Our Not-For-Long Free Press

By Chuck Dunning / May 30, 2025

In his Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln called this country “a new nation conceived in liberty” guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law …abridging the freedom of speech, or the press.”

In the 1920s, with the advent of radio and later television, Congress realized the enormous potential in these media for the public good. It deemed the airways as belonging to the public. For the right to use them, license holders would be required to operate in the “public interest, convenience and necessity.”

In 1949, the Federal Communications Commission went a step further and passed what became known as The Fairness Doctrine, requiring radio and television stations to devote airtime to issues of public importance and to present opposing perspectives. But in 1987, the Reagan administration, believing the growth of cable TV and the Internet would guarantee multiple points of view, repealed the Fairness Doctrine.

Today, that guarantee of freedom of the press is under assault like never before. Shortly after he became President-Elect, Donald Trump filed a $10 billion (later $20 billion) lawsuit against CBS alleging a 60 Minutes interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris “was edited in a way to make Harris look good,” something the newscast denies.

Despite CBS News’ contention that it did nothing wrong in its editing, its parent company Paramount is reportedly engaged in settlement talks. Paramount executives are seeking the Trump administration’s approval of a sale to another entertainment firm, Skydance. (www.apnews.com. February5 and April 13, 2025)

For those of you old enough to remember, can you imagine Katharine Graham, former owner of The Washington Post, telling the Post’s Executive Editor Ben Bradlee in 1972 to “go easy on this Watergate thing, I’m getting blowback from the White House”?

In February, the Trump Administration forbade The Associated Press from attending press briefings aboard Air Force One or in the Oval Office because they chose not to change references from the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.

And just this month, the Trump Administration announced they were ending all taxpayer subsidies for NPR and PBS. And no local PBS radio or TV station is allowed to use taxpayer funds for operation.
Why? Because, according to Trump, PBS is spreading “radical woke propaganda disguised as news.” PBS reporters have been kept from covering news at the Pentagon and Oval Office. In response, NPR and three Colorado public radio stations filed suit in federal court May 27 against the Trump Administration.

As our choices for information narrow, we must become even more discerning about our information sources. Ironically, in a 2018 survey by Gallup and The Knight Foundation, the five most unbiased news platforms were USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, NPR, The Associated Press and PBS.

Comparatively, the five MOST biased were Fox News, Breitbart News, MSNBC, HuffPost and CNN.
As an exercise in perceiving bias, note the different headlines from the most biased and unbiased sources (per Gallup) from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s recent testimony before the Senate on the meaning of habeas corpus.

The Associated Press wrote, “Kristi Noem says habeas corpus lets Trump ‘remove people from this country.” (www.apnews.com. May 21, 2025)

Breitbart News, (www.breitbart.com, May 20, 2025) in turn wrote, “U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem misstated the meaning of habeas corpus during a Senate hearing.”

The Huffpost (www.huffpost.com, May 21, 2025), wrote “Democratic senator totally schools Kristi Noem on this key constitutional right.”

How can we fine tune our “bias radars?” The Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) media watch group offers the following tips:

Who are the sources?

Whose point of view is used?

Look for inflammatory language.

Look for lack of context.

Do the headlines match the stories?

Where does the platform’s funding come from?

Are the stories fact-checked?

And watch out for “both-sidesing.” “Webster’s Dictionary says the term “refers to the media or public figures giving credence to the other side of a cause, action, or idea to seem fair or only for the sake of argument when the credibility of that side may be unmerited.”

It’s difficult to follow all of our previously “taken for granted” liberties now under attack. But the ability to gather information in a free, honest and accurate environment is vital. FAIR offers some pro-active actions we can take:

Support independent, non-profit journalism.

Publicly discuss bias, omissions and other issues on social media.

Take part in public demonstrations.

Write the Federal Communications Commission at outreach@fcc.gov or call 1-888-225-5322.

Communicate to your elected representatives. Volunteer for those who reflect your beliefs and are willing to stand up for them.

Chuck Dunning is the retired former Vice President and General Manager of XETV, Channel Six.