Media freedom in the U.S. has rarely felt more contested—and Donald Trump’s escalating threats to strip major TV networks of their licenses sit right at the center of that tension. At the heart of this story is a big question: should a sitting president be able to use the power of government to punish news organizations he believes treat him unfairly? And this is the part most people miss: many of the licenses he talks about don’t actually work the way he suggests.
Donald Trump has repeatedly lashed out at television news outlets he views as hostile, floating the idea that they should lose their licenses as a form of punishment for what he calls biased or dishonest coverage. The latest flare-up came after a tense back-and-forth with ABC News White House correspondent Mary Bruce, who pressed him on two highly sensitive issues: the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and the scandal surrounding Jeffrey Epstein. In response, Trump said that ABC deserved consequences and argued that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should revoke what he described as the network’s license.
However, there is a critical structural detail in U.S. broadcasting that often gets lost in these heated exchanges. The FCC does not grant a single, blanket license to national networks like ABC, NBC, or CBS. Instead, it licenses individual local television stations, which can either be owned directly by the networks or operate as affiliates under contractual agreements. That means when Trump talks about “taking away” a network’s license, the legal mechanics are far more complex than his rhetoric implies—and this gap between political messaging and regulatory reality is one of the most misunderstood parts of the debate.
FCC power and political threats
Anna M. Gomez, currently the sole Democratic commissioner on the FCC, has publicly described Trump’s threats as largely empty. She has emphasized that this FCC does not have broad power to retaliate against a national news network simply because politicians dislike its coverage, even if they can make life more difficult for specific companies in limited ways. She also pointed out that no relevant local station licenses are scheduled for renewal any time soon, making immediate punitive action through license renewal even less realistic.
This raises a provocative point: if the legal tools to punish networks for their reporting are so limited, are repeated threats mainly about influencing public opinion rather than actual regulation? Supporters might argue that Trump is merely applying political pressure to push for more “honest” coverage, while critics see it as a dangerous attempt to intimidate the free press. But here’s where it gets controversial: even if the FCC does nothing, the constant talk of “taking licenses away” can still chill journalism by signaling that tough reporting may carry political risks.
A pattern dating back to 2017
Trump’s comments about revoking broadcast licenses are not a one-off reaction; they form a clear pattern stretching back at least eight years. Analyses of his public remarks and social media activity show that he has suggested, in various forms, at least 28 times that a TV network should lose its license due to what he calls “fake” or unfair coverage. This isn’t just occasional venting—it’s a recurring theme in his clashes with the press.
The earliest examples in this series date to October 2017. On 11 October of that year, he posted messages complaining that network news had become “partisan” and “distorted,” arguing that licenses should be challenged and, when “appropriate,” revoked. In a separate post the same day, he singled out NBC and other networks, asking rhetorically at what point it becomes acceptable to “challenge their license” because of what he labeled as fake news. Even then, the idea that licensing could be used as a disciplinary tool for unfavorable coverage was front and center.
2018: Criticism focused on NBC
By September 2018, Trump had sharpened his attacks on NBC in particular. In a message from 4 September 2018, he called NBC “fake news,” tying this label to controversies over how the network had handled reporting on the Harvey Weinstein story. He accused NBC of scrambling to justify what he painted as “highly unethical” behavior, and he used this controversy to reinforce his longstanding criticism of the network’s journalism standards.
He even claimed that NBC’s approach to reporting was worse than that of CNN, another frequent target of his media broadsides. The punchline of that message was a pointed question: “Look at their license?”—suggesting that their broadcasting rights should be scrutinized because of their editorial decisions. And this is the part most people miss: rather than focusing on specific legal violations, these calls usually tie licensing to perceived bias or political stance, which is precisely what worries press freedom advocates.
2020: Rally rhetoric in Minnesota
The theme resurfaced strongly during the 2020 campaign. On 18 September 2020, at a rally in Minnesota, Trump talked about the “old days” when using the public airwaves for free required obtaining a license. He argued that if networks were reporting “fake news,” it made little sense that they continued to hold those licenses without consequence. He listed ABC, NBC, CBS, and especially CNN—mocking CNN and referring to MSNBC with the derisive nickname “MSDNC”—as examples of outlets that, in his view, did not deserve their place on the airwaves.
This framing is especially contentious because it equates critical coverage with dishonesty and then uses that label to justify stripping regulatory approval. Supporters might say he is defending viewers against misinformation, but critics wonder: if political leaders can threaten licenses whenever coverage is negative, what happens to robust investigative reporting? Does journalism become dependent on keeping those in power happy?
2024: Escalating clashes with ABC, NBC, CNN, and CBS
By 2024, Trump’s language about licenses and major networks had grown more frequent and more intense, particularly as he campaigned across key states.
- On 16 January 2024, at a rally in New Hampshire, he complained that NBC and CNN had refused to air his victory speech. He labeled them “crooked” and “dishonest” and argued that their licenses—or whatever legal authority they used to broadcast—should be taken away.
- On 11 September 2024, during an appearance on “Fox & Friends,” he declared that ABC had taken a “big hit” after a particular event and insisted that because ABC was a news organization, it needed a license. He argued that the government should “take away their license” based on how they handled that coverage.
The next day, 12 September 2024, he continued the attack in a Truth Social post, warning that politicians should avoid debating on ABC News entirely. He claimed ABC was “not worthy” of hosting debates and called for an investigation into whether the network had supplied debate questions in advance to then–Vice President Kamala Harris, whom he referred to as “Comrade Kamala.” He pointed out that one of her close friends was allegedly a top ABC executive and suggested that if debate questions were indeed shared, ABC’s license should be “terminated.”
He also invoked Donna Brazile, noting that she worked for ABC and recalling past accusations that she had given debate questions to Hillary Clinton. This post illustrates how Trump blends prior controversies, personal accusations, and claims of political bias into an argument for revoking a network’s ability to broadcast. But here’s where it gets controversial: this moves the conversation from policy disagreements to claims that networks are effectively election actors who deserve regulatory punishment.
October 2024: The “60 Minutes” firestorm
Tensions reached another peak in October 2024, with CBS and its flagship news magazine “60 Minutes” becoming Trump’s main target.
- On 10 October 2024, he posted that “60 Minutes” was a key part of CBS’s news operation and accused the network of creating what he called the “greatest fraud in broadcast history.” He argued that CBS should lose its license and that those licenses should be auctioned off to the highest bidder. In his view, all broadcast licenses deserved this treatment because, he claimed, other networks were just as corrupt, or worse.
- In another Truth Social post that same day, he accused CBS and “60 Minutes” of staging a “fake news scam,” alleging that the program had replaced a public figure’s real answer—one he described as “crazy” or “dumb”—with a different response to make her look better. He described this alleged editing as totally illegal and ended with an all-caps demand: “TAKE AWAY THE CBS LICENSE.”
Trump returned to the theme again that day, insisting that CBS’s license was worth billions of dollars and alleging that the network paid nothing for it. He described all the major networks as “crooked,” linking their alleged dishonesty to the privileges they enjoy on public airwaves. This argument taps into a broader populist sentiment: why, he asks, should massively profitable corporations be allowed to use valuable public spectrum without paying large fees if they are “lying” to viewers?
The next day, 11 October 2024, at a rally in Nevada, he said “60 Minutes” should be taken off the air entirely because of what he claimed they had done. He argued that the networks’ licenses are worth billions but insisted that these licenses come with a requirement: broadcasters must be honest. He labeled “60 Minutes” and CBS’s behavior as “election interference” and told the crowd they were interfering with the election, asking the audience to validate that view and again calling for them to lose their license.
Mid–October 2024: Repetition across interviews and rallies
Through mid-October 2024, Trump continued hammering CBS and “60 Minutes” across multiple platforms.
- On 12 October 2024, in an interview with Newsmax host Chris Salcedo, he argued that CBS pays nothing for its license and insisted that the license should be taken away. He said they had violated the “covenant” of the license, suggesting that they had broken a fundamental agreement with the public.
- On 13 October 2024, in an interview with Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo, he again said that “60 Minutes” and CBS should lose their license, offering this as a straightforward consequence of their alleged misconduct.
On 17 October 2024, another Truth Social post repeated the message with even more urgency, calling for “60 Minutes” to be “immediately taken off the air” and labeling the situation “election interference.” He asserted that CBS should lose its license and described the events as the “biggest scandal in broadcast history.” This kind of language is designed to frame the issue not just as bias or bad journalism, but as a historic-level fraud.
In a 18 October 2024 radio interview with Dan Bongino, Trump again said conditions were so bad that CBS should lose its license and “60 Minutes” should be taken off the air. And on 21 October 2024 at a rally in North Carolina, he repeated that “60 Minutes” and CBS ought to lose their license and be taken off the airwaves. Two days later, on 22 October 2024, at another North Carolina rally, he reminded the audience that CBS must be licensed by the federal government and said that license should be taken away.
Late October–November 2024: Broadening the target list
The rhetoric continued to escalate toward the end of October 2024 and into early November, with Trump widening his criticism to include more networks.
- On 25 October 2024 in Michigan, he declared that CBS should lose its license and claimed that the government gives licenses to what he called “NBC fake news,” “ABC fake news,” and “CBS fake news.” He argued that if they had to pay for these licenses, the cost would run into the billions, but instead they use public airwaves for free. He stressed that the key condition of these licenses is honesty, and claimed the networks had been “very dishonest.”
- On 29 October 2024, in an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity, he again said that “60 Minutes” and CBS should lose their license, insisting that the issue went beyond editing and constituted something more serious.
On 31 October 2024 at a Nevada rally, Trump said CBS should lose its license and added that ABC should also lose its license because of “what they’ve done,” hinting at a broader pattern of misconduct in his view. He left some room for suspense by saying, “We’ll see,” but repeated that these licenses are worth billions of dollars and should be taken away.
On 1 November 2024, at a rally in Wisconsin, he said that because of what “60 Minutes” and CBS had done, their license should be removed. He added that “60 Minutes” should either be shut down or forced to take an “extended stay,” implying a prolonged suspension from broadcasting.
In a 2 November 2024 appearance on “Fox & Friends Weekend,” Trump said that “on behalf of the people,” his side had sued “60 Minutes” and CBS. He argued that their license should be taken away and called the situation the greatest breach and greatest insult to American citizens. This framing turns a dispute over coverage into a claim that viewers themselves have been fundamentally wronged.
2025: Renewed attacks and lawsuits
The pattern did not stop after the 2024 election cycle. Through 2025, Trump continued using both social media and public appearances to push the idea that certain networks should lose their licenses.
- On 6 February 2025, in a Truth Social post, he said CBS should lose its license and called the people at “60 Minutes” “cheaters.” He argued that the show should be “immediately terminated,” casting it as completely disreputable as a news program.
- On 13 April 2025, another Truth Social post described him as “honored” to be suing “60 Minutes,” CBS, and Paramount over what he called “fraudulent” reporting. He alleged that they had done everything possible to illegally help elect Kamala Harris, including drastically altering major answers in an interview. He argued that they were not really a news show but a partisan political operation disguised as news, and insisted they must be held responsible.
In the same post, he said they should lose their license and expressed hope that the FCC, led by its chairman Brendan Carr—whom he described as “highly respected”—would impose maximum fines and penalties for what he called their illegal behavior. He claimed CBS was “out of control” at unprecedented levels and said they should pay a “big price,” ending with his familiar slogan, “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” This blends regulatory demands with campaign-style rhetoric, blurring the line between legal argument and political rallying cry.
On 24 August 2025, Trump shifted his focus back to ABC and NBC in another Truth Social post. He asked why ABC and NBC, which he called among the most biased networks in the world, were not paying millions of dollars a year in license fees. He argued that they should lose their licenses for what he described as unfair coverage of Republicans and conservatives, or at least pay large sums for the privilege of using what he called the most valuable airwaves in the world. He concluded that “crooked journalism” should not be rewarded but “terminated,” reinforcing his idea that biased coverage warrants regulatory punishment.
Fall 2025: “97% negative” and foreign-stage criticism
The theme carried through into the fall of 2025, with Trump continuing to frame hostile coverage as justification for license threats.
- On 18 September 2025, speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, he claimed he had read that networks were “97%” against him and that he received 97% negative coverage despite winning “easily,” including all seven swing states and the popular vote. He argued that if networks give him only bad publicity while holding licenses, perhaps those licenses should be taken away. He added that the ultimate decision would rest with FCC chair Brendan Carr, again tying his threats to a specific regulator.
- On 5 October 2025, in another Truth Social post, he said this was one of many reasons the FCC should look into NBC’s license, asserting that the network showed almost exclusively positive content about Democrats. He said ABC “fake news” was similar, claiming coverage was about 97% negative toward Republicans.
Perhaps most strikingly, on 18 November 2025, during a bilateral meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Trump criticized ABC in front of an international audience. He said ABC’s news was “so fake and so wrong” that the network’s license should be taken away. He urged that the FCC chairman look into it, arguing that if ABC’s coverage is 97% negative toward Trump, yet he still wins the election by a landslide, then the network’s news is obviously not credible and its reporters are not credible either.
That moment is particularly controversial because it involves a U.S. president criticizing and threatening an American network’s license while speaking alongside a foreign leader—especially one associated with the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. It raises a hard question: does airing these grievances on the international stage undermine U.S. claims to defend press freedom globally?
The bigger debate: bias vs. press freedom
Trump and his supporters argue that the mainstream networks are hopelessly biased, sometimes citing statistics—like the idea that 97% of coverage is negative—to claim that these organizations are effectively acting as political opponents rather than neutral reporters. From that perspective, threatening licenses can be framed as holding powerful media companies accountable for what they see as one-sided or deceptive coverage.
Critics, however, argue that using the language of licensing and government power in response to negative reporting is deeply dangerous for a democracy. They warn that if presidents can threaten to revoke broadcast rights whenever they dislike news coverage, journalists will face intense pressure to soften or avoid stories that might anger those in power. The legal system and the FCC have so far acted as a guardrail, but the rhetoric itself can still influence newsroom decisions and public trust.
And this is the part most people miss: the battle here is not only over facts and fairness, but over who gets to define what “fake news” means—and whether the government should be allowed to enforce that definition by deciding who gets access to the airwaves.
So what do you think: are these repeated calls for revoking TV licenses a justified way to push back against media bias, or are they a dangerous attack on press freedom that future presidents might expand even further? Do you agree with Trump that networks should lose their licenses over “unfair” coverage, or do you believe that’s a line political leaders should never cross? Share whether you agree, disagree, or see some middle ground in the comments—this is exactly the kind of debate that shapes how democracy and media will coexist in the years ahead.
