FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez Wages a Lonely Fight for Press Freedom in Trumpland
Like any liberal on Fox News, Anna M. Gomez finds herself outnumbered. But that hasn't stopped the Democratic appointee to the Federal Communications Commission from publicly speaking out about 'sham investigations' and what she calls the weaponizing of the commission to serve the interests of President Trump.
Appointed by President Biden in 2023, Gomez — who spent a dozen years as an FCC staffer in various capacities in addition to working as a private-practice telecommunications attorney — recently took her efforts to combat the FCC's actions and support press freedom to Los Angeles. A May 28 event sponsored by the advocacy group Free Press marked the first stop outside of Washington in a 'First Amendment Listening Tour' Gomez is conducting to call attention to the Trump administration's hostility toward mainstream media.
That includes attempts to punish news outlets for unfavorable reporting about the president, investigations related to DEI policies and dangling the threat of stripping broadcast licenses from owned-and-operated TV stations, or at the least holding up of mergers that would involve transferring them.
If that sounds extreme, remember that Trump has stated — including during a speech at the Department of Justice in March — that negative coverage of him was 'corrupt and illegal,' based on his unfounded assertion that media outlets like MSNBC and CNN were functioning as extensions of his political opponents.
After the panel, Gomez struck a realistic note about what she can hope to accomplish as the soon-to-be lone Democrat on the five-member body, with Geoffrey Starks having announced that he'll formally depart later this month.'I do work with my fellow commissioners and try to add value, and where I can agree, I will,' Gomez told TheWrap. 'But if not, I'm going to speak out. So this is my role.'
Based on the record thus far, Gomez will find little common ground with FCC chairman Brendan Carr, who has exhibited an apparent willingness to act as Trump's personal advocate on issues such as the approval process regarding Paramount Global's merger with Skydance Media. FCC scrutiny comes at a delicate time for the $8 billion deal, with Trump pursuing a lawsuit against Paramount's CBS News and '60 Minutes' over a Kamala Harris interview during the 2024 election.
'It is clear this administration is weaponizing the FCC, and the FCC's licensing authority, and that's what's happening,' Gomez said.
Practically speaking, that doesn't leave Gomez with many options, in part because some of the initiatives Carr has pursued haven't played out at the commission level, meaning there are no formal votes. Instead, she said, 'It's threats, letters and investigations at the staff level, and those aren't appealable.'
Media companies are uncertain about how far the GOP-controlled FCC may take its rhetoric, with Carr referring to diversity efforts as 'invidious' discrimination, and threatening to block merger activity by any company continuing to adhere to such policies. The FCC chairman has also spoken about whether those companies are operating in the public interest — a vague standard that could be used, in theory, to try and take away or block the right to own TV or radio stations.
However murky those statements might be in practice, media companies that have already bowed to pressure — such as announcing that they were eliminating formal DEI efforts, or that have settled lawsuits brought by Trump — don't appear eager to test the boundaries, given the high stakes involved and the potential damage to their businesses.
Representatives for the FCC didn't respond to a request for comment, though Carr has stated that his inquiries involving Paramount and CBS are unrelated to Trump's '60 Minutes' lawsuit.
To many, however, that doesn't pass the smell test, including Carr entertaining a complaint against CBS for 'news distortion,' also using that term as leverage against MSNBC parent Comcast, a regular target of Trump's social media wrath.
'The threat is the point. No lawyer thinks there's an actual claim against CBS for news distortion,' Jessica J. González, co-CEO of Free Press, a non-profit media advocacy group, told TheWrap. She said that Carr invoking that prospect is 'absolutely an attempt to harass regulated entities.'
Carr's predecessor, former FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel, sounded a similar warning shortly before Trump's inauguration, saying the commission 'should not be the president's speech police' and 'should not be journalism's censor-in-chief.' Yet under Carr, it feels as if that's what has come to pass.
