May 18, 2026
WHEN: Today, Monday, May 18, 2026
WHERE: CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street”
Following is the unofficial transcript of a CNBC exclusive interview with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr on CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” (M-F, 9AM-12PM ET) today, Monday, May 18. Following are links to video on CNBC.com: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2026/05/18/fcc-chair-brendan-carr-on-echostaras-40-billion-deal-with-att-and-spacex.html, https://www.cnbc.com/video/2026/05/18/fcc-chair-brendan-carr-on-disney-dispute-we-havent-made-a-final-decision.html, and https://www.cnbc.com/video/2026/05/18/watch-cnbcs-full-interview-with-fcc-chairman-brendan-carr.html.
All references must be sourced to CNBC.
SARA EISEN: The FCC just last week approving EchoStar's massive $40 billion sale of spectrum to both AT&T and SpaceX. The deal will now allow SpaceX to beam their satellite connectivity straight to smartphones without the need for a middleman, a first for the company. AT&T will use the new spectrum to expand service in rural and underserved areas, the FCC calling the deal a, quote, "win for America's leadership in next-gen connectivity." Joining us now, in a CNBC exclusive, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. Chair Carr, welcome back. It's good to have you.
BRENDAN CARR: Yes, good to be with you. Thanks so much.
EISEN: So, on this deal, what is your vision? And how do you convince the public that you're not just overseeing a sale here of scarce, valuable public spectrum into the hands of the dominant wireless company and the dominant satellite company?
CARR: You know, President Trump's policies are delivering real results in the area of both connectivity and U.S. leadership and technology in general. And they're starting to pay off with results. We're already seeing, last year alone, prices for wireless services down 10 percent, speeds up 50 percent. And these transactions that we approved just last week could be one of the most consequential weeks for the country in terms of connectivity and global leadership. So, on the one hand, you have spectrum that was laying fallow going to the hands of a provider that's using it to increase speeds, AT&T, by 80 percent already in areas where they have lit that new spectrum up. And, on the other hand, you have a large chunk of spectrum going to SpaceX that can use it, to your point, for this new technology called direct to cell. People have been used to pretty good satellite connectivity to a small dish wherever they go, but think about having direct to cell right to your smartphone. Effectively, a satellite is your cell tower, so global connectivity, more competition driving prices down. So I think this is going to be a real important turning point for the country.
EISEN: Except, if you think about SpaceX in that way, if they control the infrastructure and also become a gatekeeper, isn't that anticompetitive?
CARR: We don't see it developing that way at all, for a number of reasons. Again, the trend line is, prices are down, speeds are up. But we're also looking at multiple competitors in this space. Our vision is that three or more providers of direct to cell connectivity. In fact, Amazon is making a very strong move in this space. They just announced plans to purchase Globalstar, which has spectrum that Amazon can use to develop direct to cell. Amazon's team led by Panos and his team are doing great work, and we're going to allow them to compete. AST is another provider in this space. We're seeing multiple providers in that direct to cell space. That was part of our game plan as an original matter, and we're going to let the market and consumers ultimately decide from there.
EISEN: Right. So you're not picking winners and losers in the satellite space?
CARR: Yes, that's correct.
EISEN: So, have you had discussions with Elon Musk about this? Because, I mean, I don't have to tell you, Chair Carr, he's become one of the most politically influential figures in America. And some might see this and say you're picking the winner here with Musk for political reasons.
CARR: No, I haven't had any conversations recently with Musk at all. But, again, what we're seeing is setting up a framework for multiple different providers to succeed. SpaceX now has their spectrum for direct to cell. Amazon's coming in for theirs. AST already has their spectrum. So we're going to see multiple providers competing. And the real winner here is going to be the American consumer that will have choice in direct to cell and, frankly, the country, because America under President Trump's leadership is now going to be first out of the gate of any country around the globe with this direct to cell technology. And who knows exactly how that market develops. We can't predict the future very well. But we're setting it up so that the country and multiple providers can compete and win.
CARL QUINTANILLA: It's such an interesting business cycle, Chair Carr. The cost of deploying is so enormous that I wonder, is this a game where you think only giants can compete? To what degree can start-ups play in this, in this new era?
CARR: Yes, it's an interesting question. You sort of see that in the traditional mobile wireless space as well. It wasn't that long ago when you had seven or eight different providers of traditional mobile wireless service. Now we see obviously far fewer than that. I do think, at the end of the day, scale matters, but we want more than one. And we are, right now, we have three providers at least that are competing there. I think Lynk is another one that's trying to get in the game. So we want to make sure that there's plenty of room for multiple competitors, because, ultimately, that's what benefits the consumer.
EISEN: The other big, buzzy story that you have been at the center of, Chair Carr, has been around Disney. You recently took the step of calling eight ABC TV station licenses in for early review. Why did you do that?
CARR: Yes, this goes back to a DEI investigation. So, when I started as chair of the FCC, one of the first things we did in the first week was, we ended the FCC's own promotion of DEI. I think people will be shocked to learn that the FCC was spending millions of millions of dollars promoting DEI with equity action plans, the whole nine. And we have been working to make sure that the companies we regulate don't engage in invidious forms of DEI discrimination, meaning discriminating against people based on their race and gender. You know, we went through a period of time around 2020 where a lot of corporate America went all in on this invidious form of discrimination. We will see if Disney was one of them. But we have had multiple rounds of subpoenas with Disney. They're producing documents. And Disney will have every opportunity to make its case. But there has been evidence coming to light that aligns with a legal memo DOJ put out last year for private companies that you can't hire and promote based on race and gender, you can't compensate based on race and gender, and you can't provide workplace opportunities based on race and gender. And there's been evidence coming to the light indicating that Disney may have done that. Again, Disney can put in additional information. We haven't made a final decision. But this is an investigation where we will follow it wherever the facts take us.
EISEN: And, if you find that, the license is in jeopardy?
CARR: One of the things we have been clear about with Disney throughout this whole proceeding is that accelerating the renewal of their broadcast licenses was an option that was on the table. When they produced their latest round of discovery, there was concern inside the FCC that their response was evasive. They artificially limited the documents that they produced. They didn't fully answer questions. In fact, we're going back to them on that right now. When they file their renewal, there will be an opportunity for people to file petitions to deny, and we will have a choice at that point. Either we will find that they met the public interest standard and we will renew their licenses, or, alternatively, if we don't make that finding, we can set it for a hearing through a hearing designation order, and we will go wherever the facts take us. But, at the end of the day, we can't have companies that are discriminating against people based on race and gender. There's FCC rules on this for a long time about equal opportunity. And we will see if Disney did that or not.
EISEN: Right.
CARR: But that's what the basis of this investigation is.
EISEN: And it has nothing to do with Jimmy Kimmel? Just because the timing was suspicious, right? It came right after the president called for the firing of Jimmy Kimmel for that distasteful joke he made about Melania.
CARR: Yes, the renewal of the Disney license, the early renewal order that we directed was based on where we were in the enforcement of that DEI case. It came right on the heels of a second document production from Disney that, again, internally at the agency, there were significant concerns raised. Disney will have every opportunity to make its case, but there's been evidence pointing to potentially a systematic policy within Disney to hire, to promote, to compensate based on race and gender. If that turns out to be the case, that's a pretty big problem, and it's one that we're going to want to take action on at the FCC.
EISEN: There's also this, the investigation of "The View." And Disney fought back pretty hard, sending a filing, a regulatory filing, saying that you're trying to chill critical protected speech and shape media content to your liking, that the probe of "The View" is an effort to basically do this. How do you respond to that?
CARR: Well, Disney asserts that the order directing them to file this was an illegal, unlawful order. They decided to file the petition nonetheless. So now this issue has been teed up before the FCC. And what they're really taking issue at with their filing is federal law. So, federal law says, if you are not a bona fide news program, you have one legally qualified candidate on, then you have to provide equal opportunities to all others. And one of the core points that Disney is making is they believe that that federal law itself is unconstitutional or at least is unconstitutional applied to "The View." And we're going to work through the process there. But Disney is claiming that "The View" is a bona fide news program. And we will see what the FCC says about that.
