disney, stating that they were not about retaliation, but about ensuring that ABC stations operate "in the public interest" as they are required to do under law.
“If broadcasters don’t like that, that’s okay,” Carr told CNBC back in July. “They can become a cable channel, they can become a podcast, they can stream online. But if you want to uniquely be on the public’s airwaves, you have to comply with those obligations.”
Noting previous comments by Carr that public interest considerations should include the "political ideology” of a broadcaster's programming, Monday's lawsuit said the order "thus appears intended to broaden the scope of the agency’s review, including to impermissibly consider the content of ABC programming."
Earlier this year, the FCC also opened an investigation into the daytime talk show The View, alleging that its hosting of interviews with Texas Democratic US Senate candidate James Talarico in February may have violated a rule requiring broadcast stations to give political candidates "equal time" when appearing on air.
ABC has contended that The View has previously been ruled as a "bona fide news interview" program, which is exempt from the rule.
As part of the investigation, the FCC Media Bureau has probed ABC's editorial process, ordering it to produce internal communications among View staff, disclose the political donations of employees, and provide information about ABC's internal guidance for producing interviews
The White House, meanwhile, included The View on a public webpage listing so-called "media offenders." On this page, it singled out the program's co-hosts for the "offenses" of criticizing government officials for “visiting the Alligator Alcatraz ICE detention facility in Florida” and “claiming President Trump was overstepping his authority by constructing a White House ballroom.”
The lawsuit says the FCC's pressure has affected its editorial decision-making. It notes that since the investigation was launched, it has not booked any other congressional candidates on The View.
It also notes that, considering the "risk of resulting administration retaliation," ABC chose to broadcast a speech by Trump in July on its streaming channel ABC News Live in which he made unfounded accusations of rampant voter fraud in the 2020 election, which "it ordinarily would not have done."
Trump again called on the network to have its broadcast license stripped for not airing the speech on its main network. And Carr has said that the FCC would consider that decision as part of the review of ABC's renewal applications.
The lawsuit says the administration is seeking either to mire the company in costly legal fees and intimidate it into compliance or to rip it off the air entirely, as Trump demanded.
"In either scenario," the lawsuit says, "the administration accomplishes its goal of eliminating a perceived media critic: either it gets plaintiffs to fall in line, or it silences them if they refuse."
The lawsuit asks the court to issue a temporary restraining order to prevent the FCC from proceeding with the reviews. It ultimately seeks a ruling that the license-renewal proceedings constitute unconstitutional retaliation that violates the First Amendment.
It notes that the administration has been attempting to coerce other legacy news broadcasters in the same way.
"If the administration gets its way, the message to every media company in the country will be unmistakable: Tell only the stories the administration deems favorable, or face the coercive machinery of the federal government," the lawsuit says. "In such a world, the press could in no way be described as free."
CNN's chief media analyst Brian Stelter described Disney and ABC's lawsuit as "one of the stiffest challenges from any American media company against the Trump administration during Trump's return to office."
Press freedom advocates welcomed the lawsuit as a sign that media outlets were beginning to fight back against the administration's strong-arming tactics rather than appeasing them.
"At long last! A broadcast network has found a backbone and is suing to stop the administration’s bullying and censorship," said Nico Perrino, the executive vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).
“It’s about time for someone to take Carr and his FCC to court over their endless campaign of intimidation and retaliation against journalism that displeases Carr’s thin-skinned boss,” said Seth Stern, chief of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
"Carr knows the FCC is not the journalism police and said so regularly himself before he decided to throw away any integrity he once had to kiss up to Trump," Stern added. "Countless others whose First Amendment rights have been chilled by Carr’s antics should follow Disney’s lead.”
ABC has faced criticism for bowing to pressure from Trump in the past. In 2024, after Trump won the presidential election, the network agreed to pay out $15 million after he sued over comments made by anchor George Stephanopoulos, who stated that the president had been found “liable for rape” by a jury when he’d technically only been found liable for “sexual abuse." The president's case against the network was widely viewed as legally dubious.