In some respects, there's precedent for Gomez's lonely crusade. During the George W. Bush administration two decades ago, Democratic commissioner Michael J. Copps became an outspoken critic of media consolidation, a minority position thanks to the GOP appointees led by pro-business chairman Michael Powell.
Copps frequently spoke at industry forums and to groups like the Caucus for Television Producers, Writers & Directors, shining a light on the issue without derailing Powell's deregulatory agenda.
Part of the problem with the FCC's recent actions is they feel so arbitrary and transparently political, pursuing clear motives — like targeting news divisions Trump dislikes, or investigating DEI policies — under the guise of public-interest concerns and whether broadcasters are fulfilling those obligations in exchange for their licenses.
As for the importance of Gomez taking a public stand, González said, 'Dissents matter. Courts look at dissent when they're determining whether or not an agency has exceeded its statutory authority, whether or not it was unconstitutional.'
Beyond the legal ramifications, she added that dissent reverberates through the court of public opinion, while emboldening others to push back, whether that's media companies, law firms or universities, all of which have come under siege.
'It's important for us to document government abuse and overreach,' González noted. 'Can it stop what the Trump administration is doing? I still think that's an open question.'
Given that, González noted that those companies and entities that have caved in to Trump's demands are being 'shortsighted,' a point Gomez echoed during the panel, while seeing a ray of hope in the example set by Harvard and others in refusing to bend the knee.
'Capitulation breeds capitulation. But the good news is courage breeds courage,' she said.
At the Free Press forum, California Rep. Raul Ruiz applauded Gomez for her courage, which seems particularly admirable in light of Trump's decision to fire Democratic appointees to the Federal Trade Commission, prompting speculation about how long she can hold out if she keeps challenging Carr's legally dubious pursuits.
Ultimately, even in light of the Copps example, the stakes seem far higher for Gomez, given those who see the people engaging in this fight as bulwarks against rising authoritarianism that flouts the law and courts.
For now, Gomez isn't fretting about potential consequences, but rather simply doing what she believes to be right. 'I'm cognizant that I can be removed, but I'm not really worried about myself,' she said. 'I am going to continue to speak out until I can't anymore.'
The post FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez Wages a Lonely Fight for Press Freedom in Trumpland appeared first on TheWrap.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
5 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Can Elon Musk get Tesla back on track? Here are four road bumps
After a tumultuous months-long period by President Trump's side, Elon Musk is turning his attention back to his companies, including the stumbling electric vehicle maker Tesla Inc. Musk announced on X last week that his time as a special government employee was over. Tesla investors welcomed the news, hoping that Musk's departure from Washington would boost his car company's reputation and lagging performance. Since Musk began his role leading the White House advisory team called the Department of Government Efficiency in January, Tesla's stock has fallen roughly 12%. On Tuesday, the shares closed at $332, down 3.5%. The Austin, Texas-based company — which has a significant manufacturing operation in Fremont, Calif., and is the dominant EV company in the state — has been the subject of protests and vandalism as Musk, the company's chief executive, aligned himself with Trump and made controversial spending cuts on behalf of the federal government. The brand damage spread outside the U.S. to Europe, where monthly sales in 32 countries fell nearly 50% in April. 'It was very important for Musk to end this chapter and start working on Tesla's next stage of growth,' Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives said. 