Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr has accused Comcast of "news distortion" over its networks' coverage of Kilmar Armando Abrego, a Maryland man who was deported to El Salvador due to what the government said was an "administrative error". Carr made the accusation in a reply to a post on X, criticizing Comcast-owned MSNBC and Warner Bros. Discovery's CNN for not covering a White House press briefing about the deportation of immigrants.

During the briefing, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the administration's decision to deport Abrego Garcia and accused him of being a gang member. However, a Supreme Court judge later ordered the government to bring Abrego Garcia back to the US, as the government violated a previous court order preventing his deportation to El Salvador. Carr claimed that Comcast "spent days misleading the American public" and that the company knows that federal law requires its licensed operations to serve the public interest.

This is not the first time Carr has taken issue with Comcast. In February, he opened an investigation into the company's diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, and later suggested that the FCC won't approve mergers and acquisitions if companies support DEI. The FCC's own website states that the agency's authority over news distortion is "narrow" and it will only investigate if there's "evidence showing that the broadcast news report was deliberately intended to mislead viewers or listeners."

The controversy has sparked a wider debate about the role of media companies in reporting on government actions. Trump officials have lambasted Comcast and other media companies for not airing the briefing, with White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung calling the lack of coverage "shameful". The incident has also raised questions about the FCC's role in regulating the media industry and its ability to hold companies accountable for their reporting practices.

The Verge reached out to Comcast for comment but did not immediately hear back. The company's response to the allegations remains to be seen, but the incident has already sparked a heated debate about the intersection of media, politics, and government regulation.

In the broader context, this incident highlights the ongoing tensions between the government and the media industry. As the FCC continues to grapple with its role in regulating the industry, incidents like this will likely continue to spark controversy and debate. The outcome of this incident will be closely watched, as it could have significant implications for the future of media regulation in the US.