Connect with us

The Dictatorship

How a local radio station weathered Trump’s media attacks

Published

on

How a local radio station weathered Trump’s media attacks

Before Jimmy Kimmelthere was KCBS.

Just six days into President Donald Trump’s new administration, the San Francisco Bay-area radio station KCBS-AM reported that immigration agents were in the area — driving “unmarked vehicles including a black Dodge Durango, a gray Nissan Maxima and white Nissan truck.”

The brief story — also reported by other outlets — quickly drew the ire of conservative influencers who attacked KCBS’ report as endangering agents’ lives, sparking a deluge of complaints from listeners and callers.

That was just the start of KCBS’ troubles. The Trump administration’s top broadcast regulator, Brendan Carrsoon accused KCBS of failing to operate in the public interest and said he was opening an investigation.

By targeting KCBS, Carr revealed his willingness to expand the Republican administration’s offensive on perceived media foes beyond major broadcasters like ABC, CBS and NPR. In KCBS’ case, the radio station took steps to mitigate the potential of drawing further attention from conservative influencers or Carr, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, according to eight current and former station employees who insisted on anonymity out of fear of reprisal.

KCBS demoted a well-liked anchor and dialed back on political programming, people said. For months, reporters were dissuaded from pursuing political or controversial topics and instead encouraged to focus on human interest stories, according to the current and former staffers.

When journalists were given permission to pursue politics or Trump administration policies, some of the staffers said, the tone of the stories was heavily scrutinized.

Doug Sovern, a veteran political journalist at the station, said he was sidelined after Carr announced his investigation.

“‘Chilling effect’ does not begin to describe the neutering of our political coverage,” said Sovern, who retired in April. He said his retirement was not related to the controversy.

FCC scrutiny has eased in recent months, and the station has been increasingly willing to tackle more topics that might draw attention from the administration and conservative critics, the staffers said. The station, for example, assigned a reporter in October to cover the No Kings Day protests of the Trump administration, which the staffers described as a welcome change.

In a statement, KCBS said it would not “comment on internal personnel matters.”

“There has been no change in policy or editorial direction at KCBS,” the station added. “We remain committed to providing our Bay Area listeners with trusted news, including our political coverage, that is balanced and objective.”

The FCC did not respond to a request for comment.

Trump’s enforcer

In Trump’s second term, Carr has emerged as a top enforcer of Trump’s agenda, using his perch to take on one of the president’s favorite targets: media outlets.

His threat to ABC in September that “we can do this the easy way or the hard way” led to Kimmel, a late-night host and comedian, being briefly pulled off the air by parent company Disney over statements in one of his monologues about the political reaction to the slaying of Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist. ABC and CBS settled what some experts said were long-shot libel lawsuits by Trump at the same time their parent companies had significant interests before the FCC. NPR and PBS affiliates came under scrutiny over whether they were crossing the line into commercial advertising.

When the FCC later approved a merger involving CBS’ parent company, the network’s new owners committed to making “significant changes” at the broadcast network — a move the FCC chairman praised in his statement approving the deal. And in November, Carr reshared a Trump social media post that called for comedian Seth Meyers to be fired from NBC.

Al Sikes, a Republican former FCC chairman who served under President George H.W. Bush, said Carr was using “mobster” tactics.

“What we’re seeing right now is new boundaries that are being set on the exercise of authority: punishing those that you don’t like and ensconcing those that you do,” Sikes said in an interview.

ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and NPR did not respond to requests for comment.

Since February, the White House has blocked The Associated Press’ access to events after the wire service said it would continue referring to the Gulf of Mexico in some of its copy. Trump had signed an executive order renaming the body of water the Gulf of America. The AP filed suit over the restrictions, and a federal judge ordered the White House in April to restore the AP’s full access to cover presidential events as part of the press pool. The judge’s order was put on hold while the White House appeals it.

KCBS in the crosshairs

KCBS has a storied history. It was one of the earliest radio stations ever licensed. Owned by CBS for nearly 70 years, it helped pioneer the 24-hour news radio format. CBS sold its radio properties in 2017 to Entercom, which later renamed itself Audacy. KCBS remains a broadcast affiliate of CBS News Radio.

The proliferation of digital content has hit the radio industry hard. Audacy recently survived Chapter 11 bankruptcy and had only been saved by a major investment from a firm owned by George Soros, a liberal donor and frequent Republican target. That investment was approved by the FCC under President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration. Some conservatives, including Carr, had criticized the previous FCC leadership for failing to scrutinize the deal more closely.

In going after KCBS, Carr relied on a letter of inquiry, the first formal step in opening an FCC investigation. Broadcasters are regulated by the agency, and it has the authority to issue admonitions, or fines. In rare cases, it can revoke broadcast licenses.

After Carr’s threat, staffers involved in the story were summoned to meetings with lawyers hired by Audacy. The attorneys scoured employee social media posts and grilled some on whether they had any political bias, current and former staff said.

The station’s news director, Jennifer Seelig, sits on the board of the Radio Television Digital News Association, which gives out a prominent First Amendment award. She told people that business considerations required the station to avoid angering the FCC, current and former staffers said.

Seelig did not respond to requests for an interview.

Veteran reporter demoted

Bret Burkhart, who first read the report on the immigration action over the air, was demoted from his anchor position to a less prestigious reporting gig. After a few months, he left the station for a new job, according to current and former staffers. Burkhart was a well-regarded Bay Area radio personality, with more than a dozen top journalism awards over the course of his long career.

Burkhart’s colleagues were perplexed that the station would discipline anyone for reporting on the raids, especially because the federal agents were not operating undercover and the information they based the report on came from several local politicians.

The description of immigration agents in unmarked cars “is newsworthy, particularly since Trump’s administration has a history of sending in federal agents while disguising what agencies they’re with,” said Mark Feldstein, a journalism professor at the University of Maryland and former on-air correspondent at BLN and ABC.

Sovern, an award-winning political reporter who worked for The New York Times and the AP, said he struggled to get stories published.

In the weeks after the immigration story, Seelig asked Sovern to cancel an interview he had set up with California gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter out of fear she would say something negative about Trump, he said.

“I’m disappointed that a news organization once renowned and acclaimed for its diligent pursuit of the truth, no matter where it led and no matter whose feathers it ruffled, backed away from its core mission out of fear and economic insecurity,” Sovern said. “That’s not the KCBS I knew, and gave 35 years of my professional life to, and it’s a shame the last months had to end in such ignoble fashion.”

___

AP writers Brian Slodysko and Michael Biesecker contributed reporting.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Justice Jackson chides ‘oblivious’ Supreme Court conservatives…

Published

on

Justice Jackson chides ‘oblivious’ Supreme Court conservatives…

WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme CourtJustice Ketanji Brown Jackson has delivered a sustained attack on her conservative colleagues’ use of emergency orders to benefit the Trump administration, calling the orders “scratch-paper musings” that can “seem oblivious and thus ring hollow.”

The court’s newest justice, Jackson delivered a lengthy assessment of roughly two dozen court orders issued last year that allowed President Donald Trump to put in place controversial policies on immigration, steep federal funding cuts and other topics, after lower courts found they were likely illegal.

While designed to be short-term, those orders have largely allowed Trump to move ahead — for now — with key parts of his sweeping agenda.

Jackson spoke for nearly an hour on Monday at Yale Law School, which posted a video of the event on Wednesday.

Last week, Justice Sonia Sotomayor similarly talked about emergency orders in an event Tuesday at the University of Alabama that also took issue with the conservatives’ approach.

Jackson has previously criticized the emergency orders both in dissenting opinions and in an unusual appearance with Justice Brett Kavanaugh last month. But her talk at Yale, addressing the public rather than the other eight justices, was notable.