That lawsuit was seen as an opening of the floodgates for Trump's efforts to coerce and control the media during his second term, and other networks, fearful of retaliation, would follow with their own concessions to avoid his wrath.
Aaron Blake, a senior political reporter at CNN, said ABC's decision to fight back against the FCC showed that "today, we're in a different situation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Legal Challenge Promised After GOP-Controlled FCC Lifts TV Ownership Limits, Allowing Trump Allies to 'Swallow Up Stations'
"Media consolidation and deal approvals are now explicitly a way for President Trump to further consolidate his dictatorial power," said a filing by Free Press, which is suing the FCC.
Aug 06, 2026
A press freedom group says it plans to take the GOP-controlled Federal Communications Commission to court after it voted along party lines on Thursday to enact a rule that could allow a small number of media conglomerates to consolidate even more control over local news stations.
In a 2-1 vote, the FCC eliminated a 22-year-old rule that prohibited a single company from owning stations that reach more than 39% of American households, replacing it with a rule allowing the FCC to make decisions on a case-by-case basis.
FCC chair Brendan Carr said the move was necessary to "restore balance to the broadcast airwaves" and "allow local broadcasters to remain competitive with national ones."
The FCC's lone Democrat and dissenting vote, Anna Gomez, argued that the move would not benefit local broadcasters so much as it would benefit the national conglomerates seeking to buy them up.
“The large station groups positioned to grow even larger under this decision are not local broadcasters; they are national companies that own local stations and increasingly dictate what airs on them," Gomez said. "Trading a squeeze from Big Tech for a squeeze from Big Media does nothing to protect the communities this cap was designed to serve.”
In a statement after the ruling, Reporters Without Borders said the FCC had "just abandoned one of the last significant safeguards against excessive concentration of media ownership."
The change is a big win for media conglomerates like Nexstar Media Group, which is seeking a merger with rival TV company Tegna to reach about 80% of households nationwide. The merger was approved earlier this year by the FCC, but blocked by a federal judge.
It would also allow the Sinclair Broadcast Group, a conglomerate known for forcing "must-run" segments with right-wing talking points into local news coverage from its corporate headquarters, the ability to continue gobbling up local news stations around the country.
Free Press, a media and technology watchdog, said it planned to appeal the FCC's decision in court, arguing that Carr had exceeded his power by overriding the 39% threshold, which was enshrined in federal law by the 2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act.
"His goal is to spur more media consolidation involving companies Donald Trump views as ideological allies and corporate cronies," said Matt Wood, the group's vice president of policy and general counsel.
Carr, a Trump appointee, has previously sought to use the FCC to crack down on the use of the airwaves by Trump's ideological enemies and consolidate control for his allies.
He has threatened the broadcast licenses of networks that criticize Trump, most infamously pressuring ABC to briefly pull late-night host Jimmy Kimmel off the air last year. He's also used the FCC's approval of the Paramount-Skydance merger to enforce ideological conformity at CBS News, which has dramatically altered its coverage and personnel to be more favorable to the administration.
Carr has argued that the FCC has the power to alter the consolidation cap because Congress technically directed the FCC to modify its own regulations to enact the 39% limit.
Gomez has disputed this, noting that when the FCC previously tried to move the cap, Congress "stepped in within months... and made clear the FCC did not have the authority to change it."
"Changing this limit requires congressional action, but Carr doesn’t care," Wood said. "He’ll do whatever it takes to clear the way for Trump-aligned billionaires to swallow up stations wherever and whenever they please."
John Bergmayer, legal director at the public interest group Public Knowledge, argued that removing the cap was not only illegal but "also bad policy."
"Consolidation does not serve local broadcast audiences or give them more local news and information," Bergmayer said. "It gives distant corporate headquarters more control of what is aired, and it creates pressure to cut local reporters and air the same programming across many markets."
Free Press' filing argues that Carr is not just violating the law but seeking to help Trump "use the commission’s licensing authority to exert total control over the media.”
"Media consolidation and deal approvals," the filing continues, "are now explicitly a way for President Trump to further consolidate his dictatorial power, through explicit loyalty tests and pledges to use the public airwaves as a propaganda tool against the American public."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy