Last week, the Department of Justice reportedly opened an investigation into the antitrust exemption granted to the NFL in the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961. The news comes amid repeated public comments from FCC chairman Brendan Carr regarding the standing of that exemption, and whether it should apply to games that do not air on broadcast television.
The timing of Carr’s interest in where NFL games air is no coincidence. It comes at a moment when the NFL is actively renegotiating, or actively planning to renegotiate, deals with its five primary broadcast partners, four of which air games on broadcast television.
NFL games are critical to the health of these broadcast networks, which are able to command hefty retransmission fees and sell lucrative advertising because of the widely watched programming. Threatening these broadcast networks, of course, are streamers, many of which have begun to dip their toe in NFL broadcasting. Amazon’s Prime Video, for example, is the home of Thursday Night Football. Last season, both Netflix and YouTube held rights to exclusive games.
Since his appointment as FCC chair, Carr has been adamant about revitalizing local broadcast stations. Losing NFL games to streaming would accelerate what already seems to be the inexorable decline of linear television.
But there’s also more to the story. Two families with the ear of the Trump administration own broadcast networks negotiating new NFL deals. CBS, owned by Oracle billionaire Larry Ellison and run by son David, is in active negotiations with the league. Fox, majority owned by Rupert Murdoch and run by son Lachlan, is said to be next up for rights negotiations. Both families have well-documented ties to the Trump administration and have made clear moves to make their news coverage more Trump friendly. It’s not a far jump to suggest that the Trump administration is incentivized to help CBS and Fox, both of which depend mightily on retaining NFL rights, by putting political pressure on the NFL to keep games on broadcast as opposed to streaming.
Brendan Carr was asked precisely this question during an interview with CNBC on Tuesday. Predictably, he did not directly address if the FCC was aiming to influence ongoing rights negotiations with the NFL.
EISEN: Ultimately, are you trying to influence the next round of NFL TV negotiations and give more preference to traditional broadcast?
FCC CHAIR BRENDAN CARR: I do think there’s a point at which the NFL reaches a tipping point where they’re sticking too many games behind a… pic.twitter.com/kUSvmg2GTG
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 14, 2026
“Is ultimately what you’re trying to do here influence the next round of negotiations and give more preference to broadcast, traditional broadcast?” CNBC’s Sara Eisen questioned.
“I don’t know about that, but I do think there’s a point at which the NFL reached a tipping point where they’re sticking too many games behind a paywall, in which case it really raises a lot of questions about the scope of that [antitrust] exemption,” Carr replied.
“But what could you do at the FCC?” Eisen asked.
“Well one, the way we’re proceeding right now, so we are taking comment and looking at it. DOJ and Congress could also take a look at the antitrust exemption, but we want to be informed about this since we ultimately do regulate the local broadcast TV market. So we’re going to look at it and potentially we could inform Congress or DOJ as well,” Carr said.
That answer would seem to suggest that the FCC doesn’t have much, if any, direct recourse to the NFL regarding whether or not it begins to place more games on paid streaming services. However, it certainly appears as if the FCC is aiming to influence the NFL’s rights negotiations through Carr’s repeated public comments about the league’s exemption.
Whether that’s a favor to the Ellisons and Murdochs or simply a genuine interest in protecting local broadcasters at an opportune time isn’t all that relevant. The FCC seems intent on shaping the DOJ’s and Congress’s opinion on the matter. And there is support on both sides of the aisle to keep NFL games accessible via broadcast television.
If the federal government can credibly threaten to pull the NFL’s antitrust exemption is a different question entirely. If the league feels political pressure mount and believes the levers of government may actually threaten its exemption, that could shape negotiations. If the league assesses the threat to its exemption as unlikely, it’ll likely proceed business as usual.

About Drew Lerner
Drew Lerner is a staff writer for Awful Announcing and an aspiring cable subscriber. He previously covered sports media for Sports Media Watch. Future beat writer for the Oasis reunion tour.
Recent Posts
Netflix claims 12.4 million global viewers for Ronda Rousey-Gina Carano fight
Saturday's card averaged 9.3 million viewers in the U.S.
NBC’s Reggie Miller makes note of potential Victor Wembanyama rule violation
"Every time Wemby goes to the free-throw line, it's very close and borderline to 10 seconds."
Fox execs reportedly ‘surprised’ to see Fox One subscribers ‘stick around’ for Fox News content after football season
"We’ve clearly captured some of these customers that were either sports fans and now starting to watch news or news fans who were watching sports."
Longtime digital reporter Casey Holdahl let go by Portland Trail Blazers
Holdahl spent 18 years with the organization.
Pablo Torre exposes Oz the Mentalist
"...what he is actually doing, spoiler alert, is a lot of stuff he does not disclose."
Mike Breen insists calling Knicks-Cavaliers without bias is not hard
"One of my favorite things about this time of year is the passion of the fans."