WASHINGTON—Following President Trump’s Executive Order establishing an exclusive broadcast window for the annual Army-Navy football game, Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr has come out in favor of the idea, which is designed to ensure that no other college football games are aired at the same time of the matchup.

During a presentation of the Commander in Chief’s Trophy to the United States Naval Academy football team, President Trump signed a new Executive Order to protect the Army-Navy Game, known as “America’s Game” by giving it an exclusive time slot.

Specifically, the Executive Order calls on the Chairman of the FCC and the Secretary of Commerce to coordinate with relevant stakeholders to ensure that no college football games are broadcast that conflict with the airing of the game.

FCC Chair Carr, who attended the presentation and the signing of the order, quickly issued a statement backing the Order.

“I was honored to join President Trump at the White House today as he awarded the coveted Commander in Chief’s Trophy to the Navy Football team,” Carr said. “The annual showdown between Army and Navy is always a classic and showcases the strength and bravery of this national service event. America’s Game stands as a symbol of excellences and our great national spirit. It is important that we continue to reserve a window of time on the second Saturday in December exclusively for this important event. I look forward to working with Secretary Lutnick [at the U.S. Commerce Department] on the successful implementation of this Executive Order.”

The Order comes at a time when the recent and potentially ongoing expansion of the College Football Playoffs (CFP) and other postseason college football games has raised worries that the CFP might encroach upon the second Saturday in December and create scheduling conflicts with the game.

“Such scheduling conflicts weaken the national focus on our Military Service Academies and detract from a morale-building event of vital interest to the Department of War,” the March 20 Executive Order stated. “Accordingly, it is the policy of the United States that no college football game, specifically college football’s CFP or other postseason games, be broadcast in a manner that directly conflicts with the Army‑Navy Game. Such scheduling conflicts weaken the national focus on our Military Service Academies and detract from a morale-building event of vital interest to the Department of War.”

To achieve that aim, the “Preserving America’s Game” Executive Order directs that the Secretary of Commerce and the Chairman of the FCC coordinate with the CFP Committee, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, related organizations, other appropriate government agencies, and the playoffs’ broadcast and media rights partners with the goal of establishing an exclusive window for the Army-Navy Game, during which no other college football game is broadcast.

Traditionally, the Army-Navy game has sat in a protected time slot. In 2025, FBS bowl games, the Celebration Bowl and LA Bowl, were intentionally scheduled for noon and 8:00 PM to avoid a direct broadcast conflict with the rivalry.

It is not clear whether any of the parties involved in scheduling the games have considered changing that tradition. Nor is it clear if the U.S. president has the authority to establish an exclusive broadcast window for the Army/Navy game or any other sporting event.

If the courts were to rule that President Trump had the constitutional authority to schedule TV programming or the timing of other events–subjects that are not directly mentioned in the constitution establishing the authority of the executive branch–it would mark an unprecedented expansion of government power over the content appearing on television and scheduling of major events. It would also give the government greatly expanded power to directly intervene in private contracts between media outlets, sports leagues, individuals and companies.

Nor is it clear how such a window could be enforced.

The EO specifies that the Chair of the FCC shall consider reviewing the public interest obligations of broadcast licensees to determine whether those obligations would require that the Army-Navy Game remain a national service event.

Such a determination would dramatically expand the FCC’s authority over the scheduling of broadcasts and sporting events.

The full Executive Order is available here.

WASHINGTON—Following new criticism from President Trump on the news media's coverage of the Iran War, FCC Chair Brendan Carr has reposted Trump’s attack on reporting by the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and issued a stern warning to broadcasters that running “fake news” could jeopardize their licenses.

“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 on March 14 on X. “The law is clear. Broadcasters must operate in the public interest, and they will lose their licenses if they do not.”

“And frankly, changing course is in their own business interests since trust in legacy media has now fallen to an all time low of just 9% and are ratings disasters,” he added. “The American people have subsidized broadcasters to the tune of billions of dollars by providing free access to the nation’s airwaves…The public has lost faith and confidence in the media. And we can’t allow that to happen.”

In response to Carr's post, Senator Elizabeth Warren wrote "Constitutional law 101: it’s illegal for the government to censor free speech it just doesn’t like about Trump’s Iran war. This threat is straight out of the authoritarian playbook. x.com/brendancarrfcc."

Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, also sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr, urging him to resign over his latest social media post threatening to revoke broadcasters’ licenses.

Senator Markey highlighted the post as an extraordinary abuse of FCC authority and a clear violation of the First Amendment, as well as the Trump administration’s latest authoritarian attempt to weaponize the FCC’s statutory authority to censor the media.

In the letter, Senator Markey wrote, “Your post on Saturday demonstrated your continued effort to turn the FCC into Trump’s personal speech police. … Your Saturday post is not an aberration. It is the latest and most dangerous step in a sustained campaign to use the FCC’s licensing authority as a weapon against broadcasters and journalists whose coverage displeases the Trump administration. … The FCC’s credibility depends on its willingness to exercise its authority on the merits, not at the direction of the President, and not as an instrument of retribution against journalism. You have once again shown that you are unwilling to maintain that independence and uphold your sworn oath to defend the U.S. Constitution, and I once again call on you to resign.”

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez added her voice to the critics.

“The FCC can issue threats all day long, but it is powerless to carry them out. Such threats violate the First Amendment and will go nowhere," she said in a statement on Sunday. "Broadcasters should continue covering the news, fiercely and independently, without fear of government pressure.”

On Sunday night, the president ramped up his criticism of the media, accusing the "Radical Leftwing Press" of having "no credibility," and charging it with "treason" in a post on his Truth Social account.

Trump also endorsed Carr's threat to revoke broadcast licenses over news coverage of the war in Iran, calling media organizations “Corrupt and Highly Unpatriotic” in a Truth Social post.

“They get Billions of Dollars of FREE American Airwaves, and use it to perpetuate LIES, both in News and almost all of their Shows, including the Late Night Morons, who get gigantic Salaries for horrible Ratings,” Trump wrote.

“As I used to say in The Apprentice, ‘FIRED,’” he added.

Although the FCC regulates broadcast licenses, it has far less ability to control cable news. That frustration was voiced by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth during a briefing last week when he lambasted CNN's coverage of the war, implying that Paramount—CNN's new owner—will provide more favorable coverage to the Trump administration.

“The sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better," he said.

TV Tech will add more comments as they come in.

NEW YORK—An estimated 32.6 million people watched President Donald J. Trump deliver the 2026 State of the Union address on Tuesday, February 24, according to Nielsen.

Of those viewers, 2,047,000 were aged 18 to 34.

Nielsen’s historical data noted that the 2026 speech was down from the 36.6 million who viewed Trump’s 2025 SOTU, but above President Biden’s speeches in 2024 (32.2 million), 2023 (27.3 million) and 2021 (26.96 million).

It was however lower than Biden’s SOTU in 2022 (38.19 million) and notably lower than Trump’s SOTUs during his first administration, which attracted between 37 million and 47 million viewers.

It was also much lower than the 6 most popular State of the Union speeches of the 21st century, led by 62.06 million for President George W. Bush’s 2003 speech, followed by President Barack Obama’s 2009 (52.37 million), Bush’s 2002 (51.77 million), Obama’s 2010 (48 million), Trump’s 2017 (47.74 million) and Trump’s 2019 (46.78 million) speeches.

WASHINGTON—The proposed deal for Nexstar to acquire Tegna got a major boost on social media in recent days when President Trump weighed in with his support for the deal.

“We need more competition against THE ENEMY, the Fake News National TV Networks,” Trump posted on his Truth Social site. “Letting Good Deals get done like Nexstar - Tegna will help knock out the Fake News because there will be more competition, and at a higher and more sophisticated level. Those that are opposed don’t fully understand how good the concept of this Deal is for them, but they will in the future. GET THAT DEAL DONE! PRESIDENT DJT”

In response, Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr, who has repeatedly noted that he would like to strengthen local broadcasters, offered perhaps his clearest intention to date of his willingness to get rid of the 39% ownership cap.

Carr postedon X that “President Trump is exactly right. The national networks like Comcast & Disney have amassed too much power. For years, they’ve been pushing this Hollywood & New York programming all over the country with no real checks. Let’s get it done and bring real competition to them.”

Trump's willingness to back the deal and by implication support changes in station ownership rules marks a reversal from his previous position attacking efforts to lift the 39% ownership cap as something that would help "radical left networks."

In a social media post on Nov. 23, 2025 Trump linked to a Newsmax article that said lifting FCC station ownership caps would be a “disaster for conservatives.” In the earlier post, Trump also complained that if proposals to lift the cap “would allow the Radical Left Networks to ‘enlarge,’ I would not be happy…If anything make them SMALLER!”

WASHINGTON—In the wake of an executive order from President Trump and a determination by an Executive Branch Interagency body that foreign made drones pose “unacceptable risks” to U.S. security, the Federal Communications Commission has updated its “Covered List” of banned technologies and products to include all new foreign made unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and all UAS critical components.

The move effectively bans sales of new drones and components by the Chinese manufacturer DJI, which dominates the drone market in the U.S. and other foreign makers.

It does not, the FCC stressed, impact a consumer’s ability to continue using drones they previously purchased or acquired. “Nor does today’s decision prevent retailers from continuing to sell, import, or market device models approved earlier this year or previously through the FCC’s equipment authorization process,” the agency said. “By operation of the FCC’s Covered List rules, the restrictions imposed by today’s decision apply to new device models.”

The move comes at a time when drone have become increasingly important in TV production, particularly for news and live sports. In 2025, for example, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) accepted Sinclair’s Declaration of Compliance for Operations Over People. That, Sinclair said, made it the first broadcaster authorized to fly drones over people and vehicles for newsgathering without a waiver from the government regulator.

As previously reported, the potential ban on new foreign drones, which has been brewing for months, has raised widespread concerns about the impact of any ban on new products or components.

“I welcome this Executive Branch national security determination, and I am pleased that the FCC has now added foreign drones and related components, which pose an unacceptable national security risk, to the FCC’s Covered List,” said FCC chair Brendan Carr in a statement. “Following President Trump’s leadership, the FCC will work closely with U.S. drone makers to unleash American drone dominance.”

By way of background, the FCC’s Covered List is a list of communications equipment and services that are deemed to pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the U.S. or the safety and security of U.S. persons. Under the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act, the Commission can update the Covered List only at the direction of national security authorities. In other words, the Commission cannot update this list on its own and is required to implement determinations that are made by our national security agency experts.

Equipment on the Covered List (“covered” equipment) is prohibited from getting FCC equipment authorization. Most wireless devices require FCC equipment authorization prior to importation, marketing, or sale in the U.S. Covered equipment is banned from receiving new equipment authorizations, preventing new devices from entering the U.S. market.

In making the determination to ban new foreign-made drones, national security agencies referenced, among other things, concerns that that foreign-made UAS could be used for attacks and disruptions, unauthorized surveillance, sensitive data exfiltration, and other UAS threats to the homeland. Additionally, the determination noted that reliance on such devices unacceptably undermines the U.S. drone industrial base, the FCC reported.

The full Public Notice on can be found here.

WASHINGTON—Newsmax founder and CEO Christopher Ruddy has come out against reducing broadcast ownership caps in a filing with the Federal Communications Commission that says the agency has no authority to change the rules and that “allowing more consolidation in local broadcasting would not only fail to curtail anticompetitive practices of Big Tech platforms, but actually would harm local broadcasting TV the same way it did radio broadcasting.”

“Following the FCC’s relaxation of radio ownership regulations [in the 1990s], many station owners relied heavily on debt financing to acquire additional outlets and expand their market presence,” Ruddy argued in a August 21 filing to the FCC. “In the aftermath of this consolidation, the terrestrial radio market is now dominated by three primary operators: iHeart, Cumulus, and Audacy, each burdened with significant debt obligations from their buying sprees. This financial strain has placed them in a precarious position, prompting a shift away from locally produced programming toward nationally syndicated content. This has led to the reduction of local voices in an effort to minimize costs and meet debt service obligations.”

In the filing Ruddy also argued that the “Commission cannot legally alter the Horizontal Ownership Cap. As Newsmax explained, and as other parties argued in convincing detail, the statutory language reveals a crystal clear congressional intent to set the Horizontal Cap at 39% and prevent the Commission from changing the rule without express authorization from Congress.”

“The Commission must abide, not only by maintaining the 39% limit but by eliminating once and for all the outdated, so-called `UHF discount,' which only serves to undermine Congress’ original intent," he wrote.

While the conservative cable news outlet is a relatively small player in the TV industry, with just $46.4 million in revenue in Q2 2025, Ruddy’s opposition to ending ownership caps for stations and his push to get the FCC to get rid of the UHF discount, which allows station groups like Nexstar to exceed the 39% cap, is notable. He is a longtime friend of President Donald Trump, and his Newsmax has been described as one of Trump’s favorite outlets.

Ruddy’s views put him at loggerheads with filings from conservative groups and FCC Chair Brandan Carr who has repeatedly indicated a willingness to change the ownership rules as part of a larger effort to strength local broadcasting.

WASHINGTON—As the U.S. Senate prepares to vote on the Rescissions Act of 2025 that would cancel $1.1 billion in already approved funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the CPB has released a new national survey finds that U.S. voters place more trust in public media than media overall and hold a more favorable opinion of public media than for-profit media.

The OPB commissioned survey also finds that 53% of U.S. voters oppose eliminating all federal funding for public media, compared with 44% in support.

The CPB poll of 1,000 likely voters conducted online by Peak Insights from June 29 to July 1 found that respondents place a high value on public media’s core services and programming such as emergency alerts (82%), children’s educational programming (66%), local programming (66%) and national news reporting (60%).

The Senate is expected to vote on the cuts, which have already been approved by the House on a narrow party-line vote sometime this week. Several Republican senators have expressed doubts about the bill.

The survey reveals voters trust public media more widely than media in general to report the news “fully, accurately and fairly.” Only 35% of voters trust media in general, but 53% of voters trust public media networks and local stations, the survey found.

“Public media is a trusted, vital part of American life, available free of charge and commercial-free,” Patricia Harrison, president and CEO of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, said. “It delivers early learning resources to families, life-saving emergency alerts to communities, and trusted local and national programming to keep citizens connected and informed.”

In addition, a majority of voters hold a favorable opinion of local public television and radio stations (65% favorable), PBS (61% favorable) and NPR (54% favorable)—while for-profit media is widely unpopular (61% unfavorable).

The CPB also noted that the survey showed strong support for public media benefits, including:

• 68% of respondents said public media serves as a lifeline for rural and underserved communities.
• 66% said public media provides quality educational programming for children.
• 62% said public media should remain available free of charge.

WASHINGTON—Federal Communications Commission member Anna Gomez has wrapped up two weeks in California visiting broadcasters, television studio executives, entertainment-sector labor unions and companies in the space industry. The visits included meetings with representatives for ABC, NBC and Fox, Gomez said.

Gomez said the visits were designed to better inform her about the challenges facing the broadcast industry and how increased competition in the space sector can benefit consumers.

The visits came at a time amid mounting worries that some media companies and corporate executives might exert greater control over their news departments as a way to curry favor with the Trump administration. President Donald Trump has sued both CBS and ABC regarding their coverage of the 2024 presidential campaign, and broadcast networks are facing pressure from the FCC, which has been pushing companies to end fact-checking efforts and their DEI programs. The FCC is also investigating ABC, CBS and NBC over “news bias.”

Disney’s ABC settled the Trump suit for $15 million and Paramount Global is in talks about settling the lawsuit against CBS News regarding the editing of a “60 Minutes” interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris during last year’s presidential campaign. Gomez has previously criticizedthe FCC's investigation into CBS.

So far this year, two senior executives at CBS News have left in response to concerns that their parent company might settle the Trump lawsuit as a way to gain FCC approval for the proposed merger between Paramount Global and Skydance.

“I was glad to meet with media executives to better understand the challenges they face in a changing media landscape and the ways in which the FCC can help support the broadcast industry,” Gomez said. “These visits also led to important conversations about the vital responsibilities that corporate parents have to defend their First Amendment rights and ensure their news divisions remain free of political interference. In a democracy, the public’s trust in news media is paramount, and it requires news organizations to prioritize independent reporting over outside political pressure.”

During her meetings with television studio executives in Los Angeles, Gomez’s office reported that she also discussed recent actions by corporate parents to exert greater influence over their news divisions in response to White House pressure. Gomez reminded corporate executives of the protections afforded to them and their media reporters under the First Amendment, and the importance of maintaining a free and independent press, her office said.

Those meetings included ones with representatives for ABC, NBC and Fox.

In addition to these meetings, Gomez also met with the leadership of two major labor unions in the entertainment industry to discuss efforts by this Administration to try to influence creative expression and control creative content. The meetings with SAG-AFTRA and the Writer’s Guild of America, West focused on ways in which these efforts could undermine artistic freedom, threaten workers’ rights, and impact the diversity of voices represented in film and television.

Gomez also visited established and emerging companies in Los Angeles and San Francisco that are part of the growing space economy. The goal of these visits was to learn about how these companies are contributing to the field, as well as to discuss ways in which the FCC can better promote competition in the space economy. Gomez visited Planet, Astranis, Rocket Lab, and K2 Space -companies with satellite manufacturing labs- as well as NASA’s Ames Research Center and Apple to learn about its partnership with Globalstar to provide emergency satellite connectivity.

“Space is an exciting frontier of discovery and innovation. Explosive growth in this sector, domestically and internationally, has meant new opportunities for entrepreneurs and visionaries, but it also raises new questions for regulators like the FCC,” Gomez said. “As our country increasingly relies on space-based connectivity to eliminate mobile dead zones, provide greater national security capabilities and lead space communications globally, the FCC must ensure a robust and competitive ecosystem exists that expands consumer choice, lowers costs and drives further innovation.”

WASHINGTON—In response to the Trump administration’s plans to eliminating funding for public television stations in its fiscal year 2026 budget, America’s Public Television Stations issued a strong statement condemning the proposals as a “direct attack” on communities served by those stations.

“America’s Public Television Stations are deeply disappointed that President Trump’s FY 2026 budget proposal recommends eliminating federal funding for the locally controlled public television stations that the American people rely on and support funding for, including 65% of people who voted for the President,” said Kate Riley, president and CEO of ATPS in a statement.

Riley also stressed that those stations provide critical services for education, local information and emergency alerts and information. “Eliminating federal funding for public media would significantly jeopardize public safety across the country, particularly in areas with weak cell coverage and less broadband access,” she said.

“These services are particularly critical in more rural areas, many of which have no other sources or local media,” she noted. “Eliminating this funding is a direct attack on the communities that depend on their local public media stations everyday for public safety, education and community connections.

In terms of emergency preparedness, she also stressed that “the federal investment in public media enables us to provide the delivery of geo-targeted wireless emergency alerts to cell phones, and the only nationwide situational awareness tool used by public safety officials to track and monitor the effectiveness of those alerts.”

It also plays a major, and highly valued educational role, the group said. “In fact, according to a recent YouGov survey, 82% of voters, including 72% of Trump voters, said they valued PBS for its children's programming and educational tools,” she said.

“These services are essential for the American people and worthy of the federal investment, which amounts to about $1.60 per person per year and less than one 1/100th of a percent of the federal budget,” she concluded, adding that public media also has widespread support among the public.

“Public media has earned the broad support of the American people, across the political spectrum, including 65% of people who voted for President Trump who think public television is either adequately funded or underfunded, according to a recent YouGov survey,” she said “And in March, the Pew Research Center found that Americans are more likely to support than oppose continuing federal funding for NPR and PBS by a factor of almost 2:1.”

WASHINGTON—Following a decision by U.S. Department of Education to terminate its 2020-2025 Ready To Learn to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, CPB has informed recipients of the grant money, which include PBS and 44 public media stations, that they must immediately pause the program.

CPB strongly pushed back against the decision and said it would work with Congress and the administration to restore the funding.

Kate Riley, president and CEO of America’s Public Television Stations, also issued a statement in opposition to the termination of the grant money, saying, "America’s Public Television Stations are deeply concerned by the U.S. Department of Education’s termination of public television’s 2020-2025 Ready To Learn grant. This abrupt termination of a congressionally funded grant will limit the creation of and access to the kids’ educational programs and resources that American children and families rely on.

In addition to the Department of Education decision, the Trump administration has ordered the CPB to stop funding PBS and NPR and the Federal Communications Commission has opened an investigation into PBS and NPR sponsorship efforts. The Trump administration is also attempting to fire three members of the CPB board.

The CPB noted that grants from Ready To Learn have helped fund such shows as “Molly of Denali,” “Work It Out Wombats!” and “Lyla in the Loop.” In the most recent fiscal year, Ready To Learn content reached more than 1.8 billion video streams, 27.6 million digital game plays, 10.2 million television viewers, and 2 million mobile app downloads, the CPB reported.