'Now he can get back to what he's supposed to be doing.' As the executive shifts his focus back to Tesla, here are four challenges experts say he must tackle: By associating himself with the president and the Trump administration's erratic actions, Musk alienated a large swath of his customers. Many Tesla drivers are liberal-leaning, industry analysts said, and were drawn to the company's environmental mission to take gas cars off the road. In protest over Musk's activities, some Tesla drivers, including celebrities, began selling or getting rid of their vehicles. Others sported new bumper stickers that said, 'I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy.' In February, Tesla topped the list of brands that lost the most resale value year over year, according to data provided by Karl Brauer, an analyst with The price of a used Tesla Model S and Model Y each dropped by about 16% in February from a year earlier. 'Price is a reflection of supply and demand,' Brauer said. 'So it could be that nobody wants to buy them anymore, or that there's a massive influx of them available, or both.' Now that he's left Washington, Musk will have to prove that his attention is on Tesla and that he isn't prioritizing political agendas. Ives estimated that about 5% to 10% of the brand damage sustained during Musk's stint in the capital will be permanent. 'Tesla has become a political symbol around the world and that's not a good thing,' said Ives, who has an 'outperform' rating on Tesla's stock. 'But there are much brighter days ahead now that Musk is no longer in the White House.' Musk has made lofty promises for years about the capabilities of Tesla's self-driving technology and plans for a robotaxi service. Though he has often over-exaggerated his progress, Musk has taken important steps toward commercializing autonomous driving technology. The future of his company depends on whether he can follow through, experts said. 'Musk's top priority should be autonomy and robotics,' Ives said. 'With these technologies, I believe Tesla's market cap could reach $2 trillion.' The company is currently valued at just over $1 trillion. According to claims Musk has made, Tesla drivers will one day be able to sleep in their car as it drives them across the country. Tesla's robotaxis will roam city streets, and humanoid robots dubbed Optimus will perform everyday tasks. Brauer compared the emergence of autonomous driving technology to a change on the scale of the internet or smartphones. But it's still far off, he said. Although the driverless taxi company Waymo is already operating in a few cities including Santa Monica, it could take 10 to 15 years for the technology to become widely accessible and integrated into society, Brauer said. Tesla remains the dominant force in the electric vehicle market, but rapidly increasing competition from traditional carmakers and other EV manufacturers have thinned sales, Brauer said. Major manufacturers including Ford and Chevy have released lines of their own electric vehicles, while promising startups such as Irvine-based Rivian have cut into Tesla's market share. At the same time, demand for electric vehicles is plateauing as the market gets saturated, Brauer said. Tesla's profit plummeted 71% in the first quarter to $409 million as the company faced a flurry of setbacks, including a falloff in automotive sales and rising competition. To keep up and remain viable, Tesla will have to reassess aspects of its business model. 'Many people, I think including Musk himself, have realized that the current business model is pretty much played out,' Brauer said. 'He's not going to substantially increase his revenue and his profit selling these same electric cars.' Tesla could receive a boost in sales if it successfully launched an affordable model accessible to more customers, but despite rumors and claims by executives, a release date has not been announced. The company could be further hurt by the loss of a $7,500 federal electric vehicle credit, which encourages sales and is likely to be eliminated by the Trump administration. While chargers for electric vehicles are ubiquitous in many parts of California, infrastructure is lacking throughout large areas of the country — and that's a problem. For the U.S. to rely more heavily on EVs, significant progress has to be made on the network of charging stations, Brauer said. Finding a time and place to charge is an obstacle for many Tesla drivers and limits the range of customers Tesla can reach. The lack of a fully comprehensive charging network would also hinder Musk's plans to operate a nationwide robotaxi service, Brauer said. In California, many chargers are broken or have been intentionally damaged by protesters.
Los Angeles Times
5 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Voters wanted immigration enforcement, but not like this
Many voters elected President Trump to end border chaos. Illegal immigration remains low, but voters' opinions of his immigration policies as a whole have soured. The reason is that they view Trump's actions away from the border as just more chaos. Americans aren't against enforcement. But not like this. So what's the root problem — and what's the real fix? The public's perception of chaos stems from the fact that Trump's policies appear arbitrary. Under President Biden, no one knew why people were getting into the country. Now no one knows why people are getting thrown out. Under Biden, people came illegally or chaotically. Now people are being deported illegally or chaotically. The public cares about order in both directions. America shouldn't be doomed to oscillate between two types of chaos. Instead, we need to reembrace the antidote for chaos: the rule of law. In popular speech, the 'rule of law' often just means following whatever the government says. But our nation's founders meant something else entirely. For them, the rule of law was the opposite of the 'rule of men' — which leaves government dictates, and the fate of residents, to the leaders' whims in the moment. The founders saw the rule of law as general predictable rules publicly known to and applicable to all. As James Madison wrote, 'Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?' For Madison, the hallmark of the rule of man was 'instability' (i.e. chaos). The separation of powers provided the Madisonian cure. 'The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands,' he said, 'may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny' because 'the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control.' Arbitrariness is just chaos by another name. During Biden's term, much of the border chaos traces to the fact that immigrants never really knew what the rule was. On paper, it was illegal to cross between ports and legal to cross at them. In reality, at least from 2021 to 2023, ports were mostly closed, and about half of the illegal crossers were allowed to stay. Moreover, the actual determination of who got in and who got tossed was made by agents at the border, not based on asylum statutes passed by Congress or any other known rule. This was the rule of man, not the rule of law, and the chaotic results were readily apparent. Unfortunately, the chaos has not dissipated — it's only moved locations: from the border to the interior. The basic framework of Trump's interior enforcement is that it is whimsical and arbitrary. It is not about 'merit,' not about public safety threats, not even about people here illegally or about 'noncitizens,' as Trump is seeking to strip U.S. citizenship from people and remove U.S. citizenship for many U.S.-born children.. There's no articulable rule. Consider that Trump is arresting highly educated, lawful immigrant students for op-eds written long ago. Setting aside the 1st Amendment, the founders would be — or actually were — equally aghast at the 'subjecting of men to punishment for things which, when they were done, were breaches of no law, and the practice of arbitrary imprisonments.' The rule of man is back, and it's as chaotic as ever. Trump has empowered agents to strip immigrants of lawful status and immediately deport them. They are even arresting lawful immigrants based on secret criteria (like forbidden tattoos) and sending them without due process to a foreign prison. Judge. Jury. Executioner. R.I.P. Madison's definition of tyranny. All this is unnecessary. Restoring the rule of law can end the chaos. That starts with clear, consistent and predictable rules. The immigration rules were, before Trump, notoriously known as 'second only to the Internal Revenue Code in complexity.' The policies rapidly change from administration to administration and even from month to month. The U.S. needs straightforward, transparent policies on immigration. When the government accuses someone of being in violation of the law, clear rules would enable rapid implementation in accordance with due process. This enforcement would naturally channel people into legal ways to enter and live in the United States. Once someone is granted a legal way to enter, that decision should not be reopened — absent some significant new facts. America can end the immigration chaos. This vision of an immigration policy animated by the rule of law is achievable, but no one in government has focused on achieving it. David J. Bier is the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute.
