The Chilling Affect: Why Won’t America’s Business Leaders Stand Up to Trump?
A pattern is emerging in the American media landscape, one that echoes tactics employed by authoritarian leaders abroad – and it’s raising concerns about the willingness of business leaders to withstand pressure from Donald trump and his allies.While the situation hasn’t reached the level of control seen in Hungary under Viktor Orbán, experts warn that Trump is increasingly weaponizing the federal government’s financial and regulatory power to stifle critical voices, and corporations are responding with caution bordering on submission.
According to Kim Lane Scheppele, a professor of sociology and international affairs at Princeton University who has studied the erosion of democratic norms in Hungary, Orbán systematically dismantled autonomous media through a combination of legal harassment and economic coercion. “He used libel actions, and arranged to have his friends buy up troublesome media outlets that did not comply,” Scheppele wrote in an email. She further explained in a phone conversation how Orbán gutted the state broadcaster, controlled appointments to the national media board, and leveraged government advertising revenue. “He cut this financial lifeline, and then his associates bought some of the papers and flipped their politics,” Scheppele recounted. “He left a few small liberal publications in Budapest so he could point to them and say, ‘Hey, I’m not a dictator.’ but, when you get outside the capital, the media is pro-Orbán all the way down.”
Scheppele sees parallels in the current American climate. “The universities are caving to him as they realize that the Administration has the ability to cripple them financially,” she commented. “Ditto the law firms. Ditto the media companies.”
Recent events demonstrate this chilling effect. ABC News suspended a late-night comic following comments made in the wake of the murder of Charlie Kirk. This followed a $15 million settlement ABC agreed to pay to Trump’s Presidential library in December to resolve a defamation lawsuit brought by Trump against host George Stephanopoulos over comments regarding the E.Jean Carroll verdict.In July, Paramount reached a $16 million settlement in another Trump lawsuit involving CBS news’ “60 Minutes.” That same month, CBS announced the cancellation of “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” a program known for its satirical critiques of Trump, coinciding with Paramount’s pursuit of a merger with Skydance requiring approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The deal subsequently received approval.
The pressure is demonstrably linked to regulatory concerns. Following statements made by jimmy Kimmel regarding Kirk, Disney, already under FCC investigation regarding its diversity practices, faced renewed scrutiny. FCC Chair Brendan Carr publicly stated on a conservative podcast that Kimmel’s remarks were a “very, very serious issue for Disney,” and urged local television station owners to “step up.” Within hours, Nexstar Media Group, which owns over twenty ABC-affiliated stations, announced it would indefinitely stop airing Kimmel’s show, increasing the commercial pressure on ABC and Disney CEO Bob Iger. Nexstar’s motivation was clear: the company is seeking FCC approval for a competitor buyout.
These instances suggest a calculated strategy of leveraging regulatory power to influence media content, and a willingness by corporations to preemptively yield to avoid potential repercussions. The question remains: how much further will this pattern extend before American business leaders decide to openly resist?
