This is The Stepback, a weekly newsletter breaking down one essential story from the tech world. For more stories on Big Tech versus politics in Washington, DC, follow Tina Nguyen and read Regulator. The Stepback arrives in our subscribers’ inboxes at 8AM ET. Opt in for The Stepback here.
Technology
The future of local TV news has taken a Trumpian turn
A long time ago, in 2004, the Federal Communications Commission laid down a rule designed to prevent a monopoly: No one company could broadcast to more than 39 percent of all the TV households in the United States. But then Donald Trump returned to the White House in 2025. Brendan Carr became FCC chairman and immediately kicked off a deregulatory initiative called “Delete, Delete, Delete,” in which Carr vowed to get rid of “every rule, regulation, or guidance document” that placed “unnecessary regulatory burdens” on companies. And within months, Nexstar, which already owned over 200 stations nationwide and had hit its ownership cap, announced that it had entered an agreement to purchase its rival, Tegna, for an estimated $6.2 billion — something that could only happen, however, if Carr agreed to change the FCC’s rules.
If you ask Nexstar why it’s pursuing a merger that would give it control of over 80 percent of the market, it’d point to Big Tech as the culprit. As advertisers take their money to Netflix, YouTube, and other digital streamers, linear television — the local television news, the broadcast affiliates, the basic cable networks — has suffered, forcing them to consolidate and shut down newsrooms. In that sense, Nexstar argued, the merger would help it compete for ad revenue with the streaming services, thereby building more robust local journalism. However, the merger’s opponents believe that this is a basic violation of antitrust laws and principles — not to mention the danger of letting one company have editorial control over the vast majority of America’s local television newsrooms.
But the second Trump administration handles regulatory hurdles a little differently than others, and companies have found that it’s faster to get what they want if they bypass the agencies and talk (read: suck up) to Trump directly. And when Nexstar did so publicly, it confirmed its opponents’ fears about political influence. Last September, in the fraught weeks after the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk, Nexstar announced it would no longer broadcast Jimmy Kimmel Live! — a response to Carr’s claim that the FCC could revoke the broadcast licenses of TV stations that aired the comedian’s comments related to Kirk. It briefly led to ABC suspending Kimmel’s show, though ABC and Nexstar soon reversed their decision after a massive nationwide backlash and an ABC boycott.
However, Nexstar’s loyalty to Trump himself was not enough to win over his most powerful MAGA supporters. Newsmax, a cable news network with a deeply pro-Trump bent, and its CEO, longtime Trump donor and outside adviser Chris Ruddy, filed a lawsuit objecting to the merger, claiming that Nexstar’s anticompetitive behavior would force channels like his off the air with steeper carriage fees. He specifically accused Nexstar of jacking up the fees for stations to carry Newsmax, while offering its similar network, NewsNation, for much cheaper.
The Nexstar-Tegna MAGA makeover then took a more subtle turn. NewsNation hired the pro-Trump Fox News commentator Katie Pavlich and gave her her own primetime show. (The network had already hired a slew of former Fox journalists as well.) Around this time, a political group called Keep News Local began airing ads in DC that seemed to directly address Trump, praising him for having “defeated the fake news monopolies before through independent voices and local news” and claiming that the Nexstar-Tegna merger was “crucial for MAGA to survive.” (A little self-contradictory and mildly illogical, but it’s the kind of stuff that Trump likes to hear.) When I last spoke to Ruddy in February, I asked if he’d worried that the dark money going into Keep News Local would sway Trump, and he chose his words carefully: “I think at the end of the day, Trump makes up his own mind. I’m not sure he’s going to be influenced by an ad campaign.”
For months, no one could accurately predict if Trump would override Carr’s wishes and bless the deal, as he’s often done for other companies facing regulatory scrutiny. Trump’s Truth Social posts about the merger have been a good indicator of how precarious the merger has been and who’s been able to influence him at any given moment: Last November, he blasted the deal as an “EXPANSION OF THE FAKE NEWS NETWORKS,” but by February, he posted that the deal would “help knock out the Fake News because there will be more competition.”
Several current and former NewsNation employees told Status at the time that they feared that the parent company was steering NewsNation away from the centrist, “unbiased” reputation they’d long cultivated. “A lot of people within the network believe that the network has gone hard right to appeal to Trump and Brendan Carr,” one former employee told Status. Coincidentally, days before the deal was finalized, NewsNation began ramping up its explicitly pro-Trump content, tweeting a clip of CNN’s Kaitlan Collins being berated by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, along with the comment “Just going to leave this here.”
When Trump greenlit the merger in mid-March, but before the FCC’s three commissioners could vote on whether to waive the ownership cap, Nexstar and Tegna immediately announced a new complication: Tegna and Nexstar had already started merging. Tegna was no more and CEO Mike Steib had already sold $22.6 million of his company stock.
In response, eight state attorneys general and satellite TