Trump Calls for ABC License Revocation After Poor Presidential Debate Against Harris
Former President Donald Trump said Wednesday the FCC should revoke Disney-owned ABC’s licenses after what many observers considered his poor presidential debate performance Tuesday night against Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democrats’ nominee. Trump has repeatedly said broadcast networks and other entities should lose their ‘licenses’ over their coverage of him, including January comments that NBC and CNN are “crooked” and should “have their licenses or whatever they have taken away” (see 2401170050). Harris and Trump, the Republicans’ presidential nominee, briefly traded barbs during the evening about the U.S. tech leadership position with China.
“I thought [the debate] was terrible from the standpoint of ABC” because of moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis’ fact-checking and other actions during the event, Trump said during a Wednesday morning appearance on Fox News’ Fox and Friends. “They are a news organization, they have to be licensed to do it. They ought to take away their license for the way they did that.” CNN “was much more honorable” in its handling of the June debate against President Joe Biden in which the incumbent performed poorly, Trump said. He believes he won the debate and may not push for another bout with Harris. The Harris campaign said Tuesday night it’s proposing at least one more debate, in October.
Republican FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr, considered Trump’s most likely pick to lead the agency if he wins the election (see 2407120002), didn’t comment Wednesday. Current FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, NAB and ABC also didn’t comment.
Harris accused the former Trump administration during the debate of “selling American chips to China to help them improve and modernize their military, [and] basically sold us out when a policy about China should be in making sure [the U.S.] wins the competition for the 21st century.” Pro-U.S. competition policy should include “focusing on investing in American-based technology so that we win the race on [artificial intelligence] and quantum computing,” she said. Trump countered that China during his administration “bought their chips from Taiwan. We hardly make chips any more because of philosophies like they have and policies like they have.”
'Harmful Threat'
Beth Brelje, a writer for conservative political website The Federalist, echoed Trump’s ABC licensing comments in a column Wednesday. She said ABC should be “prosecuted for illegal contributions to Harris” via the debate, which she believes violated FCC rules requiring equal airtime for political candidates. Some broadcast attorneys and others said Trump and The Federalist are incorrect about the law. “Think what you will about the moderation of the debate but a call to yank a broadcaster’s news license over it [is] seriously concerning and would certainly violate the First Amendment,” said Jennifer Huddleston, Cato Institute senior fellow-tech policy. “It’s obviously a harmful threat,” said Pillsbury broadcast attorney Scott Flick in an interview.
Attorneys have repeatedly said that courts would reject as violations of the First Amendment any FCC attempts to go after a media outlet over content. Flick said he doesn’t fear for the licenses of broadcasters under a second Trump administration because of the protection of the courts, but an eventual judicial win doesn’t mean broadcasters wouldn’t face a negative impact in the process. “If you are called upon to defend your license, particularly if it has to go all the way” through U.S. courts, “you're obviously spending an excessive amount of your time and resources doing that, as opposed to collecting and reporting news,” he said: Even if the threat is empty, forcing broadcasters to protect their licenses would have a chilling effect.
Arguments that ABC’s conduct violated the FCC’s equal time laws ignore the rule’s exemptions for bona fide newscasts, interviews and coverage, numerous broadcast attorneys told us. “I think covering a presidential debate would fall under that exemption,” said Fletcher Heald broadcast attorney Frank Montero. The debate “clearly satisfied” all Federal Election Commission and FCC rules, said Foster Garvey broadcast attorney Brad Deutsch. A CNN report shows Trump spoke more than Harris during the debate and both candidates were onscreen for virtually the whole evening, Deutsch noted.
The reason FCC rules require “bona fide” interviews is that allowing a candidate to speak without an interviewer or a moderator doesn’t qualify for the exemption to the equal time rules, Flick said. “The very thing that makes it bona fide and therefore exempt from” the rules is “that the moderator or reporter is controlling the questions and the subject matter.” Although Trump and The Federalist argue that the debate moderators correcting Trump showed bias, the First Amendment allows broadcasters to express opinions and endorse candidates, Flick said.