She referred to orders, which often are issued with little or no explanation as “back-of-the-envelope, first-blush impressions of the merits of the legal issue.”

Worse still, she said, was that the court then insists that “those scratch-paper musings” be applied by lower courts in other cases.

The orders suffer from an additional problem, she said, a failure to acknowledge that real people are involved, making them “seem oblivious and thus ring hollow.”

She also pushed back on the court’s assessment that preventing the president from putting his policy in place also is a harm that often outweighs what the challengers to a policy might face.

“The president of the United States, though he may be harmed in an abstract way, he certainly isn’t harmed if what he wants to do is illegal,” Jackson said during a question-and-answer session with law school dean Cristina Rodriguez.

The court used to be reluctant to step into cases early in the legal process, she said. “There is value in avoiding having the court continually touching the third rail of every divisive policy issue in American life,” Jackson said.

While she said she couldn’t explain the change, “in recent years, the Supreme Court has taken a decidedly different approach to addressing emergency stay applications. It has been noticeably less restrained, especially with respect to pending cases that involve controversial matters.”

Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.

Jackson, often joined by Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan, has frequently dissented.

There have been conversations about emergency orders among the justices, Jackson said, but she decided to speak publicly with the goal of being “a catalyst for change.”

Also on Wednesday, Sotomayor issued a rare public apology to another justice, Kavanaugh, for what she termed “hurtful comments” she made last week during an appearance at the University of Kansas law school.

Referencing an opinion Kavanaugh wrote in an immigration case where the court granted an emergency order sought by the administration, Sotomayor said her colleague “probably doesn’t really know any person who works by the hour.” Her remarks were reported by Bloomberg Law.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Trump threatens to fire Powell if the Fed Chair remains with central bank after his term ends

Published

on

Trump threatens to fire Powell if the Fed Chair remains with central bank after his term ends

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal prosecutors made an unannounced visit this week to a construction site at Federal Reserve headquarters that is the focus of an investigation into a $2.5 billion renovation projectaccording to two people familiar with the visit.

Two prosecutors and an investigator from U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office were turned away on Tuesday by a building contractor and referred to Fed attorneys, one of the people said. The two people familiar with the visit spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to publicly discuss an ongoing investigation.

The visit underscores that the Trump administration is not backing down from its investigation of the Fed and its chair, Jerome Powell, even though the probe has delayed the confirmation of a new chair nominated by President Donald Trump. The investigation is focused on cost overruns and brief testimony about the project last summer by Powell. Trump confirmed in an interview that aired Wednesday on Fox Business that he wants to continue the probe.

Last month, during a closed-door hearing before a federal judge, a top deputy from Pirro’s office conceded that they hadn’t found any evidence of a crime in their investigation of the headquarters project.

Robert Hur, an attorney for the Federal Reserve board of governors, sent an email to Pirro’s prosecutors about their visit and their request for a “tour” to “check on progress” at the construction site. Hur’s email, which The Associated Press has viewed, noted that U.S. District Judge James Boasberg concluded that their interest in the Federal Reserve’s renovation project was “pretextual.”

AP AUDIO: Prosecutors sought access to Federal Reserve building as Trump threatens to fire Powell

AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports on more drama surrounding a federal probe of a massive construction project at the Federal Reserve’s headquarters.

“Should you wish to challenge that finding, the courts provide an avenue for you; it is not appropriate for you to try to circumvent it,” Hur wrote.

Republican Tillis is key vote

Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who is a key member of the Senate Banking Committee, has vowed to vote against Kevin WarshTrump’s nominee to replace Powell as Fed chair, until the investigation is dropped. With the committee closely divided on partisan lines, Tillis’ opposition is enough to block Warsh from receiving the committee’s approval.

Tillis on Wednesday criticized the investigation as “bogus, ill-timed, ill-informed” and repeated that seven Republican members of the banking panel have said they do not believe Powell committed a crime when he testified last June.