“Nearly every parent has raised their kids on public broadcasting’s children’s content. For the past 30 years, Ready To Learn-funded PBS Kids content has produced measurable, real-world impacts on children’s learning,” CPB President and CEO Patricia Harrison said. “Ready To Learn has received strong bipartisan support from Congress and every Administration for the last 30 years because of the programs’ proven educational value in advancing early learning skills for all children. We will work with Congress and the Administration to preserve funding for this essential program.”

Ready To Learn is authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The U.S. Department of Education, which the Trump administration is trying to eliminate, has held the Ready To Learn Programming grant competition every five years since 1995, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and PBS have won grants in every cycle. The 2020-2025 cycle expires on September 30.

In a statement opposing the decision, APTS's Riley also noted that “Ready To Learn supports the creation and distribution of educational media content to millions of children across America. For nearly 30 years, over 100 studies have confirmed that this program has helped build science, math and literacy skills of children ages two to eight and close the achievement gap between children from low-income families and their more affluent peers."

More specifically, she said that "the investment in Ready To Learn has supported the production and academic rigor of PBS KIDS series, such as Molly of Denali, Wild Kratts, Work it Out Wombats!, Lyla in the Loop, Elinor Wonders Why, Peg + Cat, SuperWhy!, Martha Speaks, Odd Squad and other iconic programming for children.," she said.

"We are pursuing all options and working with Congress to restore this essential program to support the families and communities that rely on our local stations to provide proven educational resources every day to Americans in every corner of this country," she said.

The Trump administration’s efforts to shut down the Voice of America broadcast network were handed a setback this week when a federal court judge ordered the administration to restore the service.

The shutdown of the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) was ordered as part of the administration’s DOGE cuts and was termed illegal by VOA at the time it was ordered in March. The executive order to “reduce the performance of their statutory functions and associated personnel to the minimum presence and function required by law,” resulted in more than 1,000 employees being placed on leave and the termination of 600 contracts.

This resulted in the first time since it was founded in 1942 that the VOA had to terminate its broadcasts. The VOA sued the administration, accusing it of taking a “chainsaw approach” to the service. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty also sued the USAGM “to avoid irreparable harm” to the service. VOA and RFE/RL are both funded by Congress.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth issued a preliminary injunction ordering that the administration “take all necessary steps” to reinstate employees and contractors as well as to restore funding to Radio Free Asia and Middle East Broadcasting Network. Lamberth—who is presiding over a half-dozen lawsuits filed by employees and contractors—is also requiring the broadcasters to file monthly status reports to confirm that USAGM is complying with his order.

The ruling “is a victory for the rule of law, for press freedom and journalistic integrity, and for democracy worldwide,” said Everett Kelley, president for the American Federation of Government Employees. “The Trump administration’s illegal attempt to shutter Voice of America and other outlets under the U.S. Agency for Global Media was a transparent effort to silence the voices of patriotic journalists and professionals who have dedicated their careers to spreading the truth and fighting propaganda from lawless authoritarian regimes. This preliminary injunction will allow these employees to get back to work as we continue the fight to preserve their jobs and critical mission.”

Late last month U.S. District Court Judge J. Paul Oetken issued a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration for taking any further action to shutter VOA.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—At a White House briefing, President Donald Trump has announced the Stargate Project, a new private company that aims to invest $500 billion over the next four years building new AI infrastructure for OpenAI in the United States.

The effort has already sparked a debate between billionaire Elon Musk, who dismissed the project, and Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, who is playing a major role in the Stargate initiative.

The initial equity funders in Stargate are SoftBank, OpenAI, Oracle, and MGX. SoftBank and OpenAI are the lead partners for Stargate, with SoftBank having financial responsibility and OpenAI having operational responsibility. Masayoshi Son will be the chairman.

At a White House briefing on Jan. 21, the company said it will begin deploying $100 billion immediately.

For Stargate, Arm, Microsoft, NVIDIA, Oracle, and OpenAI are the key initial technology partners. The buildout is currently underway, starting in Texas, and the company said it is evaluating potential sites across the country for more campuses as it finalizes finalize definitive agreements.

As part of Stargate, Oracle, NVIDIA, and OpenAI will closely collaborate to build and operate this computing system, building on the collaboration between OpenAI and NVIDIA going back to 2016 and a newer partnership between OpenAI and Oracle.

The effort also builds on the existing OpenAI partnership with Microsoft. OpenAI will continue to increase its consumption of Azure as OpenAI continues its work with Microsoft with this additional compute to train leading models and deliver great products and services.

Elon Musk, who has his own competing financial interests and investments in AI, has already blasted the plan, posting on X that “”They don’t actually have the money.” Musk is leading Trump’s efforts to reduce government spending and regulation.

In response to Musk's criticisms saying they don't have the money, Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI posted on X: "wrong, as you surely know. want to come visit the first site already under way? this is great for the country. i realize what is great for the country isn't always what's optimal for your companies, but in your new role i hope you'll mostly put first."

In an interview with Nexstar’s NewsNation, Brendan Carr, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for FCC chairman, highlighted his commitment to “diversity of opinion” while also signaling he might have the regulator crack down on fact-checking efforts as part of a larger effort “to smash” the “censorship cartel.”

Carr made the remarks during a Dec. 2 interview with NewsNation host Chris Cuomo where he argued, “I think Americans have been seeing an unprecedented surge in censorship, particularly over the last couple of years.”

“As you said yourself, diversity of opinion is so important in this country, and it's gonna be one of my top priorities, is trying to smash this censorship cartel,” Carr added.

In discussing the definition of the “censorship cartel” and FCC’s role in combating misinformation, Carr also launched into a critique of fact-checking that could be used against broadcasters.

“Look, at the end of the day, trying to draw the lines between disinformation and misinformation is very fraught,“ Carr said. “At the end of the day, more often than not, people are slapping those labels on political speech they disagree with. I think what we should try to protect is core political speech, religious speech, scientific speech. I don't think we want, you know, the FCC or any entity to be sort of superintending a lot of these decisions. But we have a lot of these fact-checkers out there that are really just narrative checkers.

“I sent a letter recently to a company called NewsGuard that, in my view, has been at the forefront of this censorship cartel, but I think we need to return. But it's not just social media,“ Carr added. ”Look, we see it in media, as you've known from your career. You know, we've had too much bias in the media as well. This is an important issue. Broadcasters, for instance, have an obligation to serve the public interest, and a lot of people get skittish about that, but it’s the law. It’s not just my opinion, and something has to change. Bezos recently did that op-ed where he said the status quo was just not working for traditional media. Trust has absolutely cratered. It wasn't that long ago that mass media was the most trusted institution in America, and for a long time, and at least stayed above Congress in terms of trust, but it's recently fallen below Congress … something there is not working. I think the FCC needs to make sure that broadcasters are held to their public-interest obligations.”

In terms of his first priority as chair, Carr said: “I think Americans have been seeing an unprecedented surge in censorship, particularly over the last couple of years. Look, I think it accelerated during COVID-19. Any time you have an increase in government control, you necessarily have a decrease in free speech, it's fundamentally un-American. As you said yourself, diversity of opinion is so important in this country, and it’s gonna be one of my top priorities, is trying to smash this censorship cartel.”

In terms of how he plans to break the “censorship cartel” Carr said, “It's actually pretty straightforward. So you asked, who's part of this censorship cartel? Well, it's multifaceted. One, you've got a lot of these platforms that are just acting on their own to censor speech. But two, what we saw, particularly during the Biden administration, was pressure from government officials to censor speech as well. We also have a cohort of advertising and marketing agencies have been working together, in my view, to collude to crack down on free speech. That's an issue, I think, in part, for the Federal Trade Commission. So for instance, if you have companies that get together decide not to compete on a feature of business, including content moderation. That's possibly a problem under our competition laws, and in fact, some of the Federal Trade Commission commissioners have spoken about it. The FCC also administers Section 230, which is part of the Communications Act itself. That's the provision that a lot of these technology companies have used to silence diversion speech. I think the FCC can take a look at implementing that in a way that can promote more speech, not less. So there's a lot on the FCC plate that I would look forward to getting started on.”

More specifically in relation to Facebook and social media content moderation, which Trump, Carr and other conservatives have attacked as limiting free speech, Carr noted that “Section 230 does two things. One, if you leave someone else's speech up on your platform, like Facebook, it says Facebook isn't liable if that speech happens to be tortious in any way. I think that's a pretty good provision. It's what I call a pro-speech provision. The problem is a second portion of its C2 which says that these social media companies can censor, not just consistent with the First Amendment, whatever those bounds there are, but with these special 230 protections and courts have read immunities into that takedown provision that are found nowhere in the statutory text, I think we go back to the statute that will put us in much better stead with promoting a diversity of viewpoints.”

Former president and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has filed a federal lawsuit seeking a jury trial and $10 billion in damages against CBS over claims that it edited an interview with Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, in a “deceitful” manner designed to influence the election.

CBS News' actions represented a “partisan and unlawful acts of election and voter interference through malicious, deceptive, and substantial news distortion calculated to (a) confuse, deceive, and mislead the public, and (b) attempt to tip the scales in favor of the Democratic Party as the heated 2024 Presidential Election” said the lawsuit, which was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division.

CBS News has dismissed those claims. "Former President Trump’s repeated claims against 60 Minutes are false," a CBS News spokesperson said in a statement to Reuters. "The lawsuit Trump has brought today against CBS is completely without merit and we will vigorously defend against it."

The National Association of Broadcasters also lambasted the suit.

“A free press must report, inform and scrutinize without fear of reprisal,” NAB President and CEO Curtes LeGeyt said in a statement. “Frivolous lawsuits aimed at stifling this essential role risk undermining democratic principles and ignore the First Amendment’s protection of how news is reported. NAB stands firmly with our members against any attacks on their First Amendment-protected reporting.”

Earlier, Trump had called for CBS to lose its broadcast licenses over the editing of the interview even though the FCC licenses local stations, not broadcast networks.

“‘60 Minutes’ is a major part of the News Organization of CBS, which has just created the Greatest Fraud in Broadcast History,” Trump wrote in a social media post. “CBS should lose its license, and it should be bid out to the Highest Bidder, as should all other Broadcast Licenses, because they are just as corrupt as CBS—and maybe even WORSE!”

That prompted this response from CBS:

“Former President Donald Trump is accusing ‘60 Minutes’ of deceitful editing of our Oct. 7 interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. That is false.

“‘60 Minutes’ gave an excerpt of our interview to ‘Face the Nation’ that used a longer section of her answer than that on ‘60 Minutes,’ ” CBS said. “Same question. Same answer. But a different portion of the response. When we edit any interview, whether a politician, an athlete, or movie star, we strive to be clear, accurate and on point. The portion of her answer on ‘60 Minutes’ was more succinct, which allows time for other subjects in a wide-ranging, 21-minute-long segment.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—In response to Donald Trump’s call for ABC stations to lose their broadcast licenses, Federal Communications Commission chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has issued a strongly worded statement condemning the idea. 

“The First Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy,” Rosenworcel said. “The FCC does not revoke licenses for broadcast stations simply because a political candidate disagrees with or dislikes content or coverage.”

Trump called for ABC to lose its licenses after the Sept. 12 presidential debate, where ABC News moderators fact-checked some of Trump’s widely debunked statements, including Trump’s erroneous claim that Haitian immigrants were stealing and eating dogs and cats. 

In a call to Fox News during the Fox & Friends morning show on following the debate Sept. 11, Trump attacked the ABC moderators for bias and called it a “rigged” debate. 

“To be honest, they’re a news organization,” Trump said. “They have to be licensed to do it. They ought to take away their license for the way they did that.” 

It wasn’t clear if he was calling for the revocation of licenses of stations owned by ABC or if he was referring to all ABC TV station affiliates, which are owned by a variety of companies.  Broadcast networks aren't themselves aren't licensed by the FCC while broadcast affiliate stations and local TV stations are licensed. 

Broadcasters were required to be politically balanced until the Fairness Doctrine was abolished in 1987 during the Reagan administration. 

Trump didn’t address his position on the Fairness Doctrine or the fact that bringing it back would cause serious problems for the many conservative radio talk shows that have backed Trump. 

Free speech has also been a major line of defense by Fox Corp., which owns both Fox News, where Trump made his call to revoke ABC licenses, and local TV stations. 

Activists have been pushing for Fox to lose its Philadelphia TV station license for WTXF-TV, arguing that the election conspiracy theories advanced by Fox News Channel make Fox "unfit" to own broadcast stations. Fox’s arguments against that push have relied heavily on the idea that the FCC can’t infringe on free speech. The license renewal is still under review by the FCC. 

Both of Pennsylvania's senators, who belong to the Democratic Party, have supported the license renewals, also citing free speech issues. 

WASHINGTON—President Donald Trump released his proposed budget for the 2019 fiscal year on Monday. According to CPB, the proposed budget would rescind all but $15 million in funding for public media in both FY2019 and FY2020.

Patricia Harrison, president and CEO of the CPB, released the following statement in response to the president’s budget proposal:

“Americans place great value on having universal access to public media’s educational and informational programming and services, provided commercial free and free of charge. Since there is no viable substitute for federal funding that would ensure this valued service continues, the elimination of federal funding to CPB would at first devastate, and then ultimately destroy public media’s ability to provide early childhood content, life-saving emergency alerts and public affairs programs.

[House Subcommittee Recommends Full CPB Funding]

“Public media benefits all Americans—whether they live in small towns, rural communities or large urban areas. Americans rely on public media for high-quality educational and informational programs that are proven to get their children ready to learn, and that provide opportunities for lifelong learning, such as ‘Frontline,’ ‘NOVA,’ ‘Nature’ and ‘American Experience.’ Federal funding allows public media to continue to tell America’s changing story in a way that enhances civic engagement and connects us to one another.

“Our nation’s non-commercial public media is made possible by a uniquely American, entrepreneurial, public-private partnership. Federal funding is the foundation of that partnership and a recognition of the proven benefits delivered to the American people through public media. The partnership continues with local stations doing their part, working with their communities to complete the funding process.

“We will continue to raise awareness in Congress and the Administration about the valued content and services local public television and radio stations provide to their communities and the vital role federal funding plays in supporting them.”

APTS President and CEO Patrick Butler also released a statement sharing his “disappointment” in Trump’s budget proposal. He echoed Harrison’s statements that public media is a vital part of education for America’s children and serves as a key resource of public safety information.

[CPB Offering $500,000 in Grants for Public Media Stations]

“Fortunately, Republicans and Democrats in the House and Senate, and the overwhelming majority of their constituents, understand these contributions—and our impressive return on the investment of one-hundredth of one percent of the federal budget—very well,” Butler said in his statement. “We are grateful that Congress approved full funding for public broadcasting in FY2017, and we are hopeful that Congress will continue its support for public broadcasting in the final appropriations bills for FY2018, FY2019 and beyond.

The president had previously proposed to zero out CPB’s budget, as well as the National Endowment for the arts, for the FY2018, but Congress voted down those parts of the proposal.

WASHINGTON--Could America’s 5G network be nationalized by the federal government in the next three years, becoming a “21st century equivalent of the Eisenhower National Highway System"?

It’s a dramatic possibility raised by a Trump national security official, according to a story published over the weekend by Axios. But all three Republicans on the Federal Communications Commission, including the chairman, immediately sought to squash the idea in statements Monday, and the White House subsequently downplayed the story.

Axios is a news site founded in 2016 by three former top executives at Politico. Its story said internal administration documents argue that to protect against China, America needs a centralized nationwide 5G network, and that they outline an option under which the government would pay for and build a single network — essentially a federal takeover of part of the U.S. mobile communications system.

