Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

Opinion

video camera
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com


HTTP Executive Director JudeAnne Heath clearly captured the stakes. “This advocacy day is about protecting local news as civic infrastructure, not corporate content,” she told lawmakers. “When media ownership becomes too concentrated, decisions about what communities see and hear can be driven by company priorities instead of public need… If waivers or exemptions are handed out to circumvent the law, it's a slippery slope for all mergers across all industries.”

Her warning mirrors what senators themselves raised during Tuesday's Commerce Committee hearing. Lawmakers questioned whether eliminating the national ownership cap would undermine local journalism at a moment when communities are already losing reporters at alarming rates. As The Hill reported, several senators expressed concern that the Nexstar–Tegna merger “stirred questions about the future of local news and media competitiveness” during the hearing.

Critics of the proposal, including Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy, argued that removing the ownership cap would give major broadcasters outsized influence and leave smaller, independent media companies struggling to compete for audiences and advertising revenue.

“We need more independent media and more competition, not less,” Ruddy said, testifying before the panel. “Large station groups hold enormous leverage over pay TV operators through retransmission fees.”

The hearing also highlighted the political pressure surrounding the deal. President Trump has urged regulators to approve the merger, calling it a way to “knock out the Fake News” and expand competition. But senators from both parties pushed back on the idea that the FCC should simply clear the path. One lawmaker cautioned that eliminating the cap outright would “further weaken local TV news” at a time when many communities have already lost their last remaining newsroom.

senate committee on commerce Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ranking member Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) (R) questions witnesses during a hearing in the Russell Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on February 10, 2026 in Washington, DC. The hearing explored the proposed $3.5 billion acquisition of Tegna Inc. by Nexstar Media Group, which would create the largest regional TV station operator in the United States. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington also warned that large‑scale media consolidation would reduce, not expand, the number of journalists serving local communities. She pointed to Nexstar’s history of merging newsrooms in markets where it controls multiple stations — including Denver — as evidence of the likely impact.

“That is not more local voices; it’s fewer,” Cantwell said.

These concerns aren’t abstract to me. I’ve lived through a major merger myself. In 2001, when General Electric–owned NBC purchased the nation’s second‑largest Spanish‑language broadcaster, Telemundo Communications, I saw firsthand what consolidation looks like. The layoffs came quickly. I was one of them. I watched culturally essential reporting for Latino, rural, and other underserved communities disappear. Consolidation doesn’t just reduce headcount — it narrows perspectives, weakens oversight, and leaves entire regions without journalists who understand their communities.

That’s why I’ve been blunt: media consolidation is a short‑term economic solution to a long‑term economic problem created by C‑suite leadership who are more interested in serving their Board of Directors than the public they’re licensed to serve.

When I served as president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ), I spent years fighting to stop this pattern from repeating across the country. And this year, NAHJ launched Holding the Mic, a year‑long national tour on the future of Latino journalism. The first event kicked off on Monday at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., with a panel on media consolidation and democracy as part of the Save Local Newsrooms: Community-Centered Media Hill Advocacy Day hosted by HTTP.

"Latinos are at the center of many of the most consequential stories in America, yet decisions about the future of journalism are too often made without us," said Yaneth Guillen-Diaz, Executive Director of the NAHJ. The Holding the Mic tour is elevating community voices, exposing structural barriers in the industry, and making clear that the health of local news is a national concern — not a niche issue.

That national concern is now squarely before federal regulators. The proposed Nexstar–Tegna merger would allow a single corporation to control 265 television stations and reach nearly 80% of U.S. households. No matter how it’s framed, that level of concentration is incompatible with a functioning local‑news ecosystem. It would accelerate the collapse of local journalism at a moment when communities need it most.

Congress has the tools — and the responsibility — to intervene. That means:

  • Upholding the 39% national ownership cap
  • Strengthening oversight of TV‑station mergers
  • Protecting and investing in local media
  • Expanding media‑diversity and ownership opportunities

These are not abstract regulatory questions. They determine whether people in small towns, border communities, and multilingual neighborhoods have access to trustworthy information — or whether they are left with a hollowed‑out media landscape dominated by national narratives that ignore their realities.

When local journalism erodes, so does democracy. A healthy democracy depends on reporters who know their communities, reflect their diversity, and hold power to account. Our communities deserve real, trustworthy news and equitable representation — the kind of journalism that keeps democracy alive.

Strengthening local news is strengthening democracy.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of The Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network, and twice president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.


Read More

photograph shows a handheld smartphone displaying the icons of some of the main artificial intelligence based apps

This photograph shows a handheld smartphone displaying the icons of some of the main artificial intelligence based apps, including LLMs, chatbots and generative AI, with logos (from L) of Proton AG's Lumo, Meta AI, Mistral Vibe (formerly Le Chat), xAI's Grok, Microsoft's Copilot, Google's Gemini, Anthropic's Claude, Perplexity, Deepseek, OpenAI's Chat GPT, Google's Notebook LLM and generative AI music app Suno, in Saint-Mande, east of Paris, on July 15, 2026.

Photo by Martin LELIEVRE / AFP via Getty Images)

The Second AI Election: Testing the Safeguards Before November

The 2024 U.S. presidential election was supposed to be the “first AI election.” Experts warned that generative AI could flood voters with deepfakes and fabricated evidence of fraud, U.S. intelligence officials declassified intel reports on foreign influence operations already experimenting with the technology, and leading AI companies pledged to combat deceptive election content. But foreign nations faced significant barriers to deploying AI to influence that election, according to the now-shuttered U.S. Foreign Malign Influence Center.

Two years later, the picture looks very different. AI tools have become far more sophisticated and widely available. Russia, China, and Iran are deploying a wide variety of cutting-edge AI tools in more sophisticated ways in foreign influence operations aimed at the United States and its citizens, among others. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has itself used AI in misleading ways, while at the same time dismantling or defunding the federal and independent bodies that identified and countered election-related influence campaigns. With the potential for AI-driven misinformation campaigns to escalate sharply in this year’s midterms, we tested some of the most popular AI models to learn how they can be exploited to peddle false election narratives. The results are clear: AI companies, lawmakers, and civil society must do more to blunt the threat ahead of elections this November and in 2028 to help ensure free and fair elections. We outline the steps they can take to do so below.

Keep ReadingShow less
Robot Holding a Resume Doing HR Work Vector Illustration

AI résumé screening can filter out qualified candidates before a human ever looks. Here's why transparency and human oversight in hiring matter.

nicoletaionescu/Getty Images

When AI Screens the Resume, Who Gets a Fair Shot at Work?

A job seeker can spend hours tailoring a résumé, checking qualifications and writing a thoughtful application, believing the next step will be a person deciding whether to schedule an interview.

Increasingly, that assumption may be wrong.

Keep ReadingShow less
President Trump answers questions from reporters.

U.S. President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters before boarding Air Force One on August 21, 2026 in Joint Base Andrews, Maryland.

(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Trump’s White House Press Ban Violates 1st Amendment

The principle is simple. Just like politicians are not supposed to pick their voters, government officials don’t get to pick the reporters who cover them.

If they did, the First Amendment would be meaningless. and we would no longer live in anything resembling a constitutional republic. That is why President Trump’s September 18 announcement that he is banning reporters from CNN, MSNow, and Politico from the White House is so dangerous.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person interacts with an AI chatbot on a smartphone. The screen displays a conversation interface with the text "Hi, may I help you?" suggesting the use of an AI assistant app. A laptop is visible in the background, emphasizing a tech-savvy environment.

A 2026 study found AI beat elite debaters, until it was slowed to human speed. Why persuasion throughput matters and how to make chatbot tempo transparent.

Chong Kee Siong/Getty Images

Political Chatbots Should Not Be Allowed To Set the Pace

A political chatbot can answer before a citizen has finished reading its previous message. It can add statistics, historical examples, causal claims, and links at a rate no human campaign volunteer could match. That does not necessarily make its case wiser. It changes the contest by allowing one speaker to control the tempo.

A June 2026 preprint offers unusually direct evidence of this problem. Across four preregistered experiments involving 18,978 conversations from 6,923 people, frontier AI systems were more persuasive than laypeople, tournament winners, professional canvassers and elite competitive debaters. The human experts were not casual opponents: the study included world and continental champions, paid preparation, live practice and substantial performance incentives.

Keep ReadingShow less