Censorship, cancel culture, and the First Amendment — why local publishers can’t afford to look away

Listen to the audio

Available now on:

Click to Download the
Complete Audio Transcript

CBS caves on a lawsuit. Stephen Colbert faces political targeting. ABC suspends Jimmy Kimmel after a controversial bit. For Bob Corn-Revere, one of America’s leading First Amendment lawyers, these headlines aren’t isolated incidents — they’re symptoms of a larger erosion of free expression.

“You ignore it at your peril,” Corn-Revere said, noting that even though broadcasters operate under government licenses, the same pressures apply across the media spectrum. “The impulse is the same, regardless of whether you’re traditional media or broadcast media. They simply are using different tools.”

That impulse, he explained, often comes in the form of litigation. “Litigation is one that’s being brought to bear against both newspapers and against broadcast stations,” Corn-Revere said, pointing to high-profile lawsuits filed by former President Donald Trump against The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and the Des Moines Register.

For local publishers, Corn-Revere warned, the same playbook can — and already does — land in their inbox.

The pressure feels familiar — but it’s stronger now

History offers plenty of examples of government overreach against the press, from the Red Scare to McCarthyism to Richard Nixon’s attacks on the media. But Corn-Revere said the intensity today is different. “What we have now is Nixon on steroids,” he said.

Challenges that once came in waves are now colliding all at once, he explained. “It’s like seeing these challenges to free speech and to our free expression culture — all of those challenges are rolled into one with the various challenges we’re seeing now.”

What makes the difference, he argued, is whether people stand their ground. “What’s required is for people to push back, which, at least in the cases of CBS and ABC, we have not seen,” Corn-Revere said. “But if you broaden the lens and look at those areas of American life where the president is exerting pressure… those that are standing up for their rights, those that are pushing back, are making headway.”

Local intimidation is part of the same fight

Corn-Revere is quick to draw a direct line between national censorship battles and the intimidation tactics often faced by small-town papers. “The common theme is the attempt to use official power in one way or another to silence voices you don’t like,” he said.

He pointed to recent cases FIRE has taken on, including a temporary restraining order aimed at silencing a Mississippi newspaper and the raid of the Marion County Record in Kansas. “We see it on the local level all the time,” he said. “And again, when you have people who are willing to push back, then you have people vindicating their rights and courts weighing in and holding that this is not going to be tolerated under the First Amendment.”

Corn-Revere sees those moments of resistance as essential. “You have to want to stand up for your rights,” he said. “A spine is a terrible thing to waste.”

The Des Moines Register case could set the tone

The lawsuit against the Des Moines Register and its veteran pollster Ann Selzer is being closely watched by both national and local outlets. FIRE represents Selzer, while other firms represent the paper. Corn-Revere was blunt about the merits. “There will be no capitulation in this case,” he said. “Both are frivolous cases that I think the courts are going to throw out.”

At stake is whether political actors can stretch consumer protection laws into tools of censorship. Corn-Revere stressed that publishers should not underestimate the importance of fighting back. “Right now motions to dismiss these very spurious lawsuits are being weighed by the courts, and we should hear something on that fairly soon,” he said.

Advice for smaller publishers without legal resources

Many small-town publishers lack in-house counsel and often assume they have little recourse. Corn-Revere rejects that defeatism. “The pressures are no less intense if you are a small publisher and you have fewer resources to deal with it, but at least you don’t have someone threatening to yank your broadcast licenses,” he said.

Even without legal teams, publishers aren’t alone. “There are First Amendment law clinics around the country that are looking for things to work on, ways to help,” Corn-Revere said. “And of course, national organizations like the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press… they will be there as resources when you face challenges.”

His advice to every newsroom was firm but straightforward. “You have to have that backbone to raise the fight,” he said. “A spine is a terrible thing to waste.”

Hope for journalism’s future.

Despite the mounting legal battles and political hostility, Corn-Revere doesn’t believe journalism is doomed. “I am hopeful because as much as we have faced great challenges, we’ve also seen the industry evolve to meet those challenges,” he said.

He drew a parallel between today’s threats and past crises. “All of the advancements in First Amendment law were the result of existential threats that we faced,” Corn-Revere said. “Take it back to World War I… or the McCarthy era or Nixon. All of the advancements and the strong body of First Amendment law developed because of those challenges.”

That resilience, he argued, is the source of optimism. “What it takes is for someone to stand up and say, ‘I will not take this anymore,’” Corn-Revere said. “I think it’s a matter of time before we start to see that kind of pushback for these gross abuses.”