Internal emails obtained by WIRED reveal a highly irregular process within the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), where a conservative legal group allegedly used direct access to the Chairman’s office to bypass standard regulatory procedures. The documents suggest that the Center for American Rights (CAR) successfully routed complaints against major broadcasters directly to top leadership, bypassing the career staff typically responsible for reviewing such filings.
A Direct Line to Power
The correspondence details how Daniel Suhr, president of CAR and a former policy director for Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, utilized a “direct line” to Chairman Brendan Carr’s senior legal advisers. Rather than following the standard consumer affairs pipeline, CAR’s filings were directed to senior counsel and policy advisers.
This bypass appears to have facilitated a rapid response to media personalities and networks that have drawn criticism from the Trump administration. Key findings from the internal communications include:
- Bypassing Career Staff: Emails show that FCC staff had standing instructions to route CAR’s complaints directly to the Chairman’s senior counsel.
- Strategic Timing: Following a podcast appearance by Chairman Carr, where he suggested broadcasters could face regulatory scrutiny for their treatment of late-night host Jimmy Kimmel, CAR filed a supplemental complaint within hours.
- The “News Distortion” Doctrine: CAR utilized the rarely invoked “news distortion” theory—the idea that broadcasters are prohibited from deliberately falsifying news—to pressure networks.
The Case of Jimmy Kimmel and ABC
The documents highlight a specific sequence of events involving Jimmy Kimmel Live! and its parent company, ABC. After Kimmel made remarks regarding the death of conservative figure Charlie Kirk, Chairman Carr suggested on a podcast that ABC affiliates could face “additional work” from the FCC if they did not take action against Kimmel.
The fallout was immediate and impactful:
1. Corporate Preemption: Shortly after Carr’s remarks, major station groups like Nexstar and Sinclair —both of which had multibillion-dollar mergers pending before the FCC—preempted Kimmel’s show.
2. Indefinite Suspension: Disney, ABC’s parent company, eventually suspended the program indefinitely.
3. Regulatory Pressure: The complaints filed by CAR included extensive “opposition research,” such as 60 pages of FEC donation histories for show employees, aimed at framing the program as politically biased.
Why This Matters: The Regulatory Implication
This situation raises significant questions regarding the independence of regulatory agencies and the protection of First Amendment rights.
When a regulatory body is perceived to be acting as a tool for political retribution rather than an impartial arbiter of the public interest, it threatens the principle of press freedom. By reviving the “news distortion” standard—a policy previously dismissed by former FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel as being “at odds with the First Amendment”—the current leadership is testing the boundaries of its authority.
“We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Chairman Carr stated on a podcast, suggesting that broadcasters could discipline Kimmel themselves or face regulatory consequences.
The backlash has been significant. Seven former FCC commissioners, including five Republicans, have petitioned the agency to rescind the news distortion policy, arguing that the commission is asserting powers that neither Congress nor the Supreme Court have granted it.
Conclusion
The revealed emails suggest a pattern where political advocacy groups may be leveraging direct access to FCC leadership to influence broadcast regulation and target media entities. This intersection of political pressure and regulatory oversight poses a fundamental challenge to the traditional boundaries of free speech and agency impartiality.