The material was produced by a “senior National Security Council official,” according to Axios, and presented recently to leaders at other agencies. According to Axios, one internal presentation states that China “is the dominant malicious actor in the Information Domain,” and that the best way to respond would be for the government to build a network and rent access to carriers.

Axios notes that this would be “a marked shift from the current system where those companies each build their own systems with their own equipment, and with airwaves leased from the federal government.” 

Such internal long-term discussions are common in Washington. One source told Axios that the draft in question was an “old” one and a newer version is neutral about whether the government should build and own it. The documents also outline other possible plans, including a market consortium approach that still would involve more cooperation among competitors than is currently the case. The carrier industry is a powerful one on the Hill. And Axios notes that U.S. deployment of 5G infrastructure is already well underway in the private marketplace. AT&T told the news outlet that 5G launch in the country is “already well down the road.”

According to the website Recode, White House officials also emphasized that the document as published was dated. “They also stressed it had merely been floated by a staff member, not a reflection of some imminent, major policy announcement — and probably might never be.”

But it’s a subject with vast implications, raising the possibility of a federal process for installing wireless equipment, regulating wireless sales and in the longer term influencing development of artificial intelligence, virtual reality, autonomous cars and the Internet of Things.

Read more here: Scoop: Trump team considers nationalizing 5G network

Ajit Pai, chairman of the FCC named to that position by President Trump, immediately reacted: “I oppose any proposal for the federal government to build and operate a nationwide 5G network,” he said in a statement. "The main lesson to draw from the wireless sector’s development over the past three decades—including American leadership in 4G—is that the market, not government, is best positioned to drive innovation and investment. What government can and should do is to push spectrum into the commercial marketplace and set rules that encourage the private sector to develop and deploy next-generation infrastructure. Any federal effort to construct a nationalized 5G network would be a costly and counterproductive distraction from the policies we need to help the United States win the 5G future.”

Fellow Republican Commissioner Michael O'Rielly was more colorful: "I've seen lead balloons before tried in D.C. but this is like a balloon made out of a Ford Pinto."

The wireless industry concurred.

“The wireless industry agrees that winning the race to 5G is a national priority," said CTIA President Meredith Attwell Baker, but she signaled industry should be the one driving that train: "The government should pursue the free market policies that enabled the U.S. wireless industry to win the race to 4G.”

The president is expected to talk about infrastructure needs in his State of the Union speech Jan. 30.

John Eggerton contributed to this story.

WASHINGTON—Forty years after the U.S. Supreme Court established guidelines for saying profanities over the airwaves, broadcasters are dealing with a new challenge that has very little precedent: How to treat such utterances when they come from the president of the United States.

In 1978, the court ruled in the infamous “seven dirty words” case after the FCC issued a fine against a radio station that aired the George Carlin sketch. While in some ways, the court’s decision established indecency guidelines, it also opened the door for an evolution of sorts for how radio and television broadcasters—who are bound by FCC rules—handle such incidents.

President Trump’s recent alleged use of the word “shithole” during a White House meeting with senators forced news organizations to decide whether or not to repeat the profanity during news reports. The approaches were varied and nuanced.

CNN, NBC and MSNBC didn’t mince words, repeating the president’s profanity as breaking news, while ABC News, Fox News and CBS used variations of “sh*thole,” “s**thole,” and “S-hole” on the air and on their chyrons. NBC warned its viewers prior to airing its news segments covering the controversy as did NPR.

According to FCC rules, broadcast networks are prevented from airing indecent or profane material between 6-10 p.m. The FCC defines such indecent material as "grossly offensive language that is considered a public nuisance," with the caveat that mitigating factors include "the specific nature of the content, the time of day it was broadcast and the context in which the broadcast took place."

“Context” is the key word in the debate. As a rule, news organizations report (and parse) every word the president says, so if he used a profanity in describing other nations during a meeting with legislators, is that considered “newsworthy?”

“The FCC has said repeatedly that there is no blanket rule exempting news programming from its indecency rules—so theoretically, a broadcaster could face an indecency action at the FCC for the use of a proscribed word on the air, even in a newscast,” said David Oxenford on Broadcast Law Blog. “However the FCC has recognized that decisions made about the language used in newscasts are subject to a different level of First Amendment protection than language that might be included in an entertainment program.”

For now, the news media has decided that it is newsworthy. The FCC has received several complaints, according to Broadcasting and Cable, but the commission has not commented any further on the issue.

A lot has changed since 1978, including what is considered acceptable language on television and in polite society. What used to be considered “locker room talk” (which candidate Trump alluded to when referring to the infamous “Access Hollywood” scandal) may not be so controversial anymore.

“It’s part of the general culture change, I guess,” Ben Zimmer, a Wall Street Journal columnist told the Washington Post. “Certainly over the last 50 years, profanity or taboo terms have gained more mainstream acceptance than actually see or printed in places, where they previously wouldn’t be considered allowed.”

Nevertheless, despite the fact that the FCC has provided more discretion on profanity rules during newscasts, broadcasters should not take anything for granted.

“With FCC Chairman Pai admonishing broadcasters to ‘keep it clean,’ and with the FCC’s indecency rules still on the books, and any complaint likely to cost time and money to defend,” writes Oxenford, “broadcasters may want to be cautious in their approach to these situations, even in the context of news programs.”