Tag: brendan carr
Trump Administration Demands American Press Propagandize Its Iran War

Trump Administration Demands American Press Propagandize Its Iran War

We are two weeks into President Donald Trump’s ill-conceived war of choice against Iran, and the president is already suggesting his administration should shut down news outlets for producing critical reports — or even consider treason charges based on spurious claims of collusion with America’s enemies.

Though U.S. and Israeli forces have successfully bombed a wide array of Iranian targets and assassinated its former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran has followed through with its strategic doctrine by closing the Strait of Hormuz, shutting down a major channel for the global energy and fertilizer trades.

As a result, Trump is begging/demanding foreign navies bail him out by sending ships to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, deploying additional troops and ships to the region for unknown reasons, lifting sanctions on Russia in hopes of lowering the price of oil, denying reports that a Pentagon investigation preliminarily found the U.S. military accidentally incinerated scores of Iranian schoolchildren with an errant missile — and railing against the American press for refusing to report that the war is going well.

Meanwhile, Trump’s hand-picked Federal Communications Commission chair, Brendan Carr, is signaling to broadcast stations that they will face regulatory retribution if they don’t “correct course."

It’s all part of the authoritarian playbook Trump wields against news outlets that produce anything less than Fox News-style propaganda. The protections of the First Amendment ensure that those outlets could likely prevail in court — but fighting is expensive, and over the course of Trump’s second term so far, the corporate moguls who control them have proven unnervingly unwilling to do so.

Trump rails against press, demands government retribution

Last week, former Fox News host Megyn Kelly bemoaned that the network’s coverage is offering lockstep support for Trump’s Iranian “excursion.”

“Now it's, you cheerlead the war, support the military industrial complex, or … you're a loser,” she said on her podcast. “It's infuriating because we're talking about life and death. We're talking about American life or death. And this is a dereliction of duty.”

As Kelly suggests, when Trump turns his television to Fox, he is getting unhinged validation of his efforts. But the president is not satisfied with that. He wants every American news outlet producing the same Fox-style war propaganda.

Trump used what he baselessly described as “an intentionally misleading headline by the Fake News Media” to denounce the press in a Saturday morning Truth Social post.“The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal (in particular), and other Lowlife 'Papers’ and Media actually want us to lose the War,” he wrote. “Their terrible reporting is the exact opposite of the actual facts! They are truly sick and demented people that have no idea the damage they cause the United States of America.”

In another post on Sunday evening, the president baselessly claimed that Iran had been “working in close coordination with the Fake News Media” to promote a fake, AI-generated video depicting a U.S. ship burning in the Persian Gulf.

“The story was knowingly FAKE and, in a certain way, you can say that those Media Outlets that generated it should be brought up on Charges for TREASON for the dissemination of false information!” Trump posted. “The fact is, Iran is being decimated, and the only battles they ‘win’ are those that they create through AI, and are distributed by Corrupt Media Outlets.”

(In reality, responsible news outlets have been debunking that video, not distributing it, according to CNN’s Brian Stelter.)

“It's pretty criminal because our media companies, who have no credibility whatsoever, are putting out information that they know is false, and it's a very dangerous thing for the country,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One later that night, “I think they could be in serious jeopardy."

Trump’s weekend anti-press binge followed coverage complaints from Pete Hegseth, the former Fox & Friends weekend host who now heads the Pentagon, who used a press conference on Friday morning to gripe extensively about the banners he has seen on TV news coverage:

Yet some in this crew, in the press, just can't stop. Allow me to make a few suggestions. People look up at the TV and they see banners, they see headlines. I used to be in that business. And I know that everything is written intentionally.

For example, a banner or a headline: “Mideast war intensifies,” splashing on the screen the last couple of days, alongside visuals of civilian or energy targets that Iran has hit, because that's what they do. What should the banner read instead?

How about, ‘Iran increasingly desperate,’ because they are. They know it and so do you, if it can be admitted.

Hegseth posited that an “actual patriotic press” would produce such coverage. He also decried a CNN report detailing how the Trump administration “failed to fully account for the potential consequences” of Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz. “The sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better,” he commented, referencing a Trump ally’s effort to take over CNN’s parent company with the help of the administration.

With Carr, a cause for alarm

It is disturbing enough that the president of the United States is a deranged authoritarian who responds to a faltering war by ranting about its coverage. But what makes it worse is that his administration is filled with apparatchicks eager to carry out his demands for retribution.

Carr, who was reportedly with the president at his Mar-A-Lago club over the weekend, responded to Trump’s initial post complaining about journalists who “actually want us to lose the War” by threatening the licenses of broadcast stations that produce critical coverage.

“Broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions - also known as the fake news - have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up,” Carr wrote. “The law is clear. Broadcasters must operate in the public interest, and they will lose their licenses if they do not."

Carr was nonspecific about how broadcasters could avoid reprisal (and Trump had lashed out at newspapers, not broadcast networks, in his post), but he’s a hack who is typically willing to carry Trump’s water no matter how absurd the underlying complaint may be.

