FCC Commissioner Brennan Carr Shocks Congress: “The FCC Is Not Independent”

A moment during a congressional hearing this week sent shockwaves through Washington—and through the media world.

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr openly stated that the Federal Communications Commission is not an independent agency, contradicting decades of conventional wisdom and even his own agency’s public-facing language. When pressed by a senator who pointed out that the FCC’s website described the agency as “independent,” Carr didn’t hedge.

“The FCC is not independent,” he said plainly.

Moments later, during the hearing itself, the FCC’s website was quietly updated—the word “independent” was removed from its mission statement in real time.

The message could not have been clearer: Carr was not misspeaking. He was clarifying.

“I Work for the President”

Carr’s testimony signaled a sharp departure from the long-standing narrative that federal regulatory agencies operate at arm’s length from political power. His position was blunt: the FCC answers to the president, not to some abstract, neutral standard of independence.

This came amid heightened scrutiny after reports that the FCC had pressured broadcasters earlier this year to pull ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel off the air. Democrats accused Carr of politicizing the agency. Carr’s response was essentially: that’s the reality.

“We’re not the DOJ,” he implied—though, as critics quickly pointed out, recent revelations suggest the DOJ and FBI were hardly independent either, particularly during the Mar-a-Lago raid under the Biden administration.

In Carr’s framing, the outrage over independence rings hollow when the left has spent years applauding regulatory power—until that power is no longer ideologically aligned.

Late Night Comedy, “News,” and FCC Authority

Carr went further, reviving a largely forgotten regulatory issue: the FCC’s “equal opportunity” rule.

Under federal law, broadcasters must offer equal airtime to opposing political candidates—unless the program qualifies as a “bona fide news” show. Over the years, the FCC has classified many late-night programs as news-adjacent, granting them exemptions.

Carr questioned whether that designation still makes sense.

Shows like Jimmy Kimmel Live, The View, and similar programs routinely deliver one-sided political commentary while enjoying the protections of “news” status. Carr suggested it may be time for the FCC to reassess whether these programs truly serve the public interest—or whether they are partisan entertainment masquerading as journalism.

Because ABC holds broadcast licenses, Carr made clear that the FCC has leverage in a way it does not over cable, podcasts, social media, or streaming platforms.

That distinction matters.

The View Enters the Crosshairs

The issue came to a head after comments on The View, where Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg made incendiary remarks comparing life in the United States unfavorably to Iran—statements that even some viewers found shocking for daytime television.

The White House responded sharply, calling Behar an “irrelevant loser” suffering from “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and warning that the show itself could face consequences.

Is The View now under scrutiny?

Possibly.

Carr pointed out that the program has already faced legal trouble, at times being forced to interrupt broadcasts to read multiple legal disclaimers. Ratings have also reportedly declined. In his view, legacy media outlets can no longer assume immunity simply because they align with cultural elites.

Public Interest vs. Partisan Circus

The FCC was created in 1934 under Franklin D. Roosevelt, tasked with regulating the broadcast spectrum in service of “the public interest, convenience, and necessity.” That mandate still applies—but only to broadcast media.

Carr’s argument is that many legacy broadcasters have abandoned that mission, choosing partisan outrage over public service. As evidence, he cited the financial collapse of late-night comedy, noting that shows like Stephen Colbert’s reportedly lose millions of dollars annually.

In his view, this isn’t censorship—it’s market discipline.

“You’re not funny. Nobody’s watching,” was the unspoken message. “So either change—or fail.”

A Media Reckoning in Motion

Carr also referenced recent letters from Skydance, which is seeking to acquire CBS, pledging to reduce bias, appoint an ombudsman, and restore credibility. To Carr, this signals that the pressure is already working.

“This is trust but verify,” he said. “We’re not where we need to be—but we’re getting there.”

The broader implication is unmistakable: the era of untouchable media gatekeepers is ending. Once President Trump shattered the prestige shield around legacy outlets, consequences followed—and those consequences are still unfolding.

The Bottom Line

Brendan Carr didn’t just make news by saying the FCC isn’t independent.

He said the quiet part out loud.

The regulatory state has always been political. The difference now is that the power dynamics are shifting—and for the first time in decades, legacy broadcasters are being told to justify their influence, not assume it.

Whether one views this as overdue accountability or dangerous politicization depends on perspective. But one thing is certain:

The media landscape is changing—and the FCC just announced it’s no longer pretending otherwise.