FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has fired back at criticism from a bipartisan group of former FCC leaders, including three Republicans, who have called for the repeal of the agency's news distortion policy.
Carr dismissed their petition in an X post, writing "How about no". He stated that on his watch, the FCC will continue to hold broadcasters accountable to their public interest obligations. This stance comes as a response to criticism from former FCC chairs and commissioners who have argued that the policy is overly vague and can be exploited for partisan purposes.
The news distortion policy has been rarely enforced since its introduction in the 1960s, with only one finding of distortion after 1982. However, Carr has used the policy as leverage against broadcasters that he alleges are biased against Republicans, including CBS stations accused of bias against President Donald Trump.
Carr's stance on the issue has drawn criticism from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, with several lawmakers calling for greater transparency and accountability from the FCC. The agency is set to face scrutiny in an upcoming oversight hearing, where Carr will be called to testify on December 17.
While some critics have accused Carr of being overly defensive, others have praised his commitment to holding broadcasters accountable. However, many argue that the policy itself is flawed and can be used to intimidate newsrooms and stifle free speech.
The controversy surrounding the news distortion policy has sparked a heated debate about the role of government in regulating media content and the limits of First Amendment protections for journalists. As the FCC continues to grapple with this issue, it remains to be seen whether Carr's stance will prevail or whether the agency will ultimately repeal the policy.
Carr dismissed their petition in an X post, writing "How about no". He stated that on his watch, the FCC will continue to hold broadcasters accountable to their public interest obligations. This stance comes as a response to criticism from former FCC chairs and commissioners who have argued that the policy is overly vague and can be exploited for partisan purposes.
The news distortion policy has been rarely enforced since its introduction in the 1960s, with only one finding of distortion after 1982. However, Carr has used the policy as leverage against broadcasters that he alleges are biased against Republicans, including CBS stations accused of bias against President Donald Trump.
Carr's stance on the issue has drawn criticism from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, with several lawmakers calling for greater transparency and accountability from the FCC. The agency is set to face scrutiny in an upcoming oversight hearing, where Carr will be called to testify on December 17.
While some critics have accused Carr of being overly defensive, others have praised his commitment to holding broadcasters accountable. However, many argue that the policy itself is flawed and can be used to intimidate newsrooms and stifle free speech.
The controversy surrounding the news distortion policy has sparked a heated debate about the role of government in regulating media content and the limits of First Amendment protections for journalists. As the FCC continues to grapple with this issue, it remains to be seen whether Carr's stance will prevail or whether the agency will ultimately repeal the policy.
he fires back at bipartisan criticism with a simple "how about no" - like, what's next? he's gonna start using a ruler to measure his words and call it a day 
anyway, i think the policy itself is whack, but carr's all-in on holding broadcasters accountable. if he's really committed to that, why not just make the policy more clear and less open to interpretation? seems like he's just using it as a tool to go after his enemies rather than actual reform 
... on one hand, as a consumer of news, I think it's super important for the FCC to hold broadcasters accountable for their content, you know? It's not about censoring stuff, but making sure they're not spreading misinformation or slanting the narrative in some way. Like, if someone says Trump is doing X, Y, Z and it's clearly a load of BS... shouldn't the FCC be able to call them out on it? 
. Maybe instead of a news distortion policy, we should just focus on educating people on how to critically evaluate what they're reading and watching online? 
. and meanwhile, we get to sit here and watch the FCC pretend like they care about "public interest" when really it's all just a bunch of partisan posturing 
.
. I get why they're trying to hold broadcasters accountable, but at what cost? It feels like this policy is just going to stifle innovation and creativity in the media industry... and what about all the journalists who are already struggling to keep their jobs? 
This whole thing is just so frustrating 
i'm def rooting for carr, tho - he seems like he's trying to protect the public interest 
... but maybe they should just clarify what "distortion" even means and make it more concrete? 
. Like, how can a 50-year-old policy just get a free pass every decade? It's time for some real change, you know? I don't think it's about holding broadcasters accountable, but more like, using them as puppets to serve the FCC's agenda. And let's be real, if Carr is gonna use this policy to go after specific stations that disagree with him... that's just not right 
. Transparency and accountability are totally needed here, IMHO 
.
. Like, using the news distortion policy as leverage against specific stations just seems like an easy way to silence opposing views and isn't that kinda the opposite of free speech? 
It shows that even across party lines, people are concerned about the impact of this policy on journalism and democracy.
. Will Carr's stance prevail, or will there be changes made to the policy? Only time will tell 
anyway, i guess we'll c what happens in that oversight hearing on the 17th 
like what's next, they're gonna start policing people's thoughts? come on brendan carr, you think you're some kinda superhero saving journalism from itself? news outlets have been biased since day one and now you wanna hold broadcasters accountable for it? good luck with that. i'm all for transparency but this policy is just a way to silence opposing views and i ain't having it 
. Now I'm not saying Carr should be inflexible or anything, but he's gotta stand up for what he believes in... even if that means ruffling a few feathers 
! it's like, we need more transparency and accountability from our government agencies, especially when it comes to regulating media content. i feel for brendan carr, tho - he's just trying to do his job, but at the same time, we gotta acknowledge that the policy itself might be a bit wonky 
as for the controversy surrounding it, I think we need more transparency and accountability from our government institutions 
so at least Carr is taking steps towards that...and who knows maybe one day we'll see some progress on this policy 
