The FCC’s Sleeping Power Over the Press
The Trump administration says it wants to end federal censorship. Its recent statements suggest something else.
In the executive order “Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship,” the White House asserted:
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, an amendment essential to the success of our Republic, enshrines the right of the American people to speak freely in the public square without Government interference. Over the last 4 years, the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve. Under the guise of combatting “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “malinformation,” the Federal Government infringed on the constitutionally protected speech rights of American citizens across the United States in a manner that advanced the Government’s preferred narrative about significant matters of public debate. Government censorship of speech is intolerable in a free society.
The order declared it the policy of the United States to “ensure that no Federal Government officer, employee, or agent engages in or facilitates any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.”
Despite that stated commitment, the administration has signaled a willingness to combat so-called “fake news” through a little-used and difficult-to-enforce news-distortion policy. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr recently amplified that position on social media, posting a screenshot of President Donald Trump’s Truth Social statement criticizing coverage of the conflict in Iran and warning broadcasters:
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. The law is clear. Broadcasters must operate in the public interest, and they will lose their licenses if they do not.
The problem requires precision. The FCC may plausibly claim legal authority to pursue this approach. That possibility makes the policy more—not less—concerning. This is not merely regulatory overreach. It is a long-dormant power that has remained on the books for decades, available to any administration willing to use it.
Congress should revisit that authority and eliminate it. No matter which party controls the White House, empowering a federal agency to make open-ended judgments about what qualifies as legitimate news coverage conflicts with core free-speech principles.
This discussion proceeds in two parts. First, it traces the origins of the news-distortion policy and explains why it no longer fits the modern media landscape. Second, it shows that, even under existing legal standards, no alleged facts would suffice to establish news distortion in broadcasters’ coverage of the conflict in Iran.