In Focus delivers deeper coverage of the political, cultural, and ideological issues shaping America. Published daily by senior writers and experts, these in-depth pieces go beyond the headlines to give readers the full picture. You can find our full list of In Focus pieces here.

The Federal Communications Commission, founded in 1934, is as antiquated as a late-night gabfest on network television. Initially created to regulate the public radio airwaves, the FCC now exists almost solely as a tool of government interference in market competition and speech. It has widely expanded its charge over the years to include the internet. It has the power to deny licenses to broadcasters or pressure them for whatever concocted reason it pleases.

Recommended Stories

• After Dallas ICE shooting Democrats want to ban all guns
• The War on Drugs will continue despite Democrats' complaints
• US evacuation group uncovers Afghan information leak from Brazil

After ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night talk show for three days, Democrats blamed the FCC. The comedian’s brief suspension at the hands of the Trump administration, we were assured, threatened the very foundations of American democracy. 

The FCC and other agencies have long targeted conservatives. Few, if any, Democrats protested — much less Kimmel. The Left would argue that public airwaves were tantamount to public utilities, much like the Right wrongly argued about private Big Tech platforms. Thus, there is a “public interest” in regulating speech during health scares, either by directly or indirectly pressuring private companies to censor those who dissent. 

We recently learned that the Biden administration explicitly pressured YouTube to censor people who had opinions that Democrats didn’t appreciate regarding biology or China. No one was surprised. Former President Joe Biden and members of his administration, after all, had bullied Facebook into censorship. Administration officials regularly contended that it was their job to “root out” alleged misinformation, even creating a “Disinformation Governance Board.” 

TRUMP’S FASCIST TAKEOVER OF THE FCC LASTED 5 DAYS

Here we are now, with many conservatives offering the same rationalization for FCC involvement in speech. 

MAGA contends that FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr’s statement threatening Jimmy Kimmel Live! — “We can do this the easy way or the hard way” — was misconstrued and had nothing to do with the talk show’s suspension. Late night is dying. ABC is losing tons of money because of Kimmel. And look, they say, the host was back after a mere three-day hiatus, even after blatantly lying about the shooting of Charlie Kirk. And that’s probably all true. Which means Carr’s comments were a failed threat that was not only unnecessary but counterproductive. Rather than letting the market destroy Kimmel, the comedian can now cosplay as a free-speech champion. 

At the same time, however, many conservatives argue that the FCC does have a right to interfere in what happens on airwaves for the public good. They generally avoid using words like “misinformation” or “disinformation,” but the underlying rationale is the same. Kimmel misled the public about the ideology of Kirk’s assassin and blamed the victims. This was tantamount to a “hoax” perpetrated on “public airwaves,” which falls under the FCC’s purview. 

If you point out to conservatives that Democrats will one day use the same arguments again to regulate, jawbone, or censor Republicans, they will angrily point out that Democrats have already abused power for years. “Where have you been the past decade?” The correct answer is, “Holding a consistent position on free expression.” 

Many conservatives laugh at this as a weak-kneed response. It’s suicidal to disarm unilaterally in the war of politics, don’t you know? Truth is, I’m not a huge fan of the “It can happen to you” argument, for another reason. A principle matters or it doesn’t. Constantly bringing up past abuses of others as justification for abandoning your own alleged ideals is a weak argument. Let’s face it, some on the Right just want revenge. And I am sympathetic. Some have been “radicalized” and no longer believe in limiting principles. Some, mostly the growing “post-liberal” contingent of the GOP, have always wanted to appropriate state power for their own ends. Anything less, they argue, is just “libertarian” gibberish.

At some point, you either believe in the ideal of free expression in and of itself or you don’t. If you do, the goal should be to strip those in power of the ability to govern the interactions we have online or on “public airwaves.” One way to do it is by working to dismantle the levers and institutions that make censorship easier, not strengthen and defend them. 

You can start by abolishing the FCC. The government’s claim to special powers governing “airwaves” is as illiberal as it would be for the state to govern printing presses, server centers, or WiFi hot zones. The government has no business “licensing” speech. Airwaves are not a unique resource. They should be treated like any other property. Sell off the broadcast frequencies. Prevent competing firms from broadcasting on the same frequency and interfering with each other. Treat it like you would any other private property. There is plenty of space.

There is also plenty of competition. Before cable and streaming, there was perhaps a genuine state concern that a handful of companies might dominate the airwaves. There is no monopoly today. Far from it. Most consumers make no distinction between public and private “airwaves.” Podcasts outperform late-night talk shows by wide margins. On a normal night, Fox News’s Greg Gutfeld gets higher ratings than Kimmel. This summer, the right-of-center cable news network had significantly more viewers than broadcast news networks during prime time.  

Some conservatives argue that the big three networks enjoy an unfair structural advantage. Yep, life’s not fair. These companies got in on the ground level of an industry with limited technology. The same can be said of railroads. The FCC once controlled the phone companies as well. The advantages are whittled away over decades of technological advancement. So should state involvement. 

For years, Democrats were pushing to revive the fairness doctrine because conservatives dominate talk radio. President Ronald Reagan repealed the fairness doctrine in 1987, and what happened next was an explosion of conservative opinion that torpedoed the Left’s monopoly on media. Rush Limbaugh might well have been one of the most consequential conservatives in modern political history. Loosening airwave restrictions leads to more competition in ideas. 

FREE SPEECH HYPOCRISY ACCELERATES THE NATIONAL DIVORCE

Conservatives tell me that the threat of mutually assured destruction is the only way to induce both sides to fall back on norms. Sorry, there’s no evidence that it’s happening. It seems to me that everyone will be content to dominate the minority party when in power, and the minority party will be satisfied being martyred until they get to switch roles. All this does is lead to an arms race that threatens free expression. 

There’s no panacea to stop those who abuse power, but we do have some options that would make it more difficult.