Unscripted Programming Intern

Disney accuses Trump officials of 'blatant violations' of constitution amid FCC battle. Jeremy Barr in Washington Tue, October 6, 2026 at 1:12 PM PDT Lawyers for Disney accused the Trump administration of "blatant violations of the US constitution" and censorship on Tuesday in the first court hearing over the Federal Communications Commission's early review of the media giant's eight local television station licenses. District judge Loren AliKhan seemed unswayed by government arguments that the order to force Disney's ABC to apply years early to renew local television station licenses was tied to an investigation into parent company Disney's hiring practices. ABC, Disney and its station group filed suit against the FCC in August, seeking to block the US media regulator from taking any further steps to punish or pressure the network in connection to the order. In its lawsuit, ABC argued that the FCC's actions - taken at the behest of the Donald Trump-appointed chair, Brendan Carr - were actually intended to chill the network's speech, which the president and Carr have argued is tilted against the administration. In legal filings and during Tuesday's hearing, the network cited past threats by the president and the FCC chairman that jeopardized the licenses of television networks, including ABC on several occasions, for editorial purposes. "These are blatant violations of the US constitution," the prominent trial lawyer Beth Wilkinson, arguing on behalf of ABC, told the judge during the approximately two-hour hearing. She said ABC faced a "chilling effect" that has affected - and will continue to impact - its editorial decision-making, as the network steers clear of political bookings and any other programming decisions that could spark further ire from the Trump administration and Carr. "That chilling effect has been happening and will happen every day," she said, causing "irreparable harm" to the network and its ability to broadcast independent news for the benefit of the American people. ABC has said it has stopped booking politicians on the daytime talkshow The View and chose to air a July speech by Trump on its streaming platform so as not to antagonize the president. "Our editorial decisions are being affected right now," Wilkinson said, noting the significance of decisions about how to cover next month's pivotal midterm elections. "We are watching everything we do... We have already altered our conduct because of the fear of retaliation." She also noted that ABC recently chose to air a Jimmy Kimmel-conducted interview with Texas US Senate candidate James Talarico on YouTube, rather than television, "because the FCC has no control over YouTube". Dimitar P Georgiev, representing the FCC defendants, argued that "there is no reason to believe the early renewal order has prompted changes to the plaintiffs' editorial decisions". He also argued that the US district court for the District of Columbia was not the proper jurisdiction for the case, saying that ABC could instead appeal any adverse decision to the US court of appeals for the District of Columbia. ABC is seeking a decision from the judge to enjoin the FCC from taking any further actions against the network's licenses. "We are asking to stop pure retaliation, putting us in a process that we should never have to be in," Wilkinson said. In what Wilkinson called a "fatal admission", Georgiev said the license renewal process "is not about the licenses", but is instead a "tool" to expedite the commission's review of ABC for potential violations of federal equal opportunities regulations. The lawyer also said the FCC could choose to end the license review process early if ABC is able to satisfy its document requests. Considering that the FCC opened its employment practice investigation into Disney last year, with requests for documents ongoing since then, the judge asked: "Why is it only in the summer that you determined that their responses were woefully inadequate?" She also questioned why the commission required the company to submit renewal applications for all eight of its stations simultaneously. And she noted past comments by Carr about the network's licenses, including a remark in July, when he had said ABC's decision not to carry the president's speech that month on its linear channel could factor into the license investigation. "It strikes me with all the comments that this was merely over a discovery dispute, what made this so different that you needed to call for an early license renewal?" Judge AliKhan asked lawyers for the FCC, whom she asked for a list of some of the other enforcement actions the commission could have taken short of calling up the network's licenses early. And she noted that there was "some daylight" in the FCC's arguments, considering that the diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) inquiry was handled by the commission's enforcement bureau, while the license order was made by the media bureau. The judge ended the hearing without issuing an order, saying she would take the matter "under advisement".

AI may come for your job. It's not the end of the world - it's the start of a new one. by Gene Marks, opinion contributor - 10/06/26 10:00 AM ET As long as there's been new technology, there's been opposition to it. What do these protests have in common? Environmental concerns? Resistance to billionaires? Fears that the world will end? No: people are simply scared that technology will replace their jobs. Today, it's AI and data centers. But in early 19th century Britain, skilled textile workers feared that machinery would allow employers to replace them with cheaper labor and reduce wages. They petitioned officials, organized protests and destroyed knitting frames and other textile machinery. A few decades later, Britain's Locomotives Act of 1865 imposed extraordinary restrictions on mechanically powered road vehicles: a three-person crew, including someone walking ahead with a red flag, and speed limits of 2 miles per hour in towns and 4 miles per hour in the countryside. In the mid-20th century, a union representing musicians in the U.S., fearing that the musical recordings on the radio and jukeboxes would compete with their own live performances, forbade their members from making commercial recordings. A few decades later, both Universal and Disney sued Sony Corporation over its Betamax recorder, arguing that Sony was responsible for copyright infringement when viewers recorded television programs. Industry lobbyist Jack Valenti notoriously compared the VCR's threat to the "Boston strangler." In the 1980s, newspaper workers went on strike in England to protest Rupert Murdoch's new printing plant with modernized computers and production machinery. And then there were math teachers that same decade who were protesting the use of calculators in schools. These are just a few examples of people pushing back on technology. There are many news reports documenting the public's fears of planes and cars, cell phones and beepers, computers and even electricity. It's not hard to understand. People want security. Comfort. Certainty. A job provides some of that. Technology threatens jobs. Workers are terrified that new machines will put them out of work. Math teachers get scared because they see how calculators would potentially eliminate the need for their instruction. Musicians believed that recordings would eliminate the popularity of live shows. Hollywood hated home recorders because why go to the movies when you can just watch at home? And they were right. All of this did happen. But they were also wrong. There's a shortage of teachers, plant workers and machine operators. There are more creators now than ever, and more video, TV and movie content. People adapted. Decades later, unemployment is near historical lows. Millions of jobs remain unfilled. Every business owner I know is looking for help. New roles for humans that didn't exist just 20 years ago have employed countless people. Imagine going back in time and telling someone in 2006 that in 2026 you're a "cannabis compliance manager" or a "wellness coach" or a "prompt engineer" - they would've thought you insane. AI, autonomous vehicles, drones, mobile phones, all of these things improve its lives. Technology enables businesses to run more efficiently. It cures diseases, restores hearing, replaces limbs and manages resources. It powers all the things in its world that make this world so much better than any world that existed in history. All because of technology. Of course there are risks. When business people ask me about the privacy and security risks of putting their data into AI platforms and trusting Big Tech, I always warn them that their data is not secure, not private and that you shouldn't trust Big Tech. But investing in technology is all about return on investment. If the rewards - growth, productivity, profits, success - of using AI are greater than the risks assumed, a business owner would be irresponsible not to assume these risks. SignalFeeds take risks flying in planes, eating Big Macs and crossing the street all the time. Do SignalFeeds not assume those risks to take advantage of their rewards? Technology will replace jobs. Millions of jobs. But it's an insult to humanity to assume that people will just play dead. They won't. They'll find other ways to define their purpose. SignalFeeds all know that AI, if used the wrong way, could create all sorts of problems. SignalFeeds is aware that data centers impact the environment and disrupt communities. SignalFeeds is concerned that driverless vehicles will run over its puppies, and a single drone could bring down a commercial aircraft. Technology can be dangerous. Forks can be dangerous. Do SignalFeeds ban forks? Gene Marks is founder of the Marks Group, a small-business consulting firm.

David Ellison has finally bought Warner Bros. Discovery, remaking Hollywood. Oct 6, 2026, 5:56 AM PT David Ellison and his partners have completed their purchase of Warner Bros. Discovery for $110 billion in a mega-deal that promises to reshape Hollywood. Paramount Skydance, now known as Skydance, closed its acquisition of WBD on Tuesday. The combined company now controls Paramount Pictures and the Warner Bros. studio; streaming services HBO Max, Paramount+, Pluto TV, and Discovery+; and TV networks HBO, CBS, CNN, TNT, HGTV, and The Food Network. It also has iconic IP like DC Comics, Harry Potter, and SpongeBob Squarepants. Skydance has the potential to be an entertainment behemoth that can rival Disney and Netflix in size and cultural influence. Controlling this treasure trove of assets cements Ellison as a media mogul. Skydance Media, the production company Ellison started in 2006 that was behind films like "Top Gun: Maverick," merged with Paramount last August. Ellison was backed by the fortune of his billionaire father - Larry, who cofounded Oracle - and financial partners like RedBird Capital, plus a trio of Middle East wealth funds from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Abu Dhabi. The new Skydance will be led by David Ellison and former Mattel CEO Ynon Kreiz. Ellison will be in charge of Skydance's creative and tech strategies while Kreiz, who's joining as a co-CEO, will handle the merger integration and day-to-day operations. Casey Bloys, the head of HBO, will head up the combined company's streaming strategy after Paramount streaming chief Cindy Holland stepped down. CNN CEO Mark Thompson is staying on, while Bari Weiss is heading up CBS News. The new-look Skydance faces many challenges, including a massive debt load and stiff competition in streaming. Even when combined, Paramount+ and HBO Max lack the viewership of Disney or Netflix, let alone YouTube. "It's a war for time spent, you're chasing the juggernaut in the space, which is YouTube," media analyst Rich Greenfield of Lightshed Partners said about Ellison's streaming mission. This deal's completion ends a monthslong saga that's worthy of an HBO drama. Ellison's company agreed to buy WBD in late February for $31 per share and planned to close the deal in mid-July. Paramount had outbid Netflix, which had previously agreed to pay $27.75 per share for WBD's studio and streaming division. The merger got held up by lawsuits brought by 12 US states and the Writers Guild of America. Paramount settled those lawsuits in September and pledged to make concessions, including increasing its US production spending, releasing a minimum number of movies in theaters, and not selling either of the movie lots. Ellison told Paramount employees in a memo that its deal will lead to "more opportunity for our creatives, production crews and employees across the business, and more great entertainment for audiences everywhere." Critics of the deal said that putting Paramount and WBD under one roof could harm competition in the entertainment industry, leading to fewer jobs for creatives and higher prices for consumers. Thousands of Hollywood creatives, including stars like JJ Abrams and Ben Stiller, signed an open letter opposing the deal in April. Paramount had rushed to finalize its WBD takeover since it would have owed $650 million per quarter, or roughly $7 million per day, if the deal wasn't done, starting on October 1. Inside Paramount and WBD, employees are on edge and are preparing for internal competition as the two media giants integrate. Ellison has promised to deliver $6 billion in savings from this deal, though the company has said layoffs won't account for most of the cost reductions. As for which teams and staffers will stay at the new-look Skydance, Ellison said in September after settling the lawsuits holding up the deal that he and his colleagues "don't have all the answers yet" and that he "won't pretend otherwise."