The First Amendment ensures all Americans five fundamental rights: freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom to petition the government. While the Trump administration has sought to curtail all of these to some extent, it has focused many of its attacks on the rights of free speech and a free press.
When government agencies threaten regulatory consequences based on speech content itself, such as the Federal Communications Commission leveraging broadcast licensing to influence programming, it is unconstitutional coercion. The practice of “jawboning,” where government officials use informal pressure rather than formal regulation to influence private companies’ behavior, occupies a dangerous gray area. We need transparency standards to distinguish legitimate government communication from coercive overreach.
Beyond government action, strategic lawsuits from powerful entities create a chilling effect on both free speech and freedom of the press. When critics, commentators, and news organizations must weigh not just the truth of their statements but also whether they can afford to defend them in court, public discourse suffers. The landmark protections of New York Times v. Sullivan, requiring public figures to prove “actual malice” in defamation claims, have safeguarded journalism for decades, but now face erosion through expensive litigation tactics. Codifying and strengthening these press protections is essential.
The freedom of the press works in tandem with free speech to ensure that all journalists — even news anchors, comedians, and influencers — can investigate, report, and criticize institutions and government officials without fear of retaliation. When government officials pressure advertisers or use regulatory agencies to punish media outlets or broadcasters for critical coverage, they strike at the heart of free speech in their blatant attempts to control what people watch, read, or listen to — or what they think.
When a single corporation or individual controls significant portions of our speech infrastructure — including streaming services, social media platforms, and traditional media — this person or company wields unprecedented power over public discourse. Modernizing media consolidation rules and promoting competition prevent any single entity from becoming a gatekeeper to the public square. With increased competition and user choice, people can select platforms whose policies align with their values, rather than being locked into dominant players whose content policies are formulated to appease powerful government officials that change with the tide.
Public Knowledge works to defend free speech and freedom of the press to sustain our democracy, guard against government overreach, and facilitate the truth. We advocate for transparent government communication with companies to help guard against coercive actions that infringe on free speech or threaten journalism and open public discourse. We also champion expanding press protections to defend media against frivolous lawsuits and false defamation claims that are often used to silence publications. Furthermore, we urge Congress to provide the necessary oversight of independent agencies — including the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Trade Commission — to prevent any abuse of power to silence speech on behalf of any administration. Finally, we advocate for a diverse, competitive landscape across all forms of media so that consumers have the power to choose the outlets, platforms, and voices that resonate most with them and support their local communities.
View our First Amendment resource page to learn more about the coordinated efforts to encroach upon or undermine our First Amendment rights.