Journalism

Given its diminished state and declining influence, network television might seem to be an odd prize in the Trump-era culture wars. But network television, which can still be received free by any home with an antenna, regularly draws a mass audience on the order of 10 million for “60 Minutes,” 7 million for ABC’s “World News Tonight,” and more than 100 million for the Super Bowl.

Against the backdrop of increased government pressure, reports that CBS News interfered with the editorial judgment of 60 Minutes are deeply alarming and strike at the heart of press freedom. When the FCC withheld approval of Paramount’s transaction to extract sweeping concessions, I warned that allowing the government to wield regulatory leverage in newsroom decision-making would inevitably threaten independent journalism. We are now seeing the real-world consequences of blurring the line between regulatory authority and editorial independence.

The Center for News, Technology and Innovation reviewed 188 national and regional AI strategies, laws, and policies around the world to determine how they impact journalism. We focused our analysis on how regulatory activity addresses seven policy components that are particularly likely to impact journalism.

President Trump came into office promising to decapitate mainstream media.

What exactly are the rules around data scraping? It turns out that there aren’t many—in part because government regulators haven’t really focused on this increasingly important issue. Internet data is now becoming a crucial resource in the AI boom, and there are ongoing clashes between major tech platforms that are trying to both hoard and capitalize on that data.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr announced a review of the relationships between broadcast networks and their affiliates, calling into question contractual restrictions that penalize stations for pre-empting shows and those that prevent them from airing rival programming.

Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr has reportedly written to the BBC, PBS, and NPR announcing an investigation into whether a controversial BBC documentary with a misleading edit of a Donald Trump speech was ever aired in the US. Breitbart obtained a copy of the letter, which hasn’t been shared publicly by either Chairman Carr or the FCC.

Sinclair said it built a roughly 8 percent stake in E.W. Scripps and is vying to acquire the local TV broadcaster. The two companies held constructive talks about a potential deal in recent months but have yet to strike an agreement, Sinclair said. Sinclair’s stake was revealed in a regulatory filing. Sinclair bought up the stake to add pressure on Scripps to strike a deal.

The FCC does not have the authority, the ability, or the constitutional right to go after broadcasters for their news content. The Communications Act forbids the Commission from censoring broadcasters, and the First Amendment protects journalistic choices from government intimidation. Nevertheless, this FCC has deployed a vague and ineffective News Distortion policy as a weapon to stretch its licensing authority and pressure newsrooms. The First Amendment is a pillar of our democracy.

Andrew C. Barrett, Rachelle B. Chong, Ervin S. Duggan, Mark S. Fowler, Dennis R. Patrick, Alfred C. Sikes, Thomas E. Wheeler, Christopher J. Wright, Kathryn C. Brown, Jerald N. Fritz, Peter Pitsch (the petitioners) request that the Federal Communications Commission repeal the news distortion policy in full. In Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, the Supreme Court, applying the First Amendment, reaffirmed that the government has no role in “un-biasing” the media.