• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

The Trump Administration rants about ABC News And NBC, Says They Should Lose FCC Licenses

TheBigA said:
FCC watchers have been complaining about that since the 70s. There's been a systematic replacement of engineering people with lawyers. I wonder how many people at the FCC know anything at all about radio. Most of what Carr focuses on with regards to broadcasting is TV. That could be because radio is completely off his radar. That's not a problem unique to this administration. It gets back to what I said about the communications act. Al Gore was the one who called for the rewrite in the 90s. He said it was obsolete. He wasn't wrong. It may be time to revisit it. The problem is that the potential fixes will open up a huge hornet's nest. Just like they did in the 90s. My view is the only role for the FCC in broadcasting is spectrum management. Everything else gets deleted.
Click to expand...
I think it's a bit more than simply radio being off Carr's radar. This administration (to oversimplify it a bit) views independent federal agencies two ways. They are either there to be exterminated (like Education and the CFPB) or exploited by "weaponizing" them to do the whims of the President and his handlers. They see the FCC as useful because they can employ it to strong-arm broadcasters into becoming de facto propaganda outlets or at the very least allow the government to police content. Allowing mergers to where the Ellisons or the Bezos or the Murdochs of the world can own as much of the media landscape as possible is about making money for those folks, of course, but it is also about control On the surface its outlets like Fox getting the man to call into their morning show so they can gush "Mr. President we're so happy to have you on this morning" and fawn over him, but on a deeper level it's about controlling enough of the media to "flood the zone" with friendly coverage...literally the whole idea behind the creation of Fox News in the wake of Watergate.

That took years, but it worked. Fox News is far and away the "winner" in the cable news wars, and they obviously want to expand that level of success and they see the FCC as very useful in accomplishing that goal. And that's kinda terrifying. The Founders - correctly - saw an independent press as a critical check on the power of government, and while they couldn't imagine radio and television, I think they'd agree that the "news media" we have now should not be turned into a tool of the government.

(Steps off of soapbox)
 
cc333 said:
He wouldn't know how to say the truth even if his life depended on it.

c
Click to expand...
Side note (since she was mentioned), we had Judge Judy as a guest on a show I was on back in the day. She was one of those "what you see on TV is the real thing" people. Gruff, blunt, but actually a nice lady. A great guest.


Her "people?" Well...
 
Deus Ex Machiato said:
That took years, but it worked. Fox News is far and away the "winner" in the cable news wars, and they obviously want to expand that level of success and they see the FCC as very useful in accomplishing that goal.
Click to expand...

The problem not being addressed is that broadcast and cable are declining platforms. The problems we've seen in radio for the past ten years are also happening in TV. To the point where companies that own cable channels and broadcasting are spinning them off so they don't hurt the stock performance of the parent companies. It may matter to the president, since he lives in the 1970s. But not to anyone else.
 
BTW Brendan Carr will be a guest on Clay & Buck on Monday at 2PM. So we'll get a lot of new quotes from Carr after that. I expect they'll ask about forcing TV stations to carry presidential speeches, and making companies like Nexstar into the new network.
 
TheBigA said:
The problem not being addressed is that broadcast and cable are declining platforms. The problems we've seen in radio for the past ten years are also happening in TV. To the point where companies that own cable channels and broadcasting are spinning them off so they don't hurt the stock performance of the parent companies. It may matter to the president, since he lives in the 1970s. But not to anyone else.
Click to expand...
True too and even if the president and chairman Carr shuts down broadcast and cable today we keep having to read this as wanting to go after TV apps that don’t go along with the president as another part of this go after licenses stuff.
 
TheBigA said:
The problem not being addressed is that broadcast and cable are declining platforms. The problems we've seen in radio for the past ten years are also happening in TV. To the point where companies that own cable channels and broadcasting are spinning them off so they don't hurt the stock performance of the parent companies. It may matter to the president, since he lives in the 1970s. But not to anyone else.
Click to expand...

He lives in his own reality...much like my uncle did when he was suffering from dementia. But unlike my uncle - who had people in the assisted living facility who were trying to help - Trump has people around him who are decidedly not suffering from dementia, and are also using him to serve their own agendas. The President is - to a lot of wealthy and powerful people - a useful idiot. In the case of the FCC, they're hijacking what was once a regulatory agency more concerned with whether or not a local on air talent could point to the plate voltage on the transmitter to an agency holding media mergers hostage unless they agree to play along. Can they revoke all the broadcast licenses of every ABC affiliate if the suits at the parent company refuse to fire a troublesome late night comic? Probably not, but they can bring an enormous amount of pressure to get the desired result. It's a bit like (well, a lot like) Florida trying to put the screws to Disney so that they stop having "Pride Day" at their own theme park.
 
Deus Ex Machiato said:
Can they revoke all the broadcast licenses of every ABC affiliate if the suits at the parent company refuse to fire a troublesome late night comic?
Click to expand...

That's not what they're aiming at. The just want to revoke the ones held by ABC. The FCC tried to just impose fines on affiliates for what happened on Fox, and that was overturned. There has been a real question about what the FCC can do in this kind of case. The recent history has only involved fines, not license revocation. That would be a steep hill to climb. I think they're going to have to prove a crime if they want to revoke a license.

Meanwhile there's a possibility Disney may want to get out of broadcasting. Bob Iger talked about it a few years ago. But now he's retired, and there's a new boss who has no experience in broadcasting. We don't know what he might do.
 
Last edited:
4dude said:
Trump has alot of nerve!!
Click to expand...
That he does! Also, despite his apparently dementia-addled mind, he still rarely has occasional moments of lucidity, most often under very strict conditions (and also usually with the aid of a teleprompter or some such).

However, despite the best efforts of anyone daring enough to attempt to restrain him (I have to admire those who somehow managed to hold him back from starting a nuclear war with North Korea during his first term. That could not have been easy! Even his otherwise loyal first term VP, Mike Pence, stood up to him at the end), he almost always blows up any appearances of sanity with some inane or inappropriate comment or random angry outburst that, at best, leaves everyone saying, "huh???" and at worst, creates intense anger, and inflames dangerous situations (the current re-awakening of unrestrained military strikes between Iran and the US, for example. It's unclear which side was responsible for this latest surge (arguably, it's probably a tie), but Trump's absurdity clearly hasn't helped).

Not unlike many people who suffer from late-stage dementia.

K.M. Richards said:
Now that, he has an abundance of. Knowledge of how the world actually functions, not so much.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

c
 
TheBigA said:
The recent history has only involved fines, not license revocation. That would be a steep hill to climb. I think they're going to have to prove a crime if they want to revoke a license.
Click to expand...

It would be a steep hill to climb indeed, but also for the licensees who would have to defend themselves. I'm reminded of a former fellow Clear Channel employee who tried to get out of their non-compete and take a job across town. She was basically told that while she might have a legal leg to stand on, the company had relatively unlimited legal resources to fight it, and that they would drag the case out as long as possible and ruin her financially one way or the other.

We've already seen media companies make a cost/benefit analysis and settle on "just give him a donation to his 'Presidential library' and make it go away" rather than fight to the end.
 
TheBigA said:
ABC doesn't seem to be doing that this time. This is different than the last time.
Click to expand...
I certainly hope so. Legacy media outlets have been pretty feckless when it comes to pushing back on the administration, but it would be nice to see more big companies forcefully fighting for a semblance of independence. The real action appears to be gaining steam in the "new media" space.

I've been following the "saga" of a You Tube content creator going up against a shady corporation (Reckless Ben vs Bricks & Minifigs, a company that deals in collectible Lego) and what started as a guy with a channel trying to get a follower's collection of Star Wars Lego back from a consignment store has blown up into a scandal across multiple channels (with millions of views) exposing the absurdly corrupt business practices of a company that goes far beyond just selling Lego sets. The various "investigative journalists" have managed to expose a corrupt police department or two, a family business that makes Amway seem honorable, and multiple channels hosted by attorneys have gotten into the mix. Parts of the case have even moved to federal court. All stemming from a channel that a few months ago couldn't afford to pay an animator to help tell the story. Citizen journalists are -in some cases - doing a better job rooting out malfeasance than legacy media.
 
TheBigA said:
ABC doesn't seem to be doing that this time. This is different than the last time.
Click to expand...

What's different is that when they settled the George Stephanopolous matter out of court, it didn't stop Trump from continuing to attack them. No point in making that mistake twice.
 
Brendan Carr was on Clay & Buck today, discussing a bunch of issues. He didn't really make any news in my opinion.

www.clayandbuck.com

FCC Chair Brendan Carr Talks Paramount Deal, The View & TV Sports Issues

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr joined Clay & Buck to react to breaking news and more.
www.clayandbuck.com www.clayandbuck.com

He explained why he wants to eliminate the 39% rule. He thinks if local TV companies have national scale to compete with national media, it will be good for local news. He obviously hasn't seen what having national scale has done to local radio. Because there is no 39% limit in radio. And that hasn't been good for local news.

He also addressed The View and "bonified news programs." He just said they're investigating, but he didn't say one way or another. The subject of last Thursday's speech not being broadcast on NBC or ABC didn't come up at all.
 
Bongwater said:
He's so stuck up, it would be hysterical if it wasn't so pathetic.

But you know why he made that speech; He knows November doesn't look good for his party. And he's terrified. If they lose both the House and Senate, he's done. The House will impeach and if the Senate flips, they will convict and remove. Aind that's why he's panicking. Without the president title, he's vulnerable to arrest. Possibly jail. (Epstein, war crimes, human rights abuses-the Supreme Court can't bail him out of any of that.) That's why he's freaking out so hard over the midterms. He knows he's in trouble. So he's doing what he did in 2020; Sow doubt about the election so when November comes up and should he lose, he will have a "See? I told you so" narrative he can foist on his most violent followers because he wants another January 6th to save him. (He was almost successful the first time.)
Click to expand...

The US Senate needs 67 votes in-order to impeach Trump which isn't happening plus it's a waste of time for a dog & pony show, I didn't watch the 2 impeacements.

Anyways I just feel that ABC & NBC shouldn't have broken into programing after the speech in my opinion only do that if they aired the speech in my opinion even know ABC aired the second half of Press Your Luck at about 9:50PM. And I didn't watch the speech as I'm not into political speeches no matter whos in office.
 
The House impeaches, the Senate convicts (or not)--it's a meaningful distinction. Yes, they require the 2/3 majority to convict then remove, which is not achievable for either party for the foreseeable future. The fact remains he was impeached twice. That doesn't change.
 


Back
Top Bottom