and provided scripts by conservative organizations targeting BIPOC and LGBTQ authors.
Anecdotes abound:
• Jamie Gregory, a South Carolina librarian: “This binary choice presents itself for educators—comply and remove books, or risk your job and community standing.”
• In some towns, local library boards threatened closure rather than comply with removing titles.
Despite the Trump Department of Education’s claim to have ended “Biden’s Book Ban Hoax,” the Office for Civil Rights closed 11 active cases of censorship, and the book ban coordinator position was eliminated. Critics saw this as formal abandonment of federal oversight for intellectual freedom in schools.
Voice of America and International Propaganda
The Trump administration orchestrated profound changes at Voice of America (VOA). In 2017, Congress changed the VOA’s governance to allow direct presidential appointments for its CEO, effectively ending its bipartisan independence. Trump appointees—drawn from right-wing activist backgrounds—were sent to oversee content and transition.
Investigative accounts and insider leaks allege that these shifts converted VOA into a “mouthpiece for Trump’s personal brand” reaching a global audience of 236 million. Dissenters within the agency described pressure to air pro-Trump coverage and silence criticism, a sharp break from tradition of editorial independence.
The White House further launched public attacks on VOA, accusing it of “amplifying Chinese propaganda” merely for reporting on the reopening of Wuhan after COVID-19 lockdowns—a campaign amplified by Trump’s senior social media aides, signaling that even neutral coverage was unwelcome unless it fit administration narratives.
Lawsuits as Censorship by Litigation
Trump and close allies have escalated the use of lawsuits against news organizations, often advancing disputed legal theories that most media law experts regard as meritless. These cases typically allege “intentionally misleading the public,” leveraging consumer protection rather than defamation laws due to the latter’s high bar for public figures. While these lawsuits usually fail, they require costly defense, encourage settlements (sometimes with nontrivial payouts), and create a broad deterrent against unflattering journalism. Examples include:
• Suits against CBS, the Des Moines Register, and entire pollster organizations (for publishing unfavorable polling).
• FCC inquiries launched soon after personal suits by Trump, blending private and government action in intimidating ways.
Major news outlets have begun to temper coverage, and multiple outlets canceled endorsements in the 2024 election cycle to avoid governmental retaliation.
Impact on People, Journalists, and Local Communities
Individuals and communities have felt these policies acutely: