Brendan Carr, the incoming chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, plans to challenge big technology and broadcast companies over their content choices and kill diversity and inclusion initiatives at the agency that oversees the nation’s telecom, internet and media industries.

Late Sunday, shortly after President-elect Donald Trump announced his pick of Carr to lead the agency, the 45-year-old attorney launched into a tweet-storm that included calls for the FCC to “dismantle the censorship cartel and restore free speech rights for everyday Americans,” a likely reference to attempts by social media sites like Facebook to limit content deemed offensive.

Carr also re-posted a video that’s popular in conservative media channels of Argentine President Javier Milei ripping the names of government agencies off a white board while saying “afuera,” which means “out” in English.

Eschewing the buttoned-up online personas of his colleagues at the FCC, Carr is known to post with abandon on the social media site X, which is owned by high-profile Trump supporter Elon Musk. For Carr’s allies — and members of the incoming Trump administration — his willingness to share unfiltered views publicly is an attribute, not a drawback.

Carr’s public alignment with Trump’s priorities potentially paid off with a speedy nomination, suggesting the FCC isn’t far from the president-elect’s mind. Previous chairs haven’t been named until January.

Nathan Leamer, an ex-policy adviser to former Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, describes Carr as an “ally at the FCC who understood the value of new media and how to take wonky telecom issues and reach larger audiences — and how doing that allows you to punch above your weight, politically speaking.”

Carr has been taking advantage of social media’s reach long before Musk took over the platform. He shares dizzying video and photos of himself climbing communications towers with hard-hat-clad, blue-collar workers; daily “God Bless America” benedictions; and increasingly, a glimpse into a new era of agency leadership.

Carr first joined the commission in 2012 after serving as an attorney in private practice. He rose to general counsel before Trump appointed him to the agency in 2017 during his first presidential term.

At the time, Carr was more demure publicly. He developed a reputation as an expert in 5G cellular networks and challenged regulations that constricted the build-out of wireless infrastructure.

In 2021, after the Biden administration took office, Carr gained more leeway as a minority-party commissioner to begin speaking freely. He began wading into more controversial territory — advocating for a ban on TikTok, citing national security concerns based on the app’s ties to China. He expressed support for using the FCC’s authority to crack down on social media censorship — something the agency has never done before but that the outgoing Trump administration asked it to consider.

Carr also aligned himself with Musk long before the world’s richest man endorsed Trump’s bid for a second term. He sounded alarm bells over FCC rules that, in his view, gave preference to internet-delivery technologies like fiber over burgeoning technologies like low-earth-orbit satellite constellations. Musk’s SpaceX is shooting those satellites into orbit and must court FCC approval to do so.

But despite his now-elevated profile, people who know Carr still see him as a policy wonk at heart who is bent on scrutinizing statutes and interpreting agency rules accordingly.

“In general, this guy isn’t going to go off the rails and do things outside the scope of the FCC’s jurisdiction,” said Joel Thayer, who worked alongside Carr when the two were FCC staffers under Pai. “To me, this pick is not just a responsible pick but one that will move the FCC toward presidential priorities: duplicative regulations, holding folks accountable when necessary.”

While former colleagues and friends see Carr as a by-the-books regulator, he’s also not afraid to apply a creative lens to the law, according to Leamer. Take Section 230 for example, which protects online service providers from liability for third-party content.

“He’s definitely not afraid to rethink traditional orthodoxy,” Leamer said. “That’s a really unique skill — he’s taking a wonky policy agency and not responding in a defensive way but literally changing the way people think about the issue.”

Conservatives have long criticized social media companies for taking down posts deemed problematic, including COVID-19 disinformation. In prepared Congressional testimony last year, Carr criticized the Biden “administration’s campaign to pressure internet companies into censoring Americans’ protected speech.” In 2022, he praised an appellate court ruling that upheld a Texas state law “which prohibits Big Tech companies from censoring certain political speech and viewpoints.”

Although Carr opposes so-called net neutrality regulations that require broadband providers to treat all internet traffic the same, he’s suggested that online platforms should be subject to neutrality obligations for posts they might otherwise take down for violating standards.

In his chapter in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, Carr suggests the agency limit the scope of Section 230 so that it only protects the decision of a platform to leave content on its site. Under his interpretation, a site wouldn’t be automatically immune from lawsuits over content that’s taken down.

He also called for applying broadband transparency disclosures to platforms like Google, Facebook and YouTube that manipulate search results, ban or suspend user accounts and demonetize content creators “without any apparent consistency.”

Broadcasters are also likely to enter Carr’s crosshairs. After NBC featured a cameo by Vice President Kamala Harris on Saturday Night Live just before the election, Carr accused the network of attempting to flout agency rules and not giving Trump equal airtime. NBC ran a free Trump ad the next day.

But such issues could linger in the broadcast license renewal cycle, which evaluates whether stations have made use of the airwaves in the public interest. According to agency observers, Carr could use the process to question perceived biases in programming and news coverage.

“Broadcast media have had the privilege of using a scarce and valuable public resource — our airwaves,” Carr posted on X on Monday. “In turn, they are required by law to operate in the public interest. When the transition is complete, the FCC will enforce this public interest obligation.”

Along with imposing new obligations on tech and media companies, Carr also proposed levying fees on the platforms that heavily use internet infrastructure, extending a regulatory burden that currently only affects voice service providers. The additional payments from social media companies would bolster the FCC’s Universal Service Fund, which helps pay for broadband infrastructure expansion, as well as low-income phone and internet access. Companies including AT&T Inc. have backed this approach.

With Musk taking a position at a new Department of Government Efficiency, it remains to be seen how much overlap the two regulators will have. The conversation continues, however, on social media. After Carr tweeted Sunday night about dismantling the censorship cartel, Musk responded with his support and got thousands of likes.

©2024 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.