Latest news with #FederalCommunicationsCommission
Boston Globe
2 days ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Conservatives get the PBS and NPR cuts they've wanted for decades
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'Republicans who supported public media for their entire careers are voting to kill it, and there is only one reason: Donald Trump,' said Sen. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., who has been at the center of efforts to protect public media for decades. 'When Trump sets a loyalty test today, Republicans fall in line.' Advertisement Senator Ed Markey speaks during a press conference in the Lyndon Baines Johnson Room at the Capitol on May 5, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Markey argued that Trump's moves against PBS and NPR were part of the administration's larger campaign to undermine mainstream journalism. It is in line, he said, with the president's lawsuits against the major broadcast networks and suggestions that the Federal Communications Commission might punish their stations over accusations of liberal bias. 'It's all part of a plan to intimidate and control the media and how they cover his presidency,' he said. Advertisement But the willingness of congressional Republicans to vote for a complete cutoff of federal money to public broadcasting also says a lot about sweeping changes in media, and views of mainstream journalism, since Congress passed the 1967 law that led to the creation of PBS and NPR. The ascendant ideology of the Trump era is the opposite of the one that spawned the modern public broadcasting system. Its creation was spurred along by the declaration of Newton Minow, chair of the Federal Communications Commission during the Kennedy administration, that the competition for ratings and ad dollars had turned television into a 'vast wasteland' of 'game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder.' He beseeched broadcasters to 'make a conscientious, good-faith effort to serve the public interest' with higher-quality fare. His speech was followed by an influential study on 'educational television' from the Carnegie Corp. It concluded that the federal government should finance a system of stations to produce programming that was 'of human interest and importance' without regard for the free market incentives of ratings or ad revenue. The Johnson administration then did just that, in line with its Great Society program. No sooner was the system established than the Nixon White House attacked PBS for being packed with correspondents and guests who were 'anti-administration' or 'Kennedy sycophants,' as a Nixon aide, Patrick Buchanan, put it at the time. Nixon was so 'disturbed' that PBS had started a new national news show with hosts Robert MacNeil and Sander Vanocur — someone on his enemies list — that he requested 'all funds for public broadcasting be cut immediately,' White House memos released years later showed. Advertisement His administration didn't follow through. Instead, it toggled between pressure on the independent Corporation for Public Broadcasting to do its bidding and a plan to push more of its budget down to local stations — which, Nixon aides believed, tended to have more conservative management than the national networks run out of New York and Washington. But in the years that followed, the strength of local public television and radio stations in conservative states was often what saved the federal funding. In 1995, Gingrich, then the House speaker, made one of the most aggressive moves since Nixon to 'zero out' federal support for public media before he found it politically untenable. 'He was unpleasantly surprised that a lot of conservative politicians from red states resisted,' said Steve Oney, the author of 'On Air,' a book on the history of NPR. 'In their communities, their public radio and television stations were seen as assets.' Now, though, Oney said, 'people get their news from anywhere they want, so there's not the critical-mass support back in red-state America for public broadcasting.' The explosion in media sources is what Capitol Hill Republicans and their allies point to in justifying this year's rescission package. 'With cellphones and internet and all that, I think the ability of people almost any part of the country to access all kinds of information sources is, you know, greater than it's ever been,' Jeff Miron, a vice president of Cato Institute, a libertarian research group, said this week — on none other than NPR. Public media supporters say the commercial forces that made television a 'vast wasteland' still exist in an era of social media algorithms that reward content that attracts the most likes and shares. That's rarely the hyperlocal issues or deep policy discussions that are the bread and butter of local public television and radio stations, which have their own locally produced programs that run alongside the national shows of PBS and NPR. Advertisement Bill Goodman, a former longtime host of 'Kentucky Tonight' on KET-TV, which broadcasts statewide from Lexington, recalled watching a recent episode of his old show that devoted nearly an entire hour to an in-depth conversation about Medicaid cuts. The guests engaged in reasoned and intricate arguments from opposite sides of the national debate. 'You don't find that on commercial television,' he said. As it happened, as the host of 'Kentucky Tonight,' Goodman gave regular airtime to a citizen-activist, little known at the time, who was concerned with government spending: Dr. Rand Paul. Paul, now a U.S. senator, has helped lead a libertarian-leaning revolution within the Republican Party that pushed greater distrust of government bureaucracy. Days before he voted for the cuts, he said that he wasn't 'an enemy of public TV' but that the government needed to spend less. But the cuts went a bit far for an earlier would-be slasher, Gingrich, who later became a supporter of public broadcasting despite his continuing concerns about bias. (He and his wife, Callista, have a documentary on PBS, 'Journey to America With Newt and Callista Gingrich.') Gingrich said in an interview Wednesday that congressional Republicans were now succeeding where he had failed because the perceived — and, in his view, worsening — liberal tilt on national NPR and PBS programs had finally cost them support. Advertisement 'It's much easier to mobilize the country to just say, 'Enough,'' he said. But he noted that those national networks had the financial wherewithal to live on without government support. He expressed sympathy for smaller stations that provided vital service in rural areas and that would feel the brunt of the hit. 'Those little local stations don't have real assets,' Gingrich said, adding that 'they ought to be separated out' from the larger cut. That was not the prevailing view of his fellow party members voting on the package this week. 'If those stations can stick around and make it, I wish them the very, very best,' Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas said on CNN. But federal funding of public media, he said, was 'one of the niceties we can do without.' This article originally appeared in .
Time of India
3 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
US aims to ban Chinese technology in undersea telecommunications cables
By David Shepardson WASHINGTON: The Federal Communications Commission said on Wednesday it plans to adopt rules to bar companies from connecting undersea submarine communication cables to the United States that include Chinese technology or equipment. "We have seen submarine cable infrastructure threatened in recent years by foreign adversaries, like China," FCC Chair Brendan Carr said in a statement. "We are therefore taking action here to guard our submarine cables against foreign adversary ownership, and access as well as cyber and physical threats." The United States has for years expressed concerns about China's role in handling network traffic and the potential for espionage. The U.S. has broad data security concerns about the network of more than 400 subsea cables that handle 99% of international internet traffic. Since 2020, U.S. regulators have been instrumental in the cancellation of four cables whose backers had wanted to link the United States with Hong Kong. The FCC last year said it was considering new rules governing undersea internet cables in the face of growing security concerns, as part of a review of regulations on the links that handle nearly all the world's online traffic. The FCC said it was considering barring the use of equipment or services in those undersea cable facilities from companies on an FCC list of companies deemed to pose threats to U.S, national security , including Huawei, ZTE China Telecom and China Mobile. Carr said the FCC is taking action to "guard our submarine cables against foreign adversary ownership, and access as well as cyber and physical threats." The FCC will also seek comment on additional measures to protect submarine cable security against foreign adversary equipment. The cutting of two fiber-optic undersea telecommunication cables in the Baltic Sea prompted investigations of possible sabotage. In 2023 Taiwan accused two Chinese vessels of cutting the only two cables that support internet access on the Matsu Islands and Houthi attacks in the Red Sea may have been responsible for the cutting of three cables providing internet service to Europe and Asia.
The Star
3 days ago
- Business
- The Star
US aims to ban Chinese technology in undersea telecommunications cables
The US has for years expressed concerns over China's role in handling network traffic and the potential for espionage. - Photo: Reuters WASHINGTON: The Federal Communications Commission said on Wednesday (July 16) it plans to adopt rules to bar companies from connecting undersea submarine communication cables to the United States that include Chinese technology or equipment. "We have seen submarine cable infrastructure threatened in recent years by foreign adversaries, like China," FCC Chair Brendan Carr said in a statement. "We are therefore taking action here to guard our submarine cables against foreign adversary ownership, and access as well as cyber and physical threats." The United States has for years expressed concerns about China's role in handling network traffic and the potential for espionage. The US has broad data security concerns about the network of more than 400 subsea cables that handle 99% of international internet traffic. Since 2020, U.S. regulators have been instrumental in the cancellation of four cables whose backers had wanted to link the United States with Hong Kong. The FCC last year said it was considering new rules governing undersea internet cables in the face of growing security concerns, as part of a review of regulations on the links that handle nearly all the world's online traffic. The FCC said it was considering barring the use of equipment or services in those undersea cable facilities from companies on an FCC list of companies deemed to pose threats to US, national security, including Huawei, ZTE China Telecom and China Mobile. Carr said the FCC is taking action to "guard our submarine cables against foreign adversary ownership, and access as well as cyber and physical threats." The FCC will also seek comment on additional measures to protect submarine cable security against foreign adversary equipment. The cutting of two fiber-optic undersea telecommunication cables in the Baltic Sea prompted investigations of possible sabotage. In 2023 Taiwan accused two Chinese vessels of cutting the only two cables that support internet access on the Matsu Islands and Houthi attacks in the Red Sea may have been responsible for the cutting of three cables providing internet service to Europe and Asia. - Reuters
Fox News
3 days ago
- Politics
- Fox News
MORNING GLORY: Defining vulgarity down
The Federal Communications Commission has long forbidden licensees from using the airwaves allotted by the federal government to broadcast obscene, indecent or profane content. The rules are very easy to understand. Lenny Bruce and George Carlin did a public service when they made comedy schtick out of the generally agreed-upon standards for broadcast content. Every broadcaster in America got the standards hammered into them before they took to the air. In 35 years, I've never had a complaint about breaching this rule. I don't know any broadcaster who has. Because the rules are pretty much common sense about language that doesn't merely offend, but which usually is intended to simply shock. Before there was "clickbait" there were the "seven dirty words," precursors to "clickbait." There isn't a reader of this column who doesn't know some, if not all, of the trip wire terms. Similarly, there isn't an elected official in the land who uses the forbidden language in paid advertising. That's because they know it won't be cleared for broadcast. Most of them also think the use of obscene, indecent or profane language will lose, not gain votes. It is also understood that most adults and certainly the vast majority of teens routinely let loose with a phrase that would be condemned if aired by a licensee. In the not-so-distant past, however, candidates would never let the language slip their lips in a public event or most private settings. That day is now past. This week California Governor Gavin Newsom —a skilled communicator whatever you think of his policies— let loose with the "MOAP" —the mother of all profanities, not least because it includes the word "mother." That California's governor did so on a podcast and not in public tells you he knows the rules. Applying the term to podcaster, Joe Rogan, as the governor did could have been a calculated olive branch to the most popular podcaster. It certainly was a conscious decision, not the "excited utterance" of the sort that makes it into court records. The Federal Rules of Evidence provide for an "excited utterance" as an exception to the bar of hearsay evidence, and is admissible to prove the truth of the statement itself. And Governor Newsom is hardly alone. A growing number of public officials and legions of public figures have almost no filters on their public utterances. The very few filters that remain are still so disgusting as to not even pass the "I'm trying to impress with my casual profanity" bar because they carry a real political price. They do not carry a price for comics and podcasters. The reverse in fact. Casual use of the FCC's forbidden fruit is actually a branding mechanism and serves thus on both left and right wing podcasts. It would be a very good thing for a pollster or ten to test the public's views of profane, obscene or indecent speech. Candidates and the attention-addicted seem to have concluded that there is no downside to the use of such terms. My guess is that there is still a cost and that the new approach impacts the dead center of American politics, with both blue and red America reluctant to socialize the shocking. "Prude" or "Victorian" are thought by many to be insults, but when applied to those who simply object to the coarsening of the country's discourse, such designations are compliments. There are few if any people who don't slip into obnoxious, vulgar or profane speech, which is still instantly regretted by most normal folks if uttered within hearing distance of kids, especially those from toddlers to pre-teens (who have many superpowers including a capacity to recall every phrase used by parents and relatives.) For some reason, folks on the left side of the spectrum seem convinced that the causal use of the formerly forbidden is now a plus. Doubtful. But it would be useful to have evidence that there is no upside and some downside —if only a few percentage points. Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor, and host of "The Hugh Hewitt Show," heard weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives America home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel's news roundtable hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University's Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcast, and this column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.
AsiaOne
3 days ago
- Business
- AsiaOne
US aims to ban Chinese technology in undersea telecommunications cables, World News
WASHINGTON — The Federal Communications Commission said on Wednesday (July 16) it plans to adopt rules to bar companies from connecting undersea submarine communication cables to the United States that include Chinese technology or equipment. "We have seen submarine cable infrastructure threatened in recent years by foreign adversaries, like China," FCC Chair Brendan Carr said in a statement. "We are therefore taking action here to guard our submarine cables against foreign adversary ownership, and access as well as cyber and physical threats." The United States has for years expressed concerns about China's role in handling network traffic and the potential for espionage. The US has broad data security concerns about the network of more than 400 subsea cables that handle 99 per cent of international internet traffic. Since 2020, US regulators have been instrumental in the cancellation of four cables whose backers had wanted to link the United States with Hong Kong. The FCC last year said it was considering new rules governing undersea internet cables in the face of growing security concerns, as part of a review of regulations on the links that handle nearly all the world's online traffic. The FCC said it was considering barring the use of equipment or services in those undersea cable facilities from companies on an FCC list of companies deemed to pose threats to US, national security, including Huawei, ZTE China Telecom and China Mobile. Carr said the FCC is taking action to "guard our submarine cables against foreign adversary ownership, and access as well as cyber and physical threats." The FCC will also seek comment on additional measures to protect submarine cable security against foreign adversary equipment. The cutting of two fibre-optic undersea telecommunication cables in the Baltic Sea prompted investigations of possible sabotage. In 2023 Taiwan accused two Chinese vessels of cutting the only two cables that support internet access on the Matsu Islands and Houthi attacks in the Red Sea may have been responsible for the cutting of three cables providing internet service to Europe and Asia. [[nid:720255]]
