Brendan Carr became chair of the Federal Communications Commission in 2025 after serving as a commissioner for nearly eight years, becoming the senior Republican on the board.
Months into his tenure as FCC Chair, Carr ignited a free speech firestorm for threatening ABC with penalties if it didn't remove late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel from his job. Within hours, and with pressure from two media companies with ownership of ABC affiliates, Kimmel was suspended. Carr's anger was directed at Kimmel's monologue days after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
Criticizing what he viewed as partisan finger-pointing, Kimmel had said on his Monday Sept. 15 show: "We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.”
On the following Wednesday, Carr, during an interview on a podcast, warned ABC and others: "When you see stuff like this—I mean, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”
Carr has suggested revoking broadcasters' licenses
The Jimmy Kimmel incident wasn't the first time Carr had aimed at big media. In April, Carr accused Comcast of “misleading the American public” in coverage of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom the U.S. has sought to deport. Carr has said he is willing to penalize major media companies if they "get out of line" and said licenses could be revoked from stations that broadcast material that is not in the "public interest."
President Trump, who applauded ABC's decision on Kimmel, has also said the FCC should consider revoking licenses. On Sept. 18, after the Kimmel incident, Trump said: "When you have a network and you have evening shows and all they do is hit Trump — that's all they do — they give me only bad publicity, or press. I mean, they're getting a license. I would think, maybe their license should be taken away. It would be up to Brendan Carr."
Carr advocates for reining in Big Tech that censors viewpoints
While still a commissioner, Carr made his mark early on FCC as a strong advocate of 5th Generation (5G) technology, and for his more controversial view, supported by Elon Musk who owns X, that social media companies should not be permitted to censor postings (at least not without clarifying their policies and applying them even handedly).
He published his views in at least two prominent places.
He wrote the article on the Federal Communications Commission for Project 2025, a plan by the Heritage Foundation that many believed would be a template for Trump’s second term as president.
In the 2025 chapter on the FCC, Carr describes how the FCC works, how it is funded, and what he thinks its priorities should be. At the top of his list is “Reining in Big Tech.”
He forthrightly states that such companies are attempting “to drive diverse political viewpoints from the digital town square” (847). “These corporate behemoths are not merely exercising market power; they are abusing dominant positions,” he wrote (p. 847).
Carr wants to eliminate immunity under Section 230
Carr also has said he hopes to eliminate immunity under Section 230 in cases where such companies have sought to censor speech by individuals who seek to post there. He further proposes that Google, Facebook and other carriers should be more transparent by providing “detailed disclosures about practices that would shape Internet traffic—from blocking to prioritizing or discriminating against content” (848). Although he favors prohibiting “discrimination against core political viewpoints,” he proposes that congressional legislation should continue to ensure that platforms are not required “to host illegal content; child pornography; terrorist speech; and indecent, profane, or similar categories of speech that Congress has previously carried out” (849). He also favors protection against children’s access to inappropriate sites.
After describing how the FCC uses its “$8 billion Universal Service Fund” to subsidize “Internet and rural connectivity programs,” Carr proposes that Big Tech should have to pay its fair share. He colorfully likens the FCC’s current approach to “the regulatory equivalent of taxing horseshoes to pay for highways” (850).
Carr wants FCC to free more airwaves for wireless
Carr shares Trump’s national security concerns over Chinese control of TikTok, Huawei, and other social media, and current U.S. cooperation with China with respect to artificial intelligence.
Carr believes that the FCC can unleash economic prosperity by freeing “more airwaves for wireless connectivity” and by widening broadband capabilities. He favors facilitating the building of more cell sites and advancing America’s leadership in space.
Carr compares his own proposed approach for “relying on competition and market forces to produce optimal outcomes” to the New Deal’s idea of imposing what he considers to be “heavy-handed regulation” (856).
Carr co-wrote article critical of Big Tech
In a coauthored article with FCC commissioner Nathan Simington, Carr approvingly cites a Supreme Court decision likening social media to “the modern public square.” The authors believe that “Big Tech” should not have the power to decide “who gets to speak, what they can say, and who gets to listen to that speech.” They laud a Texas law that attempts to prevent such companies from engaging in “viewpoint discrimination.”
Recognizing that tech companies are private rather than governmental entities that are directly restricted by the First Amendment, the authors note that such companies are subject to government regulation because of their massive market power. They further note a distinction between regulating the speech of companies and compelling their speech from requiring that they exercise “net neutrality” which regulating the speech of others.
The authors are particularly concerned about Big Tech social media companies because they believe that they exercise near monopolistic powers.
As Carr points out, laws provide that no more than three of five members of the FCC will be from the president’s party. Carr’s writings suggest that the Republican majority will be much more likely to rely on market forces than on government regulation except for mandating greater transparency on the part of Big Tech social media companies.
John R. Vile is a political science professor and dean of the Honors College at Middle Tennessee State University.