Trump signaled his approval for Carr’s threats in his Sunday evening “TREASON” post, writing, “I am so thrilled to see Brendan Carr, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), looking at the licenses of some of these Corrupt and Highly Unpatriotic ‘News’ Organizations."

Stelter, in an extensive report drawing on comments from First Amendment lawyers, notes that Carr “has very little power to follow through” and that television stations, if they are willing to fight such attempted reprisals in court, “are not at serious risk of being banned."

“Any government action against a licensee would cause a protracted legal battle, even more so given the current media-bashing climate, because a station would likely cite Trump’s retributive streak and mount a First Amendment case,” Stelter wrote.

There is a strong argument that stations would be victorious if they fought Carr’s attempts to strip their licenses. But there were also strong arguments that ABC News and CBS News would be victorious if they fought the lawsuits Trump filed over their coverage in 2024. The problem was that rather than going to court on behalf of a free press, Disney and Paramount, their parent companies, decided it was in the interest of their broader business holdings to fold.

The advantage Trump and Carr have in their fight to cudgel the press into line is that it can be very expensive to fight the federal government on behalf of the First Amendment — and what the last year shows is that many people who own or control news outlets don’t care enough about such principles to do it. And Disney and Paramount had much deeper pockets to pay lawyers than an individual local broadcast news station does. Even Sinclair Broadcast Network, which owns or operates nearly 200 stations across the country, has a market cap of around $1 billion, compared to roughly $175 billion for Disney.

If Carr threatens the licenses of Sinclair stations, are its pro-Trump owners really going to go to the mat for the free press rather than using his complaints as an opportunity to push coverage even further to the right?

It’s also worth taking seriously Trump’s threats of treason charges against news outlets. The Justice Department is now staffed by loyalists like former Fox host Jeanine Pirro who are willing to follow through on his demands for political prosecutions. Those efforts keep failing — but they raise the cost of dissent and thus chill free speech.

And that’s what the president wants, as Fox & Friends co-host Ainsley Earhardt made clear when she channeled him on Monday morning.

“The president has said enough with this coverage from other networks that are not telling you the truth, that are so negative about what’s going on,” she said. “This is a pro-America fight, and every network needs to get on board with that."

And if they aren’t, there will be consequences.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Shannon Bream Fox dignified transfer

Shouldn't Brendan Carr's FCC Launch An Immediate Probe Of Fox News?

Federal Communications Chairman Brendan Carr faces an important test of his stated standards for news organizations this week: If he's not just looking to punish media outlets for being insufficiently deferential to President Donald Trump, he must launch a news distortion investigation of Rupert Murdoch’s Fox Broadcasting Co.

Trump attended a dignified transfer ceremony at Dover Air Force Base on Saturday honoring the first six U.S. service members killed in the Iran war. The president drew criticism for wearing a baseball cap that his campaign store sells for $55 while saluting coffins bearing the remains of the fallen.

Fox News’ right-wing propagandists would lose their minds if a Democratic president did such a thing. But on Sunday morning, the network instead seemed to hide the president’s disrespect toward the dead. While purporting to cover the previous day’s event, Fox & Friends Weekend aired months-old footage from December of Trump attending a dignified transfer ceremony for two U.S. National Guard members and a civilian interpreter killed in Syria. The president was not wearing a ballcap in that footage, but was wearing an overcoat to shield him from the December cold.

Critics quickly exposed the Fox & Friends misrepresentation, and host Griff Jenkins apologized later in the program, claiming that the show “inadvertently aired video from an older dignified transfer instead of the ceremony that took place yesterday.” The network similarly stressed in a statement that it had been a mistake, saying, “FOX News Media programs inadvertently aired file footage from a previous dignified transfer while discussing yesterday’s ceremony at Dover Air Force Base. The archival footage was mistakenly used during the video sourcing process. We regret the error and apologize for the incorrect footage.”

But Fox News didn’t just air this incorrect footage once — as CNN noted on Sunday, “A quick scan showed both last night's ‘The Big Weekend Show’ and this morning's ‘Fox News Sunday’ also used the wrong footage, while last night's ‘My View with Lara Trump’ used the correct video.”

Fox News Sunday aired the footage of Trump at the December dignified transfer twice, first while anchor Shannon Bream said, “As fallen service members from Operation Epic Fury make their final return home, the Pentagon praises the progress being made on the battlefield,” and again as Bream stated: “On Saturday, the remains of the six U.S. service members killed in Operation Epic Fury came home. The president, first lady, and Vice President Vance joined family members for the dignified transfer ceremony at Dover Air Force in Delaware.” During the second occurrence, on-screen text read, “DOVER, DE. Saturday.”

Fox News programming airs on cable, which means its content is largely unregulated — but Fox News Sunday also airs on hundreds of local broadcast stations across the country, which “are subject to certain speech restraints” overseen by the FCC. That body, under Carr’s leadership, has been much more aggressive in cracking down on broadcast networks over purported “news distortion” on the public airwaves — at least when those distortions are against the interests of the president.

