From Sept. 17 to Sept. 25, Jimmy Kimmel was jobless. His late-night show was pulled off the air after a controversial monologue about the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. ABC and its parent company, Disney, reasoned for this by calling Kimmel’s remarks “ill-timed and insensitive”, in a BBC report. The backlash was immediate, but not just from Kimmel’s fans. First Amendment rights advocates argued that suspending the show was an attack on Kimmel’s right to free speech. Although Kimmel eventually returned to the air, his temporary silence reflects on a much larger issue: the growing efforts for control over the flow of information in America, from late-night television to public broadcasting itself.
With funding cuts even extending to programs such as Sesame Street, the Trump administration appears to be trying to keep the American people in the dark. NPR and PBS stations have faced large funding reductions after the administration’s decision to cut $500 million from public broadcasting services, leaving them no choice but to scale back on major parts of their operations. The PBS budget was reduced by 21%, forcing the network to cut 100 positions, including 34 immediate layoffs. NPR is predicting a $5 million reduction, meaning fewer local journalism broadcasts and less national programming. These cuts don’t only affect the journalists and staff behind the networks; they threaten millions of Americans with the loss of reliable information. Public broadcasting plays a vital role in ensuring communities stay informed and connected. Limiting access to independent journalism raises serious concerns about transparency and the protection of Americans’ First Amendment rights to free and informed press.
Other reforms in the journalistic world include changes to the structure of the White House press room, a space that hadn’t been changed since the Bush administration modernized it in 2007. The updates allow White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt to take questions from members of the “new press,” a group of podcasters, influencers and independent content creators selected by the administration—meaning most of them lean to the right. During press briefings, Leavitt typically takes 15 to 20 questions, about three quarters of which come from journalists seated in one of the 49 assigned spots, belonging to legacy outlets such as CNN and The New York Times. Members of the new press stand along the sides of the room and usually are allowed about a quarter of the questions. Their questions are often framed in favorable terms, serving as tools to make the administration look good and echo right-wing views. The contrast between the two groups is stark: veteran reporters from traditional outlets tend to ask targeted, accountability-focused questions about major news events, while new press members, such as Cara Castronueva, a journalist with Lindell TV, ask things like, “Will you guys consider releasing the president’s fitness plan? He actually looks healthier than ever before.”
This control over the press room may just seem like a ploy to inflate the Trump administration’s ego, but it does so much more. It takes time away from hard hitting questions that need to be asked. Because of these fillers, established news organizations are unable to get information they need that they can later publish for the American people.
If this trend continues, the future of American journalism stands on unstable ground. The First Amendment was designed to protect citizens from government control over what they can say, hear and know. When funding cuts silence independent reporting and the White House filters which voices get to ask questions, those rights are broken piece by piece. A free press is not a privilege reserved for those in positions of power; it is a necessity for a nation that values truth and accountability. The next chapter of American media should not be defined by censorship and political favoritism, but by transparency, diversity and trust. Protecting the integrity of journalism today is the only way to ensure that future generations are given a democracy where information flows freely, and that in our future we can ensure that the people, not the powerful, decide what matters.
