Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr constructed his model partly by warning towards authorities meddling in “free speech” — now it seems he’s utilizing his workplace to just do that.
For years, Carr solid himself as a First Amendment purist, denouncing efforts by Democrats and Republicans to lean on TV suppliers and social media platforms as “censorship” and a “chilling transgression of free speech.”
He’s defended political satire as “one of the oldest and most important forms of free speech” and warned that even refined or casual strain campaigns — letters, hearings, or backchannel threats — amounted to authorities attempting to silence views it didn’t like.
But there was nothing refined in regards to the message Carr delivered on Wednesday in regards to the on-air remarks Jimmy Kimmel made about murdered conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Speaking on a conservative podcast, Carr stated that Disney and ABC executives might take care of Kimmel “The easy or the hard way,” suggesting that if the community didn’t take motion, the FCC might make issues tougher for the corporate in future regulatory issues.
“These companies can find ways to change conduct and take actions on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead,” he stated.
Hours later, Kimmel’s ABC present “Jimmy Kimmel Live” was suspended indefinitely from the air.
Carr’s comment stands in distinction to a lot of his report, particularly his yearslong protection of political speech – together with political satire – from authorities strain. It additionally seems to go towards a unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court final yr affirming First Amendment rights. The courtroom dominated in favor of the National Rifle Association in its lawsuit towards a New York official urging corporations to chop ties with the group.
“Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the courtroom. “Ultimately, the critical takeaway is that the First Amendment prohibits government officials from wielding their power selectively to punish or suppress speech.”
Appointed to the FCC by Trump in 2017, Carr now sits as its Republican chairman. For a lot of Trump’s first time period, Carr spoke out in protection of free speech and towards efforts to control social media and misinformation.
On social media, Carr repeatedly referred to freedom of speech because the “bedrock of democracy” and cast political censorship as a “tool that those in power use to suppress any challenge to their positions or orthodoxy.”
A NCS evaluation of Carr’s X account revealed dozens of examples defending “free speech” from 2019 by means of 2025.
Carr is now exerting the identical variety of strain on Disney and ABC executives that resulted within the suspension of Kimmel’s present – echoing the very variety of authorities strain he has lengthy denounced.
The FCC and Carr didn’t reply to NCS’s requests for remark.
Carr has framed the decision to droop the late-night discuss present as a market determination from a community that displays viewer demand. But that market determination got here after Carr’s personal public strain towards ABC.
In February 2021, Carr blasted two senior House Democrats, Reps. Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney, after they despatched letters to a dozen main cable, satellite tv for pc, and streaming suppliers — together with AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Dish, Roku, and Hulu — questioning why they continued to hold Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN.
The lawmakers argued that these networks had performed a central function in spreading misinformation in regards to the 2020 election and the COVID-19 pandemic. They requested the businesses what “moral or ethical principles” guided their carriage selections and whether or not they meant to proceed distributing these channels
“Are you planning to continue carrying Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN on U-verse, DirecTV, and AT&T TV both now and beyond any contract renewal date? If so, why?” the letter concluded.
Carr lambasted the Democrats in public statements and media appearances.
“Democrats are sending a message that is as clear as it is troubling — these regulated entities will pay a price if the targeted newsrooms do not conform to Democrats’ preferred political narratives,” he said in a public assertion on the time. “This is a chilling transgression of the free speech rights that every media outlet in this country enjoys.”
Speaking at a conservative assume tank in March 2021, Carr warned that even casual political strain might quantity to censorship.
“You know, Congress can’t pass a law that would, you know, force a streaming provider you know to discriminate against one of these news outlets,” he stated. “But they can write a pointed letter and they can sort of help support ad boycotts. And so we have this effort that I would say is sort of outside of the constraints of the First Amendment – that’s a thumb on the scale in favor of censorship in this entire trend in this country, towards less speech, more censorship.”
In early 2020, when some Democrats pleaded with Twitter to take away a manipulated video of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from its platform, Carr described the motion as “nothing more than a brazen attempt by government officials to silence political speech they don’t like. Bending to their pressure campaign would erode the free speech principles enshrined in the First Amendment,” he wrote in February 2020.
Around that very same time, Carr defended political satire as “one of the oldest and most important forms of free speech” in response to calls to take away deep pretend photographs of 2020 presidential candidates.
“Shutting down this type of political speech – especially at the urging of those targeted or threatened by its message – would represent a serious threat to our freedoms and ability to hold those in power accountable,” Carr wrote.
In a December 2022 post, Carr wrote that free speech was important to problem the “orthodoxy of the moment.”
“Free speech gives the powerless a voice. It ensures that anyone can challenge the political, religious, or scientific orthodoxy of the moment. That is why those in powerful positions–those that benefit from the status quo–are always trying to silence it,” he wrote.
Many of Carr’s tweets admonishing authorities censorship have been directed at social media corporations.
In an August 2024 tweet, Carr argued that if a social media firm will get pressured by a authorities official to censor protected speech, the corporate ought to publicly and rapidly disclose the request. He continued, “But there should also be accountability for government officials that jawboned social media companies like Facebook into censoring Americans’ protected speech,” he wrote.
In different tweets from 2024, Carr stated he supported a “diversity of views” and that then President-elect Trump was dedicated to lifting the “wet blanket of government control” when it got here to censorship.
“Censorship isn’t just about silencing words—it is about controlling ideas and replacing robust debate with the cement of orthodoxy. That’s why it is so unAmerican,” he wrote late last year. “America is (sic) country of founders, of trailblazers that push boundaries, of innovators. And that is why America’s scrappy entrepreneurs feel so much hope with President Trump.”