Carr targeted CBS for purported “news distortion,” using his federal regulatory power to extract concessions from the network as its parent company Paramount sought to merge with Trump ally David Ellison’s Skydance Media.

Shortly after Trump took office and made him the FCC chair last year, Carr reopened a previously dismissed probe of CBS News over its editing of a 60 Minutes interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris that aired in October 2024. Trump had sued CBS for $10 billion over the interview, and repeatedly declared that the network should “lose its license.”

Carr demanded an unedited transcript of the 60 Minutes interview and tied the investigation to the merger, saying, “I’m pretty confident that that news distortion complaint over the ’60 Minutes’ transcript is something that is likely to arise in the context of the FCC review of that transaction.” The probe went away and the merger went through after Paramount agreed to settle Trump’s lawsuit and appoint a right-wing ombudsman.

CBS hasn’t been the only target of Carr’s ire. He also revived FCC probes into right-wing complaints that NBC favored Harris during the 2024 election because she appeared on Saturday Night Live, and that ABC’s moderator had unfairly fact-checked Trump during their presidential debate.

And when ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel inaccurately suggested in September that right-wing activist Charlie Kirk’s killer was part of “the MAGA gang,” the chair rushed to a MAGA influencer’s show to accuse the comedian of “an intentional effort to mislead the American people” — and to threaten retribution against both ABC parent company Disney and the broadcast stations that aired Kimmel’s show, including potential “license revocation from the FCC.”

Broadcast licenses granted by the FCC give networks “a unique obligation to operate in the public interest,” Carr explained to Trumpist mouthpiece Sean Hannity during a Fox interview amid the Kimmel uproar.

Fox Broadcasting stations, one could argue, failed that “unique obligation to operate in the public interest” when they engaged in “news distortion” by airing inaccurate footage that prevented viewers from seeing the president disrespect deceased service members.

So how about it, Mr. Chairman? Why not launch a probe and demand interviews and documents to find out whether Fox’s editing issue was “inadvertent,” as they claim — or, as certainly seems possible given the network’s record, “an intentional effort to mislead the American people”?

Reprinted with permisson from Media Matters

Stephen Colbert

Stephen Colbert, Equal Time And The True Public Interest

Stephen Colbert was right to be mad. His bosses at CBS put the kabosh on an interview he wanted to do with a Texas Senate candidate on his late-night talk show. But you can't just blame CBS. The fault lies, as it so often does these days, in the Trump administration, which last month announced new "guidance" from the Federal Communications Commission requiring "equal time" on entertainment-oriented talk shows.

The guidance was clearly aimed at Trump's targets on late-night TV, including of course, Jimmy Kimmel of ABC, who has been targeted as well by Trump's FCC chair, Brendan Carr. It grows out of the longstanding conservative complaints about the late-night liberal conspiracy and the tendency of liberal hosts and guests to dominate. So what do you do? This is not the small government/libertarian crowd. These are big government conservatives. Regulate the hell out of them is what they are doing.

Until now, the broadcast industry — following the FCC's lead — had taken the position that talk shows, like news shows, were exempt from the "public interest" requirement that stations must give rival candidates equal opportunities to buy time and appear on tv. Indeed, the FCC ruled explicitly in 2006 that interviews on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno were exempt. Then came the new guidance. "This major announcement from the FCC should stop one-sided left-wing entertainment shows masquerading as 'bona fide news,'" Daniel Suhr, the president of the Center for American Rights, said at the time the guidance was issued in January.

Or, as Carr himself put it on X: "For years, legacy TV networks assumed that their late-night & daytime talk shows qualify as 'bona fide news' programs — even when motivated by purely partisan political purposes. Today, the FCC reminded them of their obligation to provide all candidates with equal opportunities."

Or no opportunities at all. Forget the banner of free speech. As the Colbert example clearly demonstrates, the consequences of guaranteeing equal time for all candidates are most likely to be no time for any of them. What you're really telling talk shows to do — including daytime shows like The View — is to stay away from politics, which is absolutely the last message that government should be sending.

The FCC has one Democratic member. She issued a statement when the new guidance was issued calling what her fellow Commissioners were doing "an escalation in this FCC's ongoing campaign to censor and control speech. Broadcasters should not feel pressured to water down, sanitize or avoid critical coverage out of fear of regulatory retaliation."

Clearly, that is what happened at CBS. While Colbert said he expected the network to do more to protect him, CBS itself told The New York Times that it had offered him "guidance" (clearly, the word of the day) on how to comply with the new version of the rule, including by offering equal airtime to the two other Democrats in the race.

The larger question — whether the public interest is in fact served by a rule adopted in 1927 to protect against then-powerful radio networks exerting undue influence on politics — is not one CBS alone can easily address. Brendan Carr knows his answer. He's all in for regulation in what he sees as the public interest. Whether the courts and Congress will go along remains to be seen.

Susan Estrich is a celebrated feminist legal scholar, the first female president of the Harvard Law Review, and the first woman to run a U.S. presidential campaign. She has written eight books.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World