Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr told a newspaper this week that he would be willing to revoke broadcast licenses from media companies he and President Donald Trump deem to be "out of line," a stance that has prompted criticism from free speech advocates and some lawmakers.
In an interview published Monday, Carr said broadcast licenses "are not sacred cows" and argued the agency has authority under a 1934 statute to hold networks to requirements that they operate in the "public interest, convenience and necessity." Carr, who has served on the FCC since 2017, said the agency is "fully aligned with the agenda that President Trump is running," and that the president set a new standard for the government's approach to legacy media.
Carr has used the agency's oversight powers to open inquiries into Comcast, the parent company of NBCUniversal, following public criticisms from Mr. Trump alleging anti-conservative bias. The FCC has examined Comcast's diversity policies and said it would review whether programming decisions by NBC stations and affiliates properly reflect "the needs and interests of their communities," according to Carr's comments to the paper.
The chairman cited the statutory framework dating to 1934 to justify heightened scrutiny, and he pointed to precedent in which the FCC revoked a station's license in 1971 after it used its platform to defend segregation. He said he would not hesitate to act if he found a broadcaster had engaged in misconduct against the public interest.
Carr's critics say those statements reflect a politicization of the agency's work that could chill newsroom independence. Robert Corn-Revere, chief counsel at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, told the paper that Carr's approach appeared to be part of "a political campaign against what the chairman perceives to be enemies of the president," and warned it risked violating the FCC's role in protecting free speech.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has also criticized the FCC's recent decisions. She called the agency's approval of the merger between Paramount Global, the parent of CBS, and Skydance Media "looks like corruption, plain and simple," noting that Paramount agreed to pay Mr. Trump a $16 million settlement in his election-interference lawsuit over a CBS "60 Minutes" interview before the deal was finalized. Skydance had committed to appointing an ombudsman to evaluate complaints of bias at Paramount and to refrain from new diversity policies; Carr defended the handling of the merger review, saying it followed existing rules and that any ombudsman would report to the company, not to the FCC.
Supporters of Carr's approach say the FCC has long had authority to enforce broadcast obligations and that heightened oversight is appropriate when networks hold privileged access to public airwaves. The Wall Street Journal described Carr as a maverick who has embraced what it called President Trump's "showman instincts" to hold broadcasters accountable.
Legal scholars and free-press advocates counter that aggressive use of licensing authority tied to political judgments about coverage could erode First Amendment protections and create uncertainty for broadcasters. They note that revocation of a broadcast license is an extreme remedy the FCC has rarely invoked; the most-cited case occurred in 1971 when the license of a Mississippi station was revoked for defending segregation.
Carr's comments come amid broader disputes over media coverage and corporate governance at major networks and streaming companies, and follow earlier announcements by the FCC to examine relationships between network parents and their local stations. The agency did not immediately respond to a request for comment reported by other outlets.
The debate raises questions about how broadly the FCC may interpret the public-interest standard and how the agency will balance enforcement powers with constitutional protections for speech and a free press. Any move to revoke a license would likely prompt legal challenges that could test the boundaries of FCC authority and its role in regulating broadcasters who continue to reach large audiences via free over-the-air signals.
As the 2024 presidential campaign and media scrutiny continue, the FCC under Carr's leadership appears prepared to take a more assertive role in policing broadcast practices, even as opponents warn that such actions could entangle the agency in partisan disputes over content and coverage.