MVPDs Carrying Conservative Media to Stir Rancor at Hearing

Communications members Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney, both D-Calif., continued to get criticism through Tuesday for letters they sent 12 major providers asking them to justify carrying Fox News, Newsmax and One America News Network (see 2102220068). Republicans may turn the hearing into a soapbox to criticize what they see as Democratic-driven censorship, lobbyists said.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairwoman Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., told us she’s eyeing her committee having a role in focusing “on this notion of trust in information and what we can do to sustain that.” Cantwell noted committee Democrats released a report in October urging Congress not to let local news “die” because Big Tech unfairly leverages the advertising market (see 2010270036). “That issue’s going to continue to play out” in the months ahead, she said.

Some have “gone as far as to argue that traditional media is often the primary driver of disinformation,” House Commerce Committee Democrats said in a prehearing memo. The panel is a departure from Capitol Hill’s recent focus on social media’s failure to halt false information online (see 2010160054). The CEOs of Facebook, Google and Twitter are to testify during a March 25 House Commerce hearing on the issue (see 2102180064).

Media outlets “are focused on increasing revenue and audience share,” and content that relies on “controversy and division is presumed to be popular,” the Democrats’ memo said. Viewers “are often confused as to whether the content they see is news or opinion, which can result in confusion and undermine public confidence in the press.” Newsrooms repeatedly downsized, and the “void left by the absence of reliable, local news is being filled by partisan commentary and disinformation,” the memo said.

Fallout

Senate Communications Subcommittee ranking member John Thune of South Dakota echoed a growing number of Republicans who raised red flags about House Democrats’ interest in MVPDs’ carriage of conservative outlets. “This strikes me as very much outside the line of what they ought to be doing,” he told us. “It’s a free country, it’s a free market.” It would be a “very bad precedent” for Congress to weigh in on what content providers offer, Thune said.

“Democrats are expanding their campaign to censor political speech they don't agree with,” House Commerce ranking member Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., tweeted Monday. “This type of government pressure on the media is what we see in China, not here. This should deeply concern every journalist who values freedom of the press and freedom of speech.”

Lobbyists expect McMorris Rodgers and other Communications Republicans to cite the Eshoo-McNerney letter Wednesday. Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone of New Jersey and subpanel Chairman Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania didn’t sign the letter.

“It is worrying” that Eshoo and McNerney “have found it appropriate or necessary to apply the overbroad and vague label of ‘misinformation’ to any media reportage that calls into question their preferred political narratives, and have sought to intimidate into silence those who would distribute on their platforms disfavored points of view,” said FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington. Fellow GOP Commissioner Brendan Carr criticized the letter earlier Monday. The lawmakers’ “statement could be read to imply that action will be taken under the Communications Act should the recipients not agree in advance to chill their speech,” Simington said. “I trust the American people to make up their own minds regarding to whom they choose to listen.”

NAB CEO Gordon Smith urged lawmakers Tuesday in an opinion piece for The Hill to “be mindful of the vital role radio and television broadcasters play in our communities by exposing lies, uncovering the truth and reporting the facts.” He cited a range of broadcasters’ recent “expanded fact-checking enterprises” and their role in covering the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection: “Broadcasters believe that combating misinformation and disinformation, which can erode trust in our institutions and cause real-world harms, is a necessary and noble pursuit.”

Media Institute President Richard Kaplar said the letter is "an affront to the First Amendment" that can be seen as "nothing other than an attempt by government officials to chill the speech of certain news outlets by intimidating their distributors." The "spread of misinformation and disinformation in society is a legitimate concern" but "must be addressed in ways that do not run afoul of the First Amendment," he said. "It is not the place of legislators, either by virtue of the First Amendment or the Communications Act, to attempt to control the content of media outlets."

Testimony

Former CNN anchor Soledad O’Brien, Columbia University Tow Center for Digital Journalism Director Emily Bell and Marked by COVID co-founder Kristin Urquiza criticize MVPDs in written testimony for allowing some outlets to continue spreading misinformation unabated. None of them wants Congress to directly intervene.

O’Brien says “media disguised as journalism has been spreading lies for years, elevating liars, and using the ensuing slugfest to chase ratings, hits, subscriptions and advertisers.” Congress can’t "regulate journalism in defiance of the First Amendment,” O’Brien says. “It’s enough that Congress underfunds and politicizes public media even as it strives to bring basic news to scores of communities.” Lawmakers should “shed light on how irresponsible media contributes to disinformation in ways that have consequences for democracy,” she says.

“The commercial success of Fox News, Sinclair Broadcasting, OANN and NewsMax serves to remind us there are few penalties for deploying misinformation,” Bell says. “There is an opportunity for America to identify and act on the priorities that are already known to work against extremism and disengagement. Finding the means to fund and sustain more independent local reporting is a burning priority. The gap between abundant polarizing national coverage and scarce local accountability journalism is widening. Civic journalism representative of the communities it serves could be established and strengthened.”

George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley’s written testimony wasn’t available Tuesday afternoon. He’s expected to criticize efforts to stymie conservative media outlets.