The FCC's MAGA standard: Target Trump's enemies, let Fox News off the hook

Yahoo

07-03-2025

Chair Brendan Carr of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), President Donald Trump's 'censure-in-chief,' is waging a war on the First Amendment and freedom of the press by investigating all of the president's perceived enemies and the major media networks, while letting Fox News and Rupert Murdoch off the hook. The selective weaponization of the FCC against media outlets that President Trump dislikes by threatening to revoke their licenses is not only unprecedented and dangerous but also beyond hypocritical. The fact is that only Fox's leadership has repeatedly violated the character qualifications required for broadcast licensees. In 2023, the Media and Democracy Project (MAD) and its allies, former FOX executives and FCC officials, asked the FCC to deny the renewal of a Fox-owned local broadcast station's license. The groups alleged that senior management of Fox Corporation — including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch — manipulated their audience by knowingly broadcasting false news about the 2020 election. How do we know? The factual findings in the Dominion case confirmed that Fox repeatedly made false statements. In my opinion, they undermined our democracy and contributed to the Jan. 6 insurrection. The commission responded by taking the rare step of opening the issue for public comment. But over 550 days later in the waning moments of the Biden administration, the FCC's Media Bureau grouped together MAD's petition with politically motivated complaints against ABC, CBS and NBC and dismissed them all stating it was an attempt to thwart the weaponization of 'the licensing authority of the FCC in a way that is fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment.' We can see how well this preemptive maneuver turned out because Chairman Carr immediately reinstated the complaints against ABC, CBS and NBC, but not MAGA's favorite network, FOX. Even before he had assumed the position of chair, Carr was leveraging the FCC's power to coerce Paramount/CBS over the '60 Minutes' transcript. Now, the FCC chairman is digging into ABC's debate moderation, NBC's 'Saturday Night Live' guest appearances and CBS's '60 Minutes' — but won't touch Fox. Carr is twisting the FCC's 'public interest' and 'character' standards into partisan tools. ABC is accused of bias in moderating a presidential debate because it pointed out a few of Trump's lies. The CBS case is second-guessing editorial decisions on '60 Minutes,' and NBC is incorrectly accused of violating the equal time rule. None one of which is based on court findings. Despite the current political climate and the FCC's alarming attacks on the First Amendment, we decided to appeal. Why? We are right on the facts.Plus, our appeal will demonstrate the difference between our petition and the flimsy cases that Carr has embraced and can be used to strengthen the rules preventing the weaponization of free speech.
The Murdochs' and Fox's lies about the election contributed to the Jan. 6 insurrection in the Capitol and duped millions of Americans into believing that the election was stolen. These actions shocked the conscience and grievously damaged the country. We believe strongly that the only way to protect our democracy and the FCC from further weaponization is to establish a bright-line test to provide clear guidance for when an evidentiary hearing is required in a broadcast license renewal.
Our petition can be used to protect First Amendment rights by establishing that the courts should adjudicate questions of defamation and free speech, not partisan political appointees. Once adjudicated, it is up to the FCC to determine the proper consequences for a broadcast licensee's actions through an evidentiary hearing where the facts can be collected and thoroughly reviewed. By relying on court adjudication, the FCC would be protecting against politically motivated complaints such as those brought by the Center for American Rights. Some argue that Fox News is a cable outlet and that the FCC has no jurisdiction over cable television. But this argument ignores the fact that the Communications Act of 1934 and subsequent FCC rulemaking impose character requirements on broadcast licensees. Congress decided that owning and operating a broadcast station on the public airwaves is not a right — it's a public trust. Never before has the commission been confronted with so much evidence attached to a petition that clearly shows that an FCC broadcast licensee undermined that trust.
It is also important to note that Fox's actions are not protected by the First Amendment. Preeminent First Amendment champion Floyd Abrams settled that debate by filing in support of MAD's petition. Fox and Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch demonstrate why those standards are needed. Before Fox settled the Dominion defamation case for $787.5 million, the judge found it knowingly spread falsehoods. In my opinion, those actions damaged public confidence in elections and those decisions were made to protect the company's profits.
Carr must stop playing political games and ignoring a case against Fox that is based on judicial rulings showing egregious behavior. To serve the public and defend free speech, the commission should use MAD's Fox petition to erect bright-line protection against the misuse and abuse of the commission's rules.