Tillis also said there aren’t enough votes on the committee or in the broader Senate to do an end-run around the committee and get Warsh confirmed some other way.

“There really is no path,” he told reporters, adding that Pirro and her aides were “asleep at the switch” because the investigation has essentially delayed Powell’s departure from the Fed, despite Trump’s obsessive criticism of the Fed chair. Powell has now said he won’t leave until the investigation is resolved.

Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.

Tillis suggested Pirro blindsided the White House with her investigation. “They should have consulted with the White House, because I’m sure if they would have, (the White House) would have said, ‘no, we can wait,’” until Powell steps down.

But Kevin Hassett, the Trump administration’s top economist, said Wednesday that the Justice Department got involved because “the president wanted to investigate the cost overrun,” Axios reported.

The Banking panel said Tuesday that it will hold a hearing on Warsh’s nomination April 21. Powell’s term as Fed chair ends May 15, but Powell said last month he would remain as chair until a replacement is named.

Powell is serving a separate term as a member of the Fed’s governing board that lasts until January 2028. Chairs typically leave the board when their terms as chair end, but they can remain on the board if they choose. Powell has said he won’t leave until the investigation is resolved. If he remains it would deny Trump the opportunity to appoint someone else to the seven-member board.

Late Tuesday Tillis posted a link on social media to The Wall Street Journal’s article on the visit below an image of the Three Stooges and wrote, “The U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C. at the crime scene.”

Investigation centers on building renovations

The investigation centers on an appearance by Powell before the Banking Committee last June, when he was asked about cost overruns on the renovations. The most recent estimates from the Fed suggest the current estimated cost of $2.5 billion is about $600 million higher than a 2022 estimate of $1.9 billion.

“It is probably corrupt, but what it really is, is incompetent,” Trump said. “Don’t you think we have to find out what happened there?”

The president’s support for the investigation threatens a timeframe set out by Sen. Tim Scott, a South Carolina Republican who chairs the Banking Committee. Scott said Tuesday on Fox Business that he believed the investigation would be “wrapped up in the next few weeks,” allowing Warsh to be confirmed soon after.

Threat to fire Powell

News of the unannounced visit by prosecutors comes as Trump has again threatened to fire Powell, if the Federal Reserve Chair decides to stay on the central bank’s governing board after his term as chair expires next month.

“Well then I’ll have to fire him, OK?” Trump said.

Trump has for months wanted to remove Powell, saying he has been too slow in orchestrating interest rate cuts that would give the U.S. economy a quick boost. Powell has said the investigation is a pretext to undermine the Fed’s independence to set rates.

Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, said Trump can only fire Powell “for cause,” meaning some kind of misconduct, “so that’s a pretty tall order.”

Supreme Court weighing another Trump removal

Trump’s threat to fire Powell comes as the Supreme Court is weighing the president’s effort to remove another central bank governor, Lisa Cook. Lower courts have so far allowed Cook to remain in her job while her legal challenge to the firing continues. The Supreme Court also seemed likely to keep her on the Fed when the court heard arguments in January. A decision could come any time.

The issue in Cook’s case is whether allegations of mortgage fraud, which she has denied, is a sufficient reason to fire her or a mere pretext masking Trump’s desire to exert more control over U.S. interest rate policy.

The Supreme Court has allowed the firings of the heads of other governmental agencies at the president’s discretion, with no claim that they did anything wrong, while also signaling that it is approaching the independence of the nation’s central bank more cautiouslycalling the Fed “a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity.”

___

AP Writers Seung Min Kim, Mark Sherman, Paul Wiseman, Alanna Durkin Richer, and video journalist Nathan Ellgren contributed to this report.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

The Latest: US blockade of Iranian ports ‘fully implemented’ as Trump says war is near end

Published

on

The Latest: US blockade of Iranian ports ‘fully implemented’ as Trump says war is near end

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending