Ben Sperry
Role at the time: Lawyer and policy scholar, writing a signed USA Today opinion column
Condemned
Statement summary
Sperry argues that the government should not use investigation costs and document demands to shape coverage. He acknowledges that news outlets must obey antitrust law.
“The public, and courts if necessary, should recognize this investigation for what the reported facts suggest: an attempt to disguise retaliation against the press as antitrust enforcement. Protecting freedom of speech requires more than stopping outright censorship. It also requires preventing officials from using regulatory harassment to shape public debate.”
Open source (opens in a new tab)Trump's DOJ is using antitrust law to punish the free press | OpinionConcluding assessment
Sperry distinguishes unlawful commercial agreements from a joint editorial protest and argues that the reported investigation suggests retaliation.
Why we used this label
The matter under scrutiny includes the inquiry into the broadcasters' pool protest. Sperry condemns what he views as regulatory retaliation.