EISEN: I mean, your own, your own FCC commissioner, a Democrat commissioner, told Josh D'Amaro, the CEO of Disney, that ABC has been a victim of a sustained coordinated campaign of censorship and control. I mean, that's pretty unusual for a regulator at a federal agency to basically say an investigation by that agency is without merit.
CARR: Well, the FCC has multiple members on it. As you know, there's a Democrat commissioner. I have been a Republican commissioner in the minority. I have sent my own letters. There's always robust disagreements about the direction of the agency. But we have been very clear from the get-go that this early renewal is about evidence indicating that Disney was engaged in race- and gender-based discrimination. And our action is not at Disney alone. So, for instance, we have done an early renewal on News Bridge, another broadcaster. We did a short renewal against a radio station in Mississippi. So, the really overarching message that we're sending is that broadcasters are fundamentally different than any other provider, whether you are a cable channel or a YouTube or a newspaper. And there are unique public interest obligations. And this FCC has said perhaps other agencies and other FCCs would look the other way, but we're newly holding broadcasters accountable across the board. I'd say that's the overarching theme.
EISEN: Would you be OK, if the Democrats get power over this agency, if a Democrat president is elected, if they assert the kind of power that you're doing and enforcement on conservative media?
CARR: Well, Democrats, when they were in charge of the FCC in the Biden eras, they claimed far more sweeping powers than I'm suggesting, and for overtly partisan political reasons, unlike the steps that we're taking. So, for instance, during the Biden years, they teed up potentially not renewing a FOX broadcast TV license for content on FOX News cable. There were Democrat senators, including Senator Markey, that previously, even before Biden, wrote to the FCC to ask them to investigate a perceived conservative broadcaster, Sinclair. And when the Biden FCC came in, they didn't renew almost a single license for Sinclair the entire time. That was unprecedented. Democrats pressured cable companies to drop FOX News and OAN and Newsmax. The list goes on and on of actual weaponization. But you don't hear about that, because a lot of the national news media just runs cover and doesn't focus any attention or news stories on that. So we're following the precedent at the FCC. My view is, let's just apply the law in an even-handed and fair way. The Democrats massively weaponized the FCC. I'm confident, if they get back again, they're going to massively weaponize it again. I don't think that means that we should do the same thing. Let's at least enforce the public interest standard.
EISEN: Yes. So you reject the idea that you're a culture war, warrior here and have turned the FCC, this independent commission, into a political one?
CARR: Well, if your culture is making sure that the laws on the books are enforced, then I guess I'm a culture warrior in that sense. But broadcasters are different. There's a public interest obligation. We have equal opportunity rules on the books. We have rules that prohibit discrimination based on race and gender. We have rules requiring that broadcasters actually identify the needs of their local community and serve it. And we're an FCC that is going to enforce those requirements. And if people don't like it, that's OK. There's so many ways now that you can get news and information out. They can switch over and become a cable channel. They can have a YouTube channel. There's lots of ways to get your information and news out there if you don't want to comply with the regulations that Congress has put in place for this one unique medium.
EISEN: Stephen Colbert goes off the air this week, after this week and "The Late Show." Is that a win for the administration?
CARR: Well, I don't know about that. I mean, look, this was a decision made by prior CBS leadership. I know there's been some confusion on the chronology there about when that was made and why it was made. My understanding was, it was made by prior CBS ownership because that show simply wasn't making any money anymore. I think a lot of things have changed with late night over the last several years, and a lot of people think it's just not in their business interest anymore to run that type of stuff.
EISEN: OK, Chairman Carr, thank you very much. It's always a pleasure getting through some of the topics that you're working on at the FCC. Appreciate the time.
CARR: Yes, good to be with you. Thanks.
For more information contact:
Stephanie Hirlemann
CNBC
