President-elect Donald Trump's choice of Brendan Carr to lead the Federal Communications Commission is raising red flags among groups that advocate for a free press and consumer protections.

Carr is currently the top Republican on the Federal Communications Commission.

Craig Aaron, president of Free Press, a national public interest group that acts as an FCC watchdog, said Carr has already refused to condemn Mr. Trump's calls to pull the broadcast license of the ABC television network.

"That should be an easy question for an FCC chair to answer: Are you going to go after ABC's broadcast license because they fact-checked the debate? The correct answer is, 'No, that's ridiculous,'" Aaron stressed. "And what Brendan Carr essentially said testifying in Congress was, 'Well, I'd have to look at it.' That's not the answer you want."

The FCC regulates radio, television and cable communications, so its decisions have big implications for Californians, and all Americans. Carr also wrote the Project 2025 chapter on media issues, saying the FCC should rein in big tech, promote national security and emphasize prosperity and FCC accountability. Under President Joe Biden, the FCC has strengthened consumer protections and approved net neutrality rules.

Aaron worries protections will go out the window and fears the FCC will change the rules to allow mega-mergers of media companies.

"If you just allow the cronies of the administration to buy up these local TV stations, networks, infrastructure, then that's another way you can take control," Aaron contended. "And Brendan Carr's never met a media merger he didn't like."

The position of FCC chair does not require Senate confirmation, so Carr is likely to be appointed. However, any future vacancies would require Senate approval.


get more stories like this via email

This past election cycle has again raised questions about the viability of news outlets, and how audiences are consuming information.

New research indicates Minnesota's media landscape is on solid footing, even with some challenges.

The University of Minnesota's Minnesota Journalism Center issued a report on the state's local news ecosystem.

Like many other towns and cities across the country, there are concerns about outlets shutting down because of dwindling ad revenue.

More than 12% of all local outlets in Minnesota have closed since 2018. But the center's Director, Ben Toff, said there is hope.

"We have a lot of new news organizations that have launched over the last six or seven years," said Toff, "to - in many cases - try to fill in some of the gaps where there have been closures."

He points to the growth of nonprofit publications that have an online focus and help inform underserved populations.

In Minnesota, they represent more than one-in-five new outlets founded since 2018.

Toff acknowledged a bigger presence of outlets that bill themselves as local news providers, but are sometimes very partisan.

He said they tend to push out press releases or articles generated by artificial intelligence.

For rural communities, Toff stressed the importance of finding solutions as their publications struggle to keep operating.

He said without enough local reporters, community members are left in the dark about events that have a big impact on their lives.

"Whether it's schools and education policy, or public health, or natural disasters," said Toff, "there's a lot of really important local information the people depend on."

Toff said in cases where there aren't resources helping to fill the gaps, community members will have to turn to government Facebook pages and radio stations to hopefully stay informed.

Meanwhile, his team's research finds that Minnesota is setting the tone by seeing a broad philanthropic effort to mobilize more funding of local news, with the traditional commercial-structured model continuing to navigate challenges.




get more stories like this via email

By Hevin Wilkey / Broadcast version by Farah Siddiqi reporting for the Kent State NewsLab-Ohio News Connection Collaboration.

Kamala Harris has extensively used social media during her presidential campaign to target a key demographic in this election, Generation Z.

Patrick Houlihan, president of the College Democrats of Ohio and a senior political science major at Miami of Ohio University, said Harris' social media posts have aided in getting people of all demographics, but Gen Z in particular, to understand her policies and who she is.

"She feels like a person," Houlihan said. "She doesn't feel like a politician. That's, well, she does feel like a politician, but she feels like not a robot."

To Houlihan, Harris represents hope and a new age for a younger U.S. government.

Since Harris became the Democratic nominee, there has been an uptick in young voters who are more excited to vote.

UCLA produced a study on Gen Z's motivation and favor to vote in the presidential election. They found that nearly half of respondents were not initially motivated to vote before Harris's nomination, but a third of that group became motivated to vote for Harris.

Once Harris announced her candidacy, she immediately started her campaign, which included strategizing social media.

