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

[K.M. Richards]

An overstatement, but the fact is that those three networks that do shows "after the local news" are all politicized and focused on the perspectives of just one and the same party. That is obviously not a successful business model.

David, I hate to disagree with you on this, because it highlights our personal differences politically and I try to set that aside for the benefit of our long-lasting friendship, but I don't think that's the reason.

I lean more toward the decline of broadcast television in general, and how viewers' changing tastes have forced the networks to make what they put on the air attract the largest portion of what's still there in terms of audience. ABC had a chance to do away with Jimmy Kimmel and they chose to put him back on the air after a few days' forced hiatus, and his show hasn't really changed since his return. I think what ABC realizes is that there is already a lot of programming out there that caters to the conservatives -- even if it isn't on a broadcast network (because that matters less and less every day) -- the amount of overall late night viewership is far below what it was in Carson's heyday, and they can get enough of an audience to make the show work financially.

I never thought Colbert was the right choice to replace Letterman. In fact, I am surprised that he lasted a decade on "The Late Show". I don't know what it is about his style that turns me off, but I like Kimmel better, even though they have very similar POVs politically. (But then again, the only post-Johnny "Tonight" shows I ever liked were the nights Jay Leno did "Headlines".)

Not that any of it matters. I am already at the point where other than the news and Kimmel, all of my viewing save for one current network program is reruns. And when that goes away, I have a substantial library of my favorite movies on DVD, plus some series that aren't rerun anymore (like "The Avengers"), a few BBC comedies, and a full set of the HBO George Carlin specials and the Showtime Gallagher ones.

Network television is on a downhill spiral. I only wonder how many more seasons it will take to get to the bottom.

 

[TheBigA]

Many would say it was because the show, from the very first seconds of every broadcast, dismissed half or more of Americans due to its overt and virulent political focus.

Conservative talk radio does that every day, yet manages to get a 5 share in most cities, which is enough to keep it alive.

The problem for Colbert wasn't the appeal. You could move Gutfield to CBS and he'll get the same numbers. It was the expense of the theater, the rights fee being paid to Letterman, and declining ad sales for all linear TV.

The fact of the matter is that no TV show appeals to everyone. Nobody gets a 100 share. Colbert was getting more viewers than any broadcast program at that time. But linear broadcast TV simply doesn't make enough to sustain the programming budgets it once had. So he'll take his 4 million viewers to a streaming service, and drive one more nail in the coffin of broadcast TV.

 

[Deus Ex Machiato]

And "Gutfeld!" is not on an OTA television network, either.

Really? I'm shocked!

But seriously, this idea you have that late night television (or television in general) was once upon a time an inoffensive and politically neutral landscape that has only recently been "ruined" by content that offends your own personal sensibilities is questionable to put it mildly.

Let's take Colbert, for example. He was a stand-out as a correspondent on The Daily Show, and was given his own show on Comedy Central where he lampooned conservative opinion hosts. The Colbert Report was successful enough that when it came time for CBS to hire a new host for their OTA late night show, he was their choice. Not because he was "liberal," but because he was making money. I think a case could be made that he's had a pretty good run at CBS, but the argument that you appear to be making - that he failed because he's "liberal" - doesn't really hold up, does it? Big budget OTA late night shows aren't bringing in the revenue they used to. As you said, we're not in Kansas anymore.

Long gone are the days when a show like MASH (a commentary on the absurdity and brutality of the Vietnam War set in Korea) could bring in the biggest audience in history for a finale, and also gone are the days when a show like All In The Family could deftly and cuttingly criticize "traditional family values" and still be wildly successful. The trick was to feed the audience something that was political, but not overtly so. The Smothers Brothers ran up against that wall, IIRC, while Laugh In could mock Nixon and even get him to play along (even if he didn't get the joke).

And while Gutfeld! is doing well in the cable landscape, I'm hard pressed to find an example of a recent innately conservative OTA show that has been successful enough to prove that viewers would prefer it over "woke Hollywood" content from Colbert or Kimmel or Fallon.

The Melania movie didn't exactly set the world on fire, and explicitly conservative comedies like "Lady Ballers" didn't either.

 

[davideduardo]

Well there's always Greg Gutfeld! That show doesn't have an overt and virulent political focus! #sarcasm

And "Gutfeld!" is not on an OTA television network, either.

 

[K.M. Richards]

And "Gutfeld!" is not on an OTA television network, either.

You said that already, mi amigo. On the previous page.

 

[Deus Ex Machiato]

You said that already, mi amigo. On the previous page.

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

Oddly enough, Trump is bragging about what he has "DONE" to the media so far. Is it all accurate? Not entirely, but while Carr might be officially powerless, the regime is absolutely pressuring all sorts of media to fall in line. Where regulations fail, lawsuits have been shown to cause major outlets to knuckle under.


View attachment 11620

The White House can brag all they want but some of them on the list would have happened with or without Trump such as layoffs at the Washington Post and decline in "Mainstream Media" we mentioned that if one wants to get national news you can just go straight to the Associated Press for that.

 

[TheBigA]

Oddly enough, Trump is bragging about what he has "DONE" to the media so far. Is it all accurate? Not entirely, but while Carr might be officially powerless, the regime is absolutely pressuring all sorts of media to fall in line. Where regulations fail, lawsuits have been shown to cause major outlets to knuckle under.

Sure, he defunded NPR & PBS. But they both still exist. Because neither of them received much federal funding. The BULK of the money came from PEOPLE. And the PEOPLE are angry. In Arkansas, the right wing government announced they were quitting PBS. They claimed that because they lost federal funding, they couldn't afford to pay for PBS programming. Then the PEOPLE of Arkansas told the state THEY paid for PBS, and so the state had to provide it. So now the state of Arkansas has paused their decision to drop PBS.

Arkansas TV’s vote to delay break with PBS draws praise, criticism from lawmakers | Arkansas Democrat Gazette

Cheers erupted from an overflow room at the Arkansas TV headquarters in Conway when its commission voted on Thursday to postpone its plan to disaffiliate from the Public Broadcasting Service "for 180 days" while efforts are made to raise money to pay PBS dues.

www.arkansasonline.com

The media doesn't exist without the people. If this president tries to force his ideology on the people, the people will respond the way they did when the British tried to impose a tax on tea. They rebelled. That's what is starting to happen. People dropped Disney when the FCC attempted to attack Jimmy Kimmel. They gave Stephen Colbert huge ratings in February when CBS told him he couldn't interview a political candidate. They're not watching the CBS Evening News. This president can't force the people to watch HIS media. So there's another side to his story, and that other side is THE PEOPLE.

 

[Deus Ex Machiato]

The media doesn't exist without the people. If this president tries to force his ideology on the people, the people will respond the way they did when the British tried to impose a tax on tea. They rebelled. That's what is starting to happen. People dropped Disney when the FCC attempted to attack Jimmy Kimmel. They gave Stephen Colbert huge ratings in February when CBS told him he couldn't interview a political candidate. They're not watching the CBS Evening News. This president can't force the people to watch HIS media. So there's another side to his story, and that other side is THE PEOPLE.

I would counter that there's no "if" about this president trying to force his ideology on the people. He's been doing it for years, declaring media that disagrees with him "fake news" and in his first term using the "bully pulpit" of his office to inspire an actual (if misguided) attempt to overthrow the government. And yes, THE PEOPLE ultimately decide things, but in order for them to make an informed decision, they must have sources of truth as opposed to propaganda.

Trump is President again because he figured out how to fool (to steal an old adage) "most of the people, most of the time." He's going on a decade now of pushing the story that elections are being "stolen," is now pushing legislation to "save" elections, he has almost half of the legislative branch too terrified to say "this is a really bad idea" and a good chunk of the voters convinced that he only lost in 2020 because the election was "rigged." He has convinced a plurality of Americans that democracy itself is suspect (if he loses).

This time around, he's unabashedly using his office (and the power of the federal government as much as possible) to control the narrative, and as much as I'd like to have faith in our fellow Americans, a disturbing amount of people have bought into his bullshit. Can he force everyone to watch HIS media? No, but he has enormous power to put his media out in the front, control the narrative, and convince more people that maybe he should be President For Life.

We've never had this before. Sure, we've had Presidents who had an adversarial relationship with the press, and attempts at governnment censorhip (McCarthyism) but I don't recall any President or administration seeking to shut down entire companies that dared to say an unkind word about him. It's easy to dismiss Carr as a barking dog with no bite, but we ignore this at our peril.

p.s. and right on cue, there's a Truth Social post:

It's treason for saying bad things about the war

Repeating his claim that the U.S. had defeated Iran’s military and slamming the Wall Street Journal for “false reporting”, Trump then took his anger to new heights.

...

Trump ranted, “The story was knowingly FAKE and, in a certain way, you can say that those Media Outlets that generated it should be brought up on Charges for TREASON for the dissemination of false information!”

 

[AM-FM-DXer]

Sure, he defunded NPR & PBS. But they both still exist. Because neither of them received much federal funding. The BULK of the money came from PEOPLE. And the PEOPLE are angry. In Arkansas, the right wing government announced they were quitting PBS. They claimed that because they lost federal funding, they couldn't afford to pay for PBS programming. Then the PEOPLE of Arkansas told the state THEY paid for PBS, and so the state had to provide it. So now the state of Arkansas has paused their decision to drop PBS.

Arkansas TV’s vote to delay break with PBS draws praise, criticism from lawmakers | Arkansas Democrat Gazette

Cheers erupted from an overflow room at the Arkansas TV headquarters in Conway when its commission voted on Thursday to postpone its plan to disaffiliate from the Public Broadcasting Service "for 180 days" while efforts are made to raise money to pay PBS dues.

www.arkansasonline.com

The media doesn't exist without the people. If this president tries to force his ideology on the people, the people will respond the way they did when the British tried to impose a tax on tea. They rebelled. That's what is starting to happen. People dropped Disney when the FCC attempted to attack Jimmy Kimmel. They gave Stephen Colbert huge ratings in February when CBS told him he couldn't interview a political candidate. They're not watching the CBS Evening News. This president can't force the people to watch HIS media. So there's another side to his story, and that other side is THE PEOPLE.

We live in a time in which the audience wants partisanship. No one really knew where Carson and Leno stood politically when they were on the air. Leno even once talked to Howard Stern about not wanting to turn off half the audience. Michael Jordan once said that he did not talk about politics because "Republicans buy sneakers too."

But with TV audiences in decline, and the country split politically, the best the networks can do is put on hosts who have a partisan view and hope to attract as many people from that side of the aisle as possible. In other words, the politics become the draw.

 

[ted chittenden]

I would counter that there's no "if" about this president trying to force his ideology on the people. He's been doing it for years, declaring media that disagrees with him "fake news" and in his first term using the "bully pulpit" of his office to inspire an actual (if misguided) attempt to overthrow the government. And yes, THE PEOPLE ultimately decide things, but in order for them to make an informed decision, they must have sources of truth as opposed to propaganda.

Trump is President again because he figured out how to fool (to steal an old adage) "most of the people, most of the time." He's going on a decade now of pushing the story that elections are being "stolen," is now pushing legislation to "save" elections, he has almost half of the legislative branch too terrified to say "this is a really bad idea" and a good chunk of the voters convinced that he only lost in 2020 because the election was "rigged." He has convinced a plurality of Americans that democracy itself is suspect (if he loses).

This time around, he's unabashedly using his office (and the power of the federal government as much as possible) to control the narrative, and as much as I'd like to have faith in our fellow Americans, a disturbing amount of people have bought into his bullshit. Can he force everyone to watch HIS media? No, but he has enormous power to put his media out in the front, control the narrative, and convince more people that maybe he should be President For Life.

We've never had this before. Sure, we've had Presidents who had an adversarial relationship with the press, and attempts at governnment censorhip (McCarthyism) but I don't recall any President or administration seeking to shut down entire companies that dared to say an unkind word about him. It's easy to dismiss Carr as a barking dog with no bite, but we ignore this at our peril.

p.s. and right on cue, there's a Truth Social post:

It's treason for saying bad things about the war

While much of your response is correct, I do think that @TheBigA makes a valid point. Despite what @davideduardo has stated in past posts, the MAGA, or the President's true believers, make up somewhere between 20 and 30% of the population. Mr. Trump won the presidency because of the electoral college and how its votes are set up (which favor rural white conservative voters). He also won over a lot of independent voters who are now very concerned about the direction his administration is taking. And, bringing this back to media, even Fox, his most supportive big TV network, balked at the rules that Trump's Secretary of War (Defense) set up for reporting from the Pentagon.

 

[TheBigA]

He's been doing it for years, declaring media that disagrees with him "fake news" and in his first term using the "bully pulpit" of his office to inspire an actual (if misguided) attempt to overthrow the government. And yes, THE PEOPLE ultimately decide things, but in order for them to make an informed decision, they must have sources of truth as opposed to propaganda.

The longer he rants, and the more extreme he gets, the more the people reject him. He is his own worst enemy. Some politicians know to lay low when things get tough. He refuses to do that. The people don't support this war. This isn't 2002 with Iraq. There are no songs about supporting the troops as there were then. He's on his own this time. He doesn't have popular support for his tariffs, for his attacks on his opponents or the media. It's all him.

He is a media star himself. He is his own media. In that way, he hurts his own credibility and the credibility of the media that support him. In the meantime, the people have alternatives and they know how to find them. The audience for traditional broadcast media is declining. There's nothing he can do to change that. So he may be able to sue the companies that own linear media to pay him, but he can't force the people to watch or listen.

 

[IM42A]

Somebody needs to sit the man down and explain to him that networks do not have licenses, only stations, and that just a handful of network affiliates are actually owned by their networks.

 

[TheBigA]

Somebody needs to sit the man down and explain to him that networks do not have licenses, only stations, and that just a handful of network affiliates are actually owned by their networks.

He doesn't listen to anyone. The only people around him are people who agree with him. He's an old man yelling at the kids to get off his lawn. The head of the FCC thinks it's still the 60s and TV stations sign off at 1AM. He's still talking about the scarcity of signals as hundreds of stations turn in their licenses. They're all living in their own silo.

 

[TheBigA]

In case there was any doubt, the president supports the FCC chairman's threats to revoke licenses:

Trump ‘thrilled’ by FCC chair Brendan Carr’s threat to revoke broadcast licenses over Iran war coverage

President Trump said he was “so thrilled” by Federal Communications Commission chair Brendan Carr’s threat to revoke the licenses of broadcasters that peddle “hoaxes and distortions” re…

nypost.com

But they're both getting backlash from other politicians around the country:

Markey Wants Carr Out Over FCC 'Threats' Tied to Iran Coverage - Radio Ink

US Senator Ed Markey is calling on FCC Chairman Brendan Carr to resign after accusing him of threatening broadcasters’ licenses over coverage of the US conflict with Iran.

radioink.com

Trump’s FCC chair faces backlash after threatening broadcasters over Iran coverage

Brendan Carr said broadcasters must ‘correct course’ or potentially lose their licenses

www.independent.co.uk

The president can't have it both ways. He's shutting down media access to the pentagon, but then also demanding the media only report his side of the story. He's not working WITH the media, he's working against them, and then wonders why they aren't reporting his side of the story. It's because his pentagon kicked out the media. The fact is this war isn't popular with anyone but him, and he's mad about that. He thinks the media can change people's minds, and that's not the reality today. Him forcing his ideology just feeds the media trust problem. The real problem is lack of trust in the government.

 

[gr8oldies]

I would counter that there's no "if" about this president trying to force his ideology on the people. He's been doing it for years, declaring media that disagrees with him "fake news" and in his first term using the "bully pulpit" of his office to inspire an actual (if misguided) attempt to overthrow the government. And yes, THE PEOPLE ultimately decide things, but in order for them to make an informed decision, they must have sources of truth as opposed to propaganda.

Trump is President again because he figured out how to fool (to steal an old adage) "most of the people, most of the time." He's going on a decade now of pushing the story that elections are being "stolen," is now pushing legislation to "save" elections, he has almost half of the legislative branch too terrified to say "this is a really bad idea" and a good chunk of the voters convinced that he only lost in 2020 because the election was "rigged." He has convinced a plurality of Americans that democracy itself is suspect (if he loses).

This time around, he's unabashedly using his office (and the power of the federal government as much as possible) to control the narrative, and as much as I'd like to have faith in our fellow Americans, a disturbing amount of people have bought into his bullshit. Can he force everyone to watch HIS media? No, but he has enormous power to put his media out in the front, control the narrative, and convince more people that maybe he should be President For Life.

We've never had this before. Sure, we've had Presidents who had an adversarial relationship with the press, and attempts at governnment censorhip (McCarthyism) but I don't recall any President or administration seeking to shut down entire companies that dared to say an unkind word about him. It's easy to dismiss Carr as a barking dog with no bite, but we ignore this at our peril.

p.s. and right on cue, there's a Truth Social post:

It's treason for saying bad things about the war

Only a short six months ago: "I obliterated Iran's nuclear program. If you say anything but 'obliterated' you are fake news", echoed by the whole administration.

 

[gr8oldies]

Sure, he defunded NPR & PBS. But they both still exist. Because neither of them received much federal funding. The BULK of the money came from PEOPLE. And the PEOPLE are angry. In Arkansas, the right wing government announced they were quitting PBS. They claimed that because they lost federal funding, they couldn't afford to pay for PBS programming. Then the PEOPLE of Arkansas told the state THEY paid for PBS, and so the state had to provide it. So now the state of Arkansas has paused their decision to drop PBS.

Arkansas TV’s vote to delay break with PBS draws praise, criticism from lawmakers | Arkansas Democrat Gazette

Cheers erupted from an overflow room at the Arkansas TV headquarters in Conway when its commission voted on Thursday to postpone its plan to disaffiliate from the Public Broadcasting Service "for 180 days" while efforts are made to raise money to pay PBS dues.

www.arkansasonline.com

The media doesn't exist without the people. If this president tries to force his ideology on the people, the people will respond the way they did when the British tried to impose a tax on tea. They rebelled. That's what is starting to happen. People dropped Disney when the FCC attempted to attack Jimmy Kimmel. They gave Stephen Colbert huge ratings in February when CBS told him he couldn't interview a political candidate. They're not watching the CBS Evening News. This president can't force the people to watch HIS media. So there's another side to his story, and that other side is THE PEOPLE.

There will be millions of us in the street come March 28, even in the reddest places in America, to once again say "No Kings", especially with the GOP's attempt to take away our ability to vote them out, through the so-called "SAVE" act. There's plenty of media that aren't the Big 4 and aren't controlled by the FCC.

 

[gr8oldies]

I tried warning family just how bad it was going to get, and was called alarmist even by those who detest this regime. Now they’re starting to see it’s going to be even worse than that.

It defies all logic that a press—broadcast, cable, print, digital—that latched onto every stutter, every shuffle step, every little botched word by the previous President is utterly silent as this one sleeps through multiple meetings, spits out word salad that ranges from incomprehensible to downright inane. Bulldozing the East Wing? A Defense Secretary credibly accused of war crimes? A man who seems incapable of any exertion, uses a vile slur, berates female reporters with particular disdain and invites a murderer to the Oval Office? All sanewashed and given a “both sides” treatment as they’re basically glossed over. Jake Tapper writes and endlessly promotes a book about Biden’s fragility and then defends the cheetoh sleeping on the job as perfectly normal.

We have no functional press. We have no functional judiciary. We have no functional Congress.

Get elected to Congress, do absolutely no work, tweet praise and worship of Donald Trump and against the Villain of the Day, podcast and appear on Fox News. Great gig if you can get it. Of course cash those donor checks.

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

Somebody needs to sit the man down and explain to him that networks do not have licenses, only stations, and that just a handful of network affiliates are actually owned by their networks.

True on all counts and also we have to remind the FCC head about that every time. The last time a TV Network lost their Broadcast license was in the Philippines under the presidential administration of Rodrigo Duterte in 2020. The lead up to ABS-CBN News losing their Network TV and Radio license was that their News team investigated that country's president over multiple deaths from police during that administration Drug War in that country. The TV Network that lost their Broadcast license ABS-CBN simply told their audience that to find them they moved to TV Streaming and podcasts.

Oddly enough once the Philippines changed Presidential Administration's in 2022, ABS-CBN went on to cover the nations high profile political scandals in one political family such as Rodrigo Duterte sent to the International Criminal Courts for Crimes against Humanity and the current Philippine Vice President (2028 Philippine Presidential candidate) Sara Duterte who happens to be the daughter of Rodrigo Duterte facing impeachment for corruption and misusing the country's funds for questionable reasons. Karma do hit people in crazy ways that try to shut down media outlets.

Philippines' biggest TV network silenced after years feuding with Duterte

ABS-CBN, long embattled with the country's hardline president, has been forced off TV and radio airwaves after lawmakers let its license expire.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2032892227106804084

https://twitter.com/x/status/2032875355879690534

Democrats blast FCC Chair Carr's broadcast license threats as anti-First Amendment, 'totalitarian'

Carr on Saturday blasted broadcasters shortly after President Donald Trump called reports that Iran struck five U.S. tanker planes "fake news."

www.cnbc.com

Heres is more This time from congressman Ted Lieu response to the FCC threat. Its because Ted Lieus congressional district is in Los Angeles which contains the west coast operations of the major TV Networks. Also when the California Governor responds to the FCC threat its because local public media stations in the state such as KQED could have their license questioned over the Iran news coverage via their affiliation with PBS and NPR.