Los Angeles Times
5 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Candidates for California governor face off about affordability, high cost of living in first bipartisan clash
SACRAMENTO — In a largely courteous gathering of a half dozen of California's top gubernatorial candidates, four Democrats and two Republicans agreed that despite the state boasting one of the world's largest economies, too many of its residents are suffering because of the affordability crisis in the state. Their strategies on how to improve the state's economy, however, largely embraced the divergent views of their respective political parties as they discussed housing costs, high-speed rail, tariffs, climate change and homelessness on Wednesday evening at the first bipartisan event in the 2026 governor race to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom. 'Californians are innovators. They are builders, they are designers, they are creators, and that is the reason that we have the fourth largest economy in the world,' said former Rep. Katie Porter., a Democrat from Irvine 'But businesses and workers are being held back by the same thing. It is too expensive to do things here. It is too expensive to raise a family. It is too expensive to run a business.' Conservative commentator Steve Hilton, a Republican, argued that state leaders need to end the 'stranglehold' of unions, lawyers and climate change activists on California policy. 'I've been traveling this state. Everywhere I go, it's the same story, this heartbreaking word that I get from every business I meet, every family is in such a struggle in California,' he said, with a raspy voice he explained immediately upon taking the stage was caused by a sore throat. The candidates spoke to about 800 people at a California Chamber of Commerce dinner at an 80-minute panel at the convention center in Sacramento. The chamber's decision on who to invite to the forum was based on which ones were leaders in public opinion surveys and fundraising. Making the cut were former Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, Hilton, Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, Porter and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The sharpest exchange of the evening was between Kounalakis, a Democrat, and Bianco, a Republican. After the candidates were asked about President Trump's erratic tariff policies, Kounalakis cited her experience working for her father's reat estate company as she criticized Bianco for arguing for a wait-and-see approach about the president's undulating plans. 'You're not a businessman, you're a government employee,' she said to Bianco. 'You've got a pension, you're going to do just fine. Small businesses are suffering from this, and it's only going to get worse, and it's driven, by the way, it is driven by Donald Trump's vindictiveness toward countries he doesn't like, countries he wants to annex, or states he doesn't like, people he doesn't like. This is hurting California, hurting our people, and it's only going to make things worse, until we can get him out of the White House.' Bianco countered that Kounalakis and the other Democrat gubernatorial candidates are directly responsible for the economic woes facing Californians because they have an 'unquenchable thirst' for money to fund their liberal agenda. 'I just feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. I have a billionaire telling me that my 32 years of public service is okay for my retirement,' he said. 'It's taxes and regulations that are driving every single thing in California up. We pay the highest taxes, we pay the highest gas, we pay the highest housing, we pay the highest energy.' The Democrats on stage, though largely agreeing about policy, sought to differentiate themselves. The sharpest divide was about whether to raise the minimum wage. On Monday, labor advocates in Los Angeles proposed raising it in Los Angeles County Atkins reflected most of her fellow Democrats' views, saying that while she wanted to see higher wages for workers, 'now is not the time.' Villaraigosa said that while he believes in a higher minimum wage, 'we can't just keep raising the minimum wage.' Kounalakis, though, said not increasing the minimum wage would be inhumane. 'I think we should be working for that number, yes I do,' she said. 'You want to throw poor people under the bus.' California's high cost of living is a pressing concern among the state's voters, and the issue is expected to play a major role in the 2026 governor's face. Nearly half feel worse off now compared with last year, and more than half felt less hopeful about their economic well-being, according to a poll released in May by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies that was co-sponsored by The Times. Nearly exactly a year before the gubernatorial primary next year, the event was the first time Democratic and Republican candidates have shared a stage. It was also the first time GOP candidates Bianco and Hilton have appeared together. Although the state's leftward electoral tilt makes it challenging for a Republican to win the race – Californians last elected GOP politicians to statewide office in 2006 — Bianco and Hilton are battling to win one of the top two spots in next year's primary election. The pair expressed similar views about broadly ending liberal policies in the state, such as stopping the state's high-speed rail project and reducing environmental restrictions such as the state's climate-change efforts that they argue have increased costs while making no meaningful impact on the consumption of fossil fuels. A crucial question is whether President Trump, who both Bianco and Hilton fully support, will eventually endorse one of the Republican candidates. The gubernatorial candidates, some of whom have been running more than a year, have largely focused on fundraising since entering the race. But the contest to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom is growing more public and heated, as seen at last weekend's California Democratic Party convention. Several of the party's candidates scurried around the Anaheim convention center, trying to curry favor with the state's most liberal activists while also drawing contrasts with their rivals. But the Democratic field is partially frozen as former Vice President Kamala Harris weighs entering the race, a decision she is expected to make by the end of the summer. Harris' name did not come up during the forum. There were a handful of light moments. Porter expressed a common concern among the state's residents when they talk about the cost of living in the state. 'What really keeps me up at night, why I'm running for governor, is whether my children are going to be able to afford to live here, whether they're going to ever get off my couch and have their own home,' she said.