TikTok account "Kamalahq" has racked in nearly 5 million followers since its first post in February, then named "Bidenhq." The account switched names the day Harris announced that she would be taking Joe Biden's spot seeking the nomination of the Democratic party.

She then quickly adopted videos and edits featuring songs like "Feminimonemon" by Chappell Roan and visuals similar to "Brat" by Charli XCX.

Through various videos such as edits, memes (both uplifting herself and making fun of Donald Trump), clips of speeches from her own page and regular TikTok users, she aimed to connect with a new demographic.

J. Cherie Strachan, a professor and director of the Ray J. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at the University of Akron, teaches various political science classes. She works with a mix of undergraduate and graduate students and sees their interests and thoughts firsthand.

"I think [college voices] make or break, right?" Strachan said. "This is a margin of error race, for the presidency at least. Harris needs to not only match the youth support that Biden got four years ago, but if possible, increase it."

Harris is reaching Gen Z Americans through social media, where many of them get their news, according to the Pew Research Center.

A September Harvard Youth Poll reported that out of the 53% of young adults who have seen memes and social media associated with Kamala Harris, 34% say it positively influenced their opinions of her. This poll shows +24 to +33 point leads to Donald Trump in empathy, honesty, reliability and other issues like abortion and climate change.

"No matter if Harris wins or loses, there are going to be thousands of strategists all across the country looking at her campaign trying to figure out what went right, what went wrong," Houlihan said. "One of those things that is probably going to go right and it's going to get duplicated is the social media strategy."

More specifically, the quick, rapid response technique is what is working in his opinion. Harris has found a way to quickly put out indirect statements at any given time in reference to what Trump is saying about her, who is endorsing her, what events and interviews she's doing, et cetera.

To Houlihan, every effort counts, but others don't think social media will be enough for Harris to win.

Malcolm Neitenbach, president of Kent State University's College Republicans and senior psychology major, understands just how much of an impact social media has in elections now more than ever. He said Trump began the trend of candidates using social media in campaigns with Twitter in 2016 and an overall increase in its use with both Biden and Trump in 2020.

"With social media, just the power of reaching these mass groups of people online is changing how politics works nowadays," Neitenbach said. "It's just going to get more prevalent. It's going to be more normalized."

Professor Strachan thinks using social media is strategic in the same way as presidential candidates going to swing states and trying to get any and every possible voter on their side.

"Realizing that the campaign had some weak spots with [swing] voters and, you know, going meeting them where they are." Strachan said. "The same with the memes and the things on social media, if that's where young people are, and we know that that's where you get your news ... Then that's where you go."


This collaboration is produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

The Missouri Broadcasters Association is among the parties filing a lawsuit, claiming a state law that requires extensive redactions in court documents is unconstitutional.

The lawsuit, filed in Jefferson City, challenges a law passed last year that mandates attorneys and judicial officers redact the names of all witnesses and victims in lawsuits and criminal proceedings.

Dave Roland, president and CEO of the Freedom Center of Missouri, represents the plaintiffs. He said these restrictions severely limit the news media's ability to effectively monitor the judicial system - which in turn harms the public. He added the law also has cost implications.

"The redaction requirement dramatically increases the cost of litigation, such that it is putting certain types of legal actions and certain motions beyond the financial capacity of a number of litigants," he said.

Roland added the plaintiffs agree that in some situations - involving children, or sexual assault - names should be kept private. But they contend a blanket law to redact all names violates both the Missouri and U.S. Constitutions.

The bill was spearheaded by Rep. Justin Hicks, R-St. Louis. A hearing date for the case has not yet been set.

Chad Mahoney, president and CEO the Missouri Broadcasters Association, voiced concerns about the law's impact on journalists' ability to report accurately.

"We support protecting those who need to be protected for their safety, but we think this goes way too far. It's making it very difficult for journalists to do their jobs and to fully inform the public," he continued.

Mahoney said historically, the courts have been the most open and transparent branch of government, and that has changed with some of these recent actions.


get more stories like this via email