President Donald Trump has once again targeted CBS, demanding the network lose its broadcasting license and warning it will face severe consequences following a recent 60 Minutes broadcast.

The remarks, made via Truth Social on April 13, 2025, reflect Trump’s ongoing feud with the media, particularly over what he perceives as biased reporting.

This latest escalation has sparked debate about free speech, media independence, and the limits of presidential influence over broadcast regulation.

According to Newsweek, Trump criticized 60 Minutes for airing segments on Ukraine and Greenland, which he claimed portrayed him and the United States “falsely, inaccurately, and fraudulently.”

He accused the program of being a “dishonest Political Operative simply disguised as ‘News’” and reiterated allegations of election interference stemming from a 2024 60 Minutes interview with Vice President Kamala Harris.

Trump’s post suggested CBS should “pay a big price” for its actions, a sentiment echoed in his broader attacks on media outlets he views as unfavorable.

The Hill reported that Trump specifically took issue with an interview featuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who suggested that Russian narratives were gaining traction in the U.S. The broadcast also included a segment on Greenland, which Trump claimed misrepresented his leadership.

He called for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), led by his appointee Brendan Carr, to impose “maximum fines and punishment” on CBS. This aligns with Trump’s history of leveraging regulatory threats against networks, a tactic critics argue undermines press freedom.

The Washington Examiner noted that Trump’s ire extends beyond the recent broadcast. He referenced a $10 billion lawsuit filed against CBS in 2024, alleging the network manipulated the Harris interview to make her appear more competent.

CBS has denied these claims, releasing unedited transcripts to demonstrate that edits were routine and not deceptive.

Despite this, Trump’s rhetoric has intensified, with calls for 60 Minutes to be “immediately terminated” and the network’s license revoked—a demand complicated by the fact that licenses are issued to individual stations, not networks like CBS.

Deadline highlighted concerns from media advocates about the implications of Trump’s threats. Eugene Daniels, president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, has pushed back against what he sees as hostility toward journalists.

The article also noted that CBS’s parent company, Paramount Global, is navigating a merger with Skydance Media, which requires FCC approval.

Some speculate that Trump’s pressure may be influencing Paramount’s reported willingness to settle the lawsuit, raising questions about corporate capitulation to political demands.

Critics, as cited by CNN Business in a related 2024 report, argue that Trump’s attacks echo authoritarian tactics.

Former FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel previously called such threats “serious and should not be ignored,” emphasizing that the First Amendment protects editorial decisions.

Legal experts have dismissed Trump’s lawsuit as lacking merit, pointing to established case law that defends newsroom editing practices. Yet, with Carr’s FCC revisiting complaints against CBS, the network faces heightened scrutiny.

The controversy underscores a broader tension between Trump’s administration and the press.

As The Guardian reported in February 2025, Trump’s rhetoric often amplifies unverified claims, such as a debunked conspiracy about USAID funding media outlets like Politico.

His accusations against CBS frequently blend specific grievances with sweeping indictments of the media as “the enemy of the people.”

While Trump’s supporters view his actions as a necessary pushback against perceived liberal bias, opponents warn of a chilling effect on journalism.

The New York Times quoted a CBS correspondent expressing alarm at the prospect of settling with Trump, stating, “If we settle, we become the laughingstock.” With mediation reportedly underway, the outcome could set a precedent for how media companies navigate political pressure in the Trump era.