Biden FCC Lets Biased Media Off the Hook at the 11th-Hour — New Trump Chair Says No
The issue of media bias and duplicity has taken center stage again as Brendan Carr, the newly-appointed Republican chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), seeks to reverse his Democratic predecessor’s last-minute dismissal of three significant complaints against major media outlets. This decision challenges the media’s purported objectivity and reflects a growing frustration among Americans with an industry that appears to prioritize narrative over factual reporting. (RELATED: The Total Collapse of the Washington Post)
In her final days as FCC chair under the Biden administration, Jessica Rosenworcel dismissed several complaints and petitions, asserting that they posed a threat to press freedom. However, this decision appeared less about protecting free speech and more about shielding major media outlets like ABC, NBC, and CBS from legitimate scrutiny over their partisan election coverage.
A striking example of this biased coverage involved ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, who inaccurately reported that President Trump had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll. This false claim ultimately led to a settlement in which ABC agreed to pay $15 million toward Donald Trump’s presidential library as part of a defamation lawsuit. (RELATED: Trump Humiliates His Media Enemies)
By rejecting these complaints, Rosenworcel effectively ensured these outlets would not face accountability for their actions, deepening public skepticism about whether legacy media entities will ever be held responsible for their influence and bias.
Brendan Carr is now stepping in to address this strategic dismissal. Reports suggest that Carr plans to reinstate three key complaints concerning the networks’ election coverage. This move exposes the contradictions in the media’s self-proclaimed defense of press freedom while regularly advancing one-sided narratives. By promoting specific political viewpoints, these outlets leave audiences questioning whether their primary role is to inform the public or promote an agenda.
The allegations are significant. ABC News is accused of showing favoritism during the vice presidential debate, favoring then-candidate Kamala Harris. CBS’s 60 Minutes allegedly edited an interview with Harris to present her in an overly positive light. NBC permitted Harris to appear on Saturday Night Live without offering equal airtime to then-President Trump, raising concerns about fairness and impartiality. (RELATED: Trump Debates Harris, Muir, and Davis to Stalemate)
These instances highlight a troubling trend: major media outlets openly align with their preferred political figures while disregarding the standards of fairness and balance they claim to uphold. The double standard is undeniable. If a debate moderator had favored Trump or if CBS had aired a glowing feature on a Republican candidate, there no doubt would have been widespread calls for investigations.
This approach indicates that, as FCC chair, Carr sees these cases as requiring further examination to ensure broadcasters are held accountable. His actions demonstrate a re-evaluation of the FCC’s role in regulating media, seeking to uphold press freedom while enforcing standards that serve the public interest. By revisiting these complaints, Carr takes a critical step in addressing the growing trend of media organizations prioritizing activism over impartiality, potentially influencing public opinion with selective narratives rather than offering objective information.
The irony is stark. These same outlets often position themselves as defenders of democracy, advocating for free expression while simultaneously silencing dissenting voices. By labeling opposing perspectives as “misinformation” and crafting narratives to align with their agendas, they distort public discourse. Through selective reporting, biased framing, and strategic omissions, they construct a skewed reality that serves their favored candidates and causes, leaving audiences grappling with half-truths.
Carr’s initiative delivers a critical message: no media organization, regardless of its influence, should be above accountability. When media outlets use their platforms to advance partisan agendas, they erode public trust and compromise the integrity of public debate. The FCC’s effort to revisit these complaints is not about censoring the press but about ensuring that powerful media entities do not misuse their influence to distort democratic principles.
In an era where the media holds unparalleled sway over shaping public opinion, the need for responsible journalism has never been more pressing. The FCC’s willingness to address these concerns is not about limiting freedom but about upholding its ethical practice. By ensuring that the press remains committed to truth and fairness, the FCC helps protect the very foundations of a healthy democracy.
READ MORE:
Americans Need Brendan Carr as FCC Chair to Rein in Big Tech
At MSNBC, Rising Tensions Fuel Fears of Collapse
The Total Collapse of the Washington Post
Krysia Lenzo is a media strategist, the executive director of Harvard in Technology, and the president of the Metropolitan Republican Club. She is a fellow at Independent Women and has appeared on Newsmax, News Nation, Fox Business, Fox News, NBC News, and Fox News Radio.
The post Biden FCC Lets Biased Media Off the Hook at the 11th-Hour — New Trump Chair Says No appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.