Ayn Rand Denounced the FCC's 'Public Interest' Censorship More Than 60 Years Ago
In her 1962 essay "Have Gun, Will Nudge," Rand foresaw how government officials would seek to silence people they don't like.
In her 1962 essay "Have Gun, Will Nudge," Rand foresaw how government officials would seek to silence people they don't like.
The president thinks TV networks have a legal obligation to cover him the way he prefers. The FCC's chairman seems to agree.
FIRE suggests laws to trim FCC power and protect free expression.
"I have not seen ever before a direct infringement on the right to free speech like that," CNN's Jake Tapper says of the Trump administration's actions in the Jimmy Kimmel saga.
Jake Tapper examines the growing pressure on the news media to serve political interests, Donald Trump’s attacks on the press and peaceful protesters, as well as the lasting damage Joe Biden may have done to the Democratic Party.
Politicians across the aisle love free speech—until they're in power.
ACLU legal director Ben Wizner warns that Donald Trump’s war on dissent endangers the First Amendment, urges Americans to protect speech they dislike, and reflects on Edward Snowden’s enduring legacy.
Paramount has acquired The Free Press for $150 million and named her editor in chief of CBS News.
Civil liberties attorney Jenin Younes recounts her role in Murthy v. Missouri, her opposition to pandemic mandates, and why she believes Trump poses an even greater threat to free speech than Biden.
From the Fairness Doctrine to Nixon’s “raised eyebrow,” government licensing power has long chilled broadcast speech—proving the First Amendment should apply fully to the airwaves.
History suggests that Republicans will regret letting the FCC police TV programming.
Congress placed the term in the law but chose not to define it, leaving that task for future regulators.
In her 1962 essay "Have Gun, Will Nudge," Rand explained exactly how the public interest standard would lead to censorship.
Plus: Fallout from the Tom Homan bribery probe, U.S. forces strike Venezuelan drug boats, and Trump considers sending troops back to Afghanistan
The First Amendment still stands, but the culture that supports it is eroding.
Rand Paul concurs that the threats preceding the comedian's suspension were "absolutely inappropriate" because the agency has "no business weighing in on this."
And Trump's much more extreme one. [EV writes: I bumped this post from yesterday, because it struck me as especially timely and substantively valuable.]
Vice President J.D. Vance and Sen. Cynthia Lummis are among the latest conservatives to turn their backs on free speech when it comes to their ideological opponents.
The Trump Administration's recent abuses of the agency's powers lend weight to longstanding libertarian arguments for abolishing it, going back to Nobel Prize-winning economist Ronald Coase's classic 1959 article.
"We can do this the easy way or the hard way," the FCC chairman said, threatening to punish broadcasters for airing the comedian's show.
Plus: America's cocaine habit, how Charlie Kirk handled South Park, and more...
Rand Paul, who called for "a crackdown on people" who celebrated the assassination, was less careful in distinguishing between private and government action.
The Sixth Circuit wrestles with what it means for a regulation to be "substantially the same" as one disapproved by Congress.
The cartoon’s savage Season 27 premiere puts a tiny, naked Trump in bed with Satan—and lands squarely in the American tradition of using outrageous satire to hold the powerful accountable.
As a minority FCC member during the Bush administration, Carr condemned government interference with newsroom decisions.
Chairman Brendan Carr thinks his agency should strive to ensure that news coverage is fair and balanced—a role precluded by the First Amendment.
Plus: The Columbia settlement as a "blueprint" for going after other universities, South Park lampoons Trump, and more...
The Senate just voted to cut off the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. What comes next?
The company's surrender to Trump's extortion vindicates his strategy of using frivolous litigation and his presidential powers to punish constitutionally protected speech.
The Supreme Court may have reached the wrong result in FCC v. Consumers Research. But ruling emphasizes there are significant constitutional limits to legislative delegation to the executive.
Now is the perfect time for the FCC to change its precedent to comply with the First Amendment.
Even if the president was joking in both cases, he already has used his powers to punish people whose views offend him.
In a legal filing this week, Trump argued that routine edits to a CBS News interview he did not participate in caused him "confusion and mental anguish."
The president has launched a multifaceted crusade against speech that offends him.
Disney scaled back DEI policies this year. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr still opened an investigation.
The commission’s partisan “news distortion” probe is trampling the First Amendment to pressure the press.
FCC v. Consumers’ Research could dismantle a massive slush fund run by unelected regulators and industry insiders.
Carr advocates greater control over social media by federal regulators, despite a reputation for supporting free speech.
The full transcript shows the president's complaints about the editing of the interview are not just wildly hyperbolic and legally groundless. They are demonstrably false.
Brendan Carr has a clear record of threatening to suppress constitutionally protected speech.
Settling Trump’s CBS lawsuit won’t buy peace—it will sell out press freedom.
The company is worried that the president's complaints about a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris could block a pending merger.
Billions of dollars in government revenue is a no-brainer.
Brendan Carr is prepared to block a merger because he doesn't approve of minor CBS editorial decisions.
The unanimous panel has little difficulty concluding the FCC sought to exercise authority it did not have.
Marc Andreessen’s call to build clashed with Washington’s regulatory mindset.
Simple policy changes can unleash innovation, remove barriers, and secure U.S. dominance in the final frontier.
Plus: a listener asks the editors about fluoride in the water supply.
Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.
Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanksEvery dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interestedSo much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks