Alright, the Republican Supreme Court has not literally said this, but its likely ruling on the president’s power to fire, without cause, the people sitting on independent commissions, pretty much does. This ruling means that Trump can order a formerly independent commission to reward a political ally or punish a political enemy, and to fire anyone who does not go along with his order.

This is a problem across the government. Trump can tell the Securities and Exchange Commission to let his friends issue fraudulent stock, while bottling up critics in endless red tape so that their businesses cannot function normally. He can tell the Federal Trade Commission to greenlight any merger proposed by a campaign contributor, no matter how anti-competitive it might be, while nixing any proposal by a company that opposes him.

And getting to the news outlet story, Trump can tell the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to approve any deals put up by his supporters, while harassing and taking away broadcast licenses from his critics. And Chief Justice John Roberts and the other MAGA justices say this is fine. 

This is not just an abstract concern. Trump has explicitly said that he will be involved on the decision by the FCC to approve the takeover over Warner Brothers by either Netflix or Paramount. The latter is controlled by Trump ally and major donor, billionaire Larry Ellison and son. 

They have already taken over CBS and installed Trump hack Bari Weiss to oversee the network’s news. Many long-established reporters and producers have already fled the network. While it looks like they still do some serious reporting and have reporters that call attention to the Trump administration’s lies, it is likely that they will not long survive Trump’s complaints about “nasty” questions.  

Warner Brothers owns CNN, one of the major networks that has not yet paid tribute to Donald Trump. (NBC is the other one.) Trump has made it clear that he sees CNN’s current team as an enemy, which he will likely expect Larry Ellison to rein in. 

Trump has made it clear that he couldn’t care less about the First Amendment and probably does not even know what it is. The Supreme Court is supposed to care, but as Republican justices have shown repeatedly in their rulings, giving more power to Republican politicians is their only concern.

It would be great if there were some way to prevent the further consolidation in the media in the hands of Trump-friendly billionaires, but at this point there seems little hope. Unfortunately, almost no one on the left-center seemed to think the media mattered. 

When it might have been possible to structure Section 230 protection in a way that worked against giant social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook, there was essentially zero interest. While progressives seem to understand that campaign contributions matter to election outcomes, they apparently don’t think it makes a difference who controls massive social media platforms that tens of millions of people use every day. 

With our backs against the wall, the main options are whining or trying to figure out some positive steps. There has been plenty of whining, and we can look forward to much more, but there are things that can be done. There obviously are not going to be positive steps coming from the national government with Trump in the White House and Republicans controlling Congress, but there are measures that can be taken at the state and local level. 

My preferred route is an individual tax credit, of say $100 a person, modeled on the charitable contribution tax deduction. This money could be used by individuals to fund the local media outlet of their choice. Since it’s a credit, and not a deduction, everyone would get it. And unlike with the tax deduction, the credit is the same for everyone, regardless of their income. 

While some of this money would go to support right-wing outlets, and some would support material of little real value, some of it could go to give a major shot in the arm to news outlets committed to doing serious reporting. The arithmetic is straightforward. If 100,000 in a city or state used a $100 tax credit, it would provide $10 million to support news. That money is an addition to the money news outlets can raise from subscriptions, advertising, or donations. 

In my view, the material supported by the tax credits should not be paywalled. The public already paid for it once with the tax credits, it should not pay for it a second time by giving it a copyright monopoly. But that is a design question that could be decided by whoever chooses to go this route. 

If we can just get a foot in the door, it could be something to build on. There are a number of cities and states still controlled by progressives. Any of them could lead the way. Seattle is a possibility, where  the newly elected progressive mayor Katie Wilson is a big supporter of this sort of tax credit. Wilson has a full agenda and would need to get approval of the city council for a tax credit to support news outlets, so this is not a sure thing even in Seattle, but it certainly is a possibility.

The point is that the media matter a huge amount for politics. The Republicans have been smart enough to understand this fact and increasingly look to control it to advance their agenda and stifle honest reporting. It is very late for progressives to get in the game, but there really is no alternative if there is to be any hope for turning back the Trumpian tide.