Trump's likely FCC chair wrote Project 2025 chapter on how he'd run the agency

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Overall view of a Carr-led FCC / Project 2025

  • Many see the plan as openly telegraphed: roll back regulation, punish “Big Tech,” reward allies, and pursue grievances rather than coherent policy.
  • Commenters highlight tension: criticizing “New Deal–era heavy-handed regulation” while seeking aggressive FCC intervention against social media, TV content, Section 230, etc.
  • Comparisons are made to Ajit Pai and expectations of dropping net neutrality defense; many predict outcomes favoring large ISPs and politically friendly platforms.
  • Some expect clientelism toward figures like Musk and fossil fuel interests and say loyalty to Trump, not public interest, will be the main selector.

Section 230, platform liability, and moderation

  • Large subthread on whether limiting Section 230 is desirable.
  • One side: wants platforms like Meta to be responsible for misinformation or at least for algorithmic amplification; argues current power is already unaccountable and akin to editorial control.
  • Other side: stresses that 230 is safe harbor for intermediaries, not blanket indemnity; removing it would:
    • Kill or radically shrink user-generated content sites (including HN, Reddit, Truth Social, X).
    • Entrench only the biggest firms that can afford legal risk.
    • Incentivize over-moderation and censorship to avoid lawsuits.
  • Disagreement over whether algorithms and large-scale moderation turn platforms into publishers and thus justify more liability.

Misinformation, truth, and free speech

  • Disagreement on whether companies should be arbiters of truth:
    • Some propose knowledge-graph-based fact systems and more accountability.
    • Others ask “who decides?” and note moving targets (lab-leak theory, election claims).
  • Strong concern about government defining “misinformation,” especially via targeted 230 changes, as an avenue for viewpoint-based censorship.

Courts, Chevron, and constraints on the FCC

  • Some argue post-Chevron courts and litigation will slow or block aggressive FCC moves.
  • Others counter that recent Supreme Court behavior appears partisan and inconsistent, so legal checks are unreliable.

Broader political stakes and democracy

  • Debate on whether elections and institutions will meaningfully constrain overreach, versus fears of an entrenching illiberal system (gerrymandering, compliant courts, social media ecosystems).
  • Some see Trump as a unique personality cult that ends with him; others view him as a symptom of a longer-lasting authoritarian movement.

Media narratives and evidence

  • Skepticism toward “Trump’s likely X” appointment stories and advocacy-group–driven coverage; some warn against getting distracted by speculative or weakly sourced outrage ahead of concrete actions.