Free Press Calls for End to Carr’s Unconstitutional Crusade Against ABC 86%

By Newswire Editor98%

7/30/2026, 2:27:33 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Burden of Proof, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 63% saturation with 419 hits. Analysis detected 2,760 faulty-reasoning hits from 665 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 71.9% and a BS Rank of 86% (4,029 of 27,714 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 85.50% of the article peer group.

On Wednesday, Free Press called out Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr for engaging in a political crusade against broadcaster ABC that not only violates free speech rights but distorts and weaponizes existing agency rules and procedures in service of a censorial president. 
In a filing in the FCC docket regarding early license reviews of eight ABC affiliated and owned stations, Free Press called the proceeding “an arbitrary and capricious abuse of power, ordered by Brendan Carr to exact the revenge Donald Trump demands against ABC for exercising its First Amendment rights.” 
In June, Free Press stated in a similar filing on the contents of the show The View that the agency’s proceeding against ABC stations “never should have been opened.” 
It condemned the politicized campaign from the White House and FCC to silence the voices of people who disagree with or challenge the president and his views. 
Chairman Carr has insisted that this bogus proceeding is an investigation into allegations that Disney engaged in “invidious discrimination.” 
But the agency has not identified any specific allegations of discrimination by Disney, ABC or its local stations, reads Free Press latest filing . 
“That Chairman Carr is willing to place Disney’s entire broadcasting operation in jeopardy without a single specific allegation of unlawful behavior is further evidence of the corruption that undergirds this proceeding and Carr’s reign at the Commission,” Free Press adds. 
Matt Wood , Free Press’ vice president of policy and coauthor of the filing, said: 
“The only just ending to Carr’s circus, and the only way for him to stop trampling the First Amendment freedoms he swore to uphold, is to to close this proceeding now and rescind the trumped-up charges that started it. 
“The ridiculous notion expressed by the Trump FCC is that this extraordinary proceeding allows the FCC to conduct an ongoing investigation into Disney’s supposed violations of agency rules. 
But there’s absolutely nothing about the process of early renewal that would aid that supposed investigation. 
That inquiry is just a rotten fig leaf to provide cover for Brendan Carr using the FCC’s investigatory powers to harass, intimidate, and punish ABC for its speech. 
“If the FCC were acting in good faith, it would have conducted and completed a full and fair investigation of Disney’s compliance with existing rules and the law first. 
But giving Disney due process under the law and respecting its First Amendment rights would not deliver Donald Trump the revenge he seeks, hence the existence of this corrupt, arbitrary and capricious early renewal proceeding. 
“Even if Disney had engaged in some kind of discrimination, there’s no reason and no precedent for threatening its broadcast licenses over such behavior. 
The partisan nature of this whole endeavor couldn’t be clearer. 
Brendan Carr says not a word about a conservative broadcaster like Sinclair, approving its acquisition of more stations even as that company settles employment discrimination suits with the Trump EEOC. 
Yet for ABC, Carr’s embarrassing himself again by concocting this utterly shameful censorship campaign on behalf of a petty president. 
“This kind of capricious law enforcement has no place in a legitimate democracy. 
The law and U.S. 
Constitution do not permit Brendan Carr and the FCC to violate Disney’s and the public’s rights because the President’s ego demands it. 
In its haste to please Trump, the agency has chilled the speech of every licensee, and placed Disney in a lose-lose situation. 
Even if the FCC does nothing following this pleading cycle, the order for an early license renewal will continue to be a threat to Disney’s licenses, and will undoubtedly alter how broadcasters exercise their First Amendment-protected right to free speech and freedom of the press. 
“At some level, Carr must know that his claims against ABC are bogus. 
But legal and statutory integrity aren’t the point with this chairman. 
Carr is more than happy to browbeat and jawbone broadcasters into silence though his claims have zero legal merit.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 51.0%Newswire editor: 8.7%Common Dreams: 7.9%Confirmation Bias51.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 1.5%Common Dreams: 1.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.4%Newswire editor: 5.3%Common Dreams: 4.6%Availability Heuristic7.4%This article: 3.6%Newswire editor: 0.8%Common Dreams: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic3.6%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.5%Common Dreams: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 1.8%Common Dreams: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 28.7%Newswire editor: 18.8%Common Dreams: 16.8%Framing Effect28.7%This article: 3.3%Newswire editor: 1.9%Common Dreams: 1.4%Loss Aversion3.3%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.8%Common Dreams: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.2%Common Dreams: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.4%Newswire editor: 1.4%Common Dreams: 1.4%Optimism Bias4.4%This article: 10.2%Newswire editor: 3.4%Common Dreams: 3.1%Pessimism Bias10.2%This article: 63.0%Newswire editor: 19.6%Common Dreams: 19.2%Negativity Bias63.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.8%Common Dreams: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 20.5%Newswire editor: 2.7%Common Dreams: 2.3%Fundamental Attribution Error20.5%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.1%Common Dreams: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 3.1%Common Dreams: 3.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 1.3%Common Dreams: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.7%Common Dreams: 1.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.8%Common Dreams: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 1.4%Common Dreams: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.5%Common Dreams: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 16.2%Newswire editor: 5.7%Common Dreams: 6.6%Ad Hominem16.2%This article: 4.1%Newswire editor: 0.9%Common Dreams: 1.2%Straw Man4.1%This article: 6.0%Newswire editor: 5.3%Common Dreams: 5.0%Appeal to Authority6.0%This article: 14.4%Newswire editor: 4.3%Common Dreams: 3.6%False Dilemma14.4%This article: 6.8%Newswire editor: 3.6%Common Dreams: 3.4%Slippery Slope6.8%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.2%Common Dreams: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 22.0%Newswire editor: 9.3%Common Dreams: 8.2%Hasty Generalization22.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.2%Common Dreams: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 2.1%Common Dreams: 2.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 33.1%Newswire editor: 19.8%Common Dreams: 18.2%Appeal to Emotion33.1%This article: 14.4%Newswire editor: 4.0%Common Dreams: 3.5%Begging the Question14.4%This article: 10.7%Newswire editor: 4.4%Common Dreams: 3.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.7%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.2%Common Dreams: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 39.7%Newswire editor: 1.8%Common Dreams: 1.4%Burden of Proof39.7%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.2%Common Dreams: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.6%Common Dreams: 0.5%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.5%Newswire editor: 2.0%Common Dreams: 1.9%Anecdotal1.5%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 1.9%Common Dreams: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.1%Common Dreams: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.0%Common Dreams: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.4%Common Dreams: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.3%Common Dreams: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 1.7%Common Dreams: 1.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 10.7%Newswire editor: 2.5%Common Dreams: 2.3%Quote-first Misdirection10.7%This article: 25.6%Newswire editor: 15.3%Common Dreams: 16.4%Biased Writer Voice25.6%This article: 5.9%Newswire editor: 10.7%Common Dreams: 8.2%Indoctrination5.9%This article: 12.0%Newswire editor: 18.9%Common Dreams: 16.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias12.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.6%Common Dreams: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newswire editor: 0.9%Common Dreams: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

665 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers82%attributed speech119writer words
Selected voice

Free Press

100%flagged-word coverage
142 attributed words26% of attributed speech84% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Biased Writer Voice-39.9 ptsWriter: 68.1%Free Press: 28.2%28.2%Quote-first Misdirection-36.1 ptsWriter: 36.1%Free Press: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B+25.3 ptsWriter: 9.2%Free Press: 34.5%34.5%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.