FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez

Companies in America have always looked to hire based on merit. That’s what’s best for their bottom lines.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) discrimination is a myth.

It is shameful that any company would co-sign this lie.

Protecting speech from government interference is part of what makes America free.

Unfettered media consolidation has real consequences.

When business interests outweigh the public interest, communities face layoffs, shrinking newsrooms, and fewer local stories.

Nothing is more American than defending our constitutional rights against those who would erode our civil liberties.

If broadcasters choose to participate in this FCC campaign, they can do so by defending their First Amendment rights and refusing government interference.

The FCC is engaged in a campaign of censorship and control.

They may not have ordered The Late Show interview pulled.

But when government interferes in editorial decisions, broadcasters are forced to self-censor or push back.

CBS chose not to push back.

We knew the FCC is targeting The View.

Like other so-called "investigations" before it, it will amount to nothing.

As I said before: this is government intimidation, not a legitimate investigation.

The FCC is powerless to restrict protected speech, and any attempt to intimidate broadcasters into self-censorship undermines both press freedom and public trust.

I once again urge broadcasters and their parent companies to stand firm against these unlawful pressures.

FCC Commissioner Gomez statement pictured, and partially transcribed in posts.

CBS is fully protected under the First Amendment to determine what interviews it airs.

That makes its decision to yield to political pressure all the more disappointing.

Corporate interests cannot justify retreating from airing newsworthy content.

Read my full speech at #SOTN2026 on the dangers of unchecked media consolidation: docs.fcc.gov/public/attac...

That does not mean we should ignore the real economic challenges facing broadcasters.

We should pursue targeted, market-specific policies that help local media respond to the realities of streaming competition, declining advertising revenue, and changing consumer habits.

Decisions about media consolidation today will shape
whether broadcast television continues to serve as a source of local accountability, or whether it follows the same path that left so many communities without a meaningful local newspaper presence.

Competition policy is not an end in itself.

It is a means to an end, and that end is
supposed to be consumers.

Commissioner Gomez at State of the Net

The FCC should not be in the business of managing media consolidation as an inevitability.

Its role is to ensure that competition remains real, that consumers benefit, and that local communities are not sacrificed in the name of corporate growth.
#SOTN2026

Looking ahead, I’m excited about how telecom advancements can help tackle big challenges, especially in accessibility.

From autonomous vehicles on the ground and in the air to smarter infrastructure, technology shouldn’t replace humanity, but give us more time to be human.

The greatest legacy of the Telecom Act of ’96 was opening the door to competition with guardrails.

It expanded consumer choice and helped fuel the growth of wireless and broadband, powering everyday tools like smartphones that we now take for granted.

30 years ago, the 1996 Telecom Act reshaped communications.

I was lucky to be at the FCC as a legal advisor in the Common Carrier Bureau helping implement it.

We worked hard for the promise of technology, without knowing where it would lead. 🧵

Happy Super Bowl Sunday! 🏈

As a reminder: broadcasters must follow FCC broadcast rules, including during major events like the Super Bowl.

But political statements remain constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment, regardless of the viewpoint being expressed.

Trump's FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has weaponized the agency, shaking down merger-seeking companies, launching bogus investigations, and pushing the agency into the middle of a culture war.

This isn't what @agomezfcc.bsky.social signed up for.

Q&A with Anna Gomez: www.freepress.net/blog/qa-fcc-...

Here is more information on the FCC's equal time rules ⬇️

The First Amendment protects the right of daytime and late-night programs to cover newsworthy issues and express viewpoints without government interference.

I urge broadcasters and their parent networks to stand strong against these unfounded attacks.

The real purpose is to weaponize the FCC’s regulatory authority to intimidate perceived critics of this Administration and chill protected speech. That is not how a free society operates.

FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez issued the following statement after a report that the FCC plans to launch an investigation against ABC’s The View:

Like many other so-called "investigations" before it, the FCC will announce an investigation but never carry one out, reach a conclusion, or take any meaningful action.

This is government intimidation, not a legitimate investigation. 🧵

It’s true.

The FCC is proposing major changes to the Lifeline program that would make it harder for eligible households to qualify for support to stay connected and participate in the digital economy.

The result? Higher costs for families.

This Administration is engaged in a full-frontal assault on the First Amendment.

It has weaponized the FCC against broadcasters and government critics. Now it is arresting journalists.

These actions undermine the core freedoms on which our democracy depends.

As we’ve done in the past, I support targeted reforms that preserve the integrity and success of the Lifeline program.

But this FCC proposal goes far beyond that.

It risks turning connectivity into a political tool, instead of treating it like the essential service it is.

The FCC is proposing changes that would make it harder for EVERYONE who is eligible for the Lifeline program to qualify for support that lowers monthly phone and home internet bills.

That could mean higher costs 📈💰 for families just to stay connected.

Graphic displaying text in post with pictured individuals

What’s at stake under the FCC’s proposal?

⚫️Families could lose up to $9.25/month (already not enough)

⚫️Tribal families could lose up to $34.25/month

These new barriers to this proven and effective federal program could make it harder for families to afford to stay connected.

Graphic displaying text in post with pictured individuals

What’s at stake under the FCC’s proposal?

⚫️Families could lose up to $9.25/month (already not enough)

⚫️Tribal families could lose up to $34.25/month

These new barriers to this proven and effective federal program could make it harder for families to afford to stay connected.

Connectivity should be treated as an essential service and not be used as a political tool.

As the FCC moves forward with this proposal, my focus will continue to be on ensuring that our policies expand opportunity, lower costs, and keep families connected.

I support efforts to protect the integrity and success of the Lifeline program.

But by proposing to use the same cruel and punitive eligibility standards recently imposed for Medicaid coverage, the FCC risks excluding large numbers of eligible households from a proven lifeline.