As a key contributor to "Project 2025" Brendan Carr is unequivocally a toady of the current regime which Senator Ed Markey, Mass., correctly called him on.  
As abhorrant as this FCC stance was, a continuing issue for Democrats and REAL Republicans is surely whether to consider rescinding Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act due to the abject failure of the social media technopolies to meaningfully regulate their content gutters. (The Section reflects a key provision that grants limited federal immunity to providers and users of interactive computer services from being held liable for information provided by others. Enacted as part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, it allows platforms to host user-generated content without being treated as the publisher or speaker of that content. This section has been pivotal in shaping the internet by protecting online platforms from legal repercussions related to user content.)  

Why NATO, US & European nations shouldn't have let Putin invade Crimea & Donbas that was wrong on so many levels. Kinda surprised Putin didn't go on a full-blown attack on Ukraine in 2014 or 2015 truth be told slap tariffs on Russia and make them go broke.   

@Mark Winslow: Interesting point, but also mostly whataboutism. My column was about the characterization -- and reaction -- of FCC Chairman Brendan Carr during a Congressional hearing about threats he made to media he regulates (TV stations). The FCC doesn't regulate social media platforms, which are inherently unregulated -- and indemnified from any liability of the content they distribute, thanks to Section 230 of the Communications Act.

And personally, I don't think you can compare the White House pressuring social media networks to moderate misinformation to the head of the FCC threatening government licensed TV stations for broadcasting a comedian whose humor the administration didn't like.

One was pressure, jawboning, "extensive communications," or whatever you want to call it on companies the White House had no regulatory power over. The other was an explicit threat to TV station owners, who are licensed by the FCC.

Interesting piece, but it's worth remembering that government pressure on social media content moderation wasn't invented by Republicans.

Under the Biden administration:Mark Zuckerberg publicly stated in 2024 that senior White House officials 'repeatedly pressured' Meta for months to censor COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, and that he regretted complying in some cases.

The Missouri v. Biden (later Murthy v. Missouri) case uncovered extensive communications where the White House, CDC, FBI, and other agencies flagged posts and urged platforms to remove or suppress content on COVID vaccines, election integrity, and even the Hunter Biden laptop story. A federal judge initially called it an 'almost dystopian' censorship effort, and the 5th Circuit found likely First Amendment violations (though the Supreme Court later ruled on standing).

Internal documents (e.g., Twitter Files, House Judiciary reports) showed platforms changing policies in response to Biden admin demands, including censoring true information that didn't violate their own rules.

Both sides have raised valid free speech concerns at different times—let's hold all administrations accountable without selective memory.

Nice report, Ray. It's sad to note that print media is in such a down position that it can no longer fund the kind of media promotion effort that the MPA nad the newspaper folks once put out. So, now, it's up the the Audit Bureau Of Circulation--under its new name --to get the message out. 

In what world is this legal?

R.I.P. Rob Reiner & his wife Michelle very sad as well.

Thank you Adam. I'm more of the All in the Family era and he was terrific in that show. I knew about Spinal Tap, but learned about his involvement in most of the other producations in the last few sad days. What a talent. Agree with Linda above; true last line. RIP!

Thank you for posting this column. Although I am one of the masses that did not know him personally, I have been unable to shake the sadness that I feel over this very profound loss. My very deepest condolences to his family and friends. I can't imagine the depths of their sadness. 

True last line  Thanks Adam

Correction on my last post. I meant minutes per day, not week, in my "All In The Family" analysis.

Tony, many years ago, I calculated what the mega hit sitcom, "All In The Family",added to TV's overall vieing and it came to only 6 minutes per week out of about 260 minutes viewed per person.. Point being, no single attraction -even the entire NFL season-- captures more than a small fraction of total TV usage. For example, the NFL games probably account for only 2-3% when tallied across a full year. In that context, I doubt that The Premium League would add much to the sports total--which is a survey finding subject to error, interpretation, etc.

Ed:  What about "real" football, e.g. Premier League, as opposed to the US gladiator sport?  Maybe its increasing popularity and the World Cup in NA next year will effect the Sport's share a tick or two in 2026? 
  

I was very happy that Mendoza won the Hiesman great guy from interviews I have seen.

Well said Ed, I agree Nielsen should put the numbers out.

Yep, thanks mainly to football sports was an important pillar of remaining strength for broadcast TV in November. However it's impact will, no doubt, decline as we get into the full basketball and baseball seasons and the likely average for the next twelve months will probably  be around 20-25% for broadcast TV, about 9-10% for cable and less for CTV. Put all three together, weighted by their platforms' respective shares of audience, and  it probably averages out for all of "TV" to around 12%. I wish that Nielsen would provide such numbers in its reports or commentaries to provide some context.

No attempt to get the other side of the story? This is very one-sided.

No matter how many scenarios the programmers will anticipate and provide for, there will always be something new and different in real life, that the programming will do the exact wrong thing for, by default.  For example, tall buildings or tunnels can block GPS and cause the program to put on the brakes on the highway.

They are not actually safe at all.  They can not differentiate between a light pole and a child waiting on a curb, and will not slow down while passing the child.  The sensors will eventually all fail, from things like dust or corrosion.  To be safe, they would need daily testing.  That's not going to happen.  They can't pass a driver's test, so should never be legal.

@Brian Bieron: I have heard of Google and written about it in the past, including how it indexes images published on the Web. This column was about chatbots -- including Google's Gemini -- and how they generate things that may not be appropriate for children.

Have you ever tried using this new technology called Google to find artwork like you describe? It totally works.

Last week I was solicited on Linkedin and offered front-row seats to the Rockettes at Radio City Music Hall -- in exchange for listening to a financial-services software pitch. It made me feel ikcy AND the Rockettes (and holiday musical variety shows in general) are not my thing.

Too bad they aren't really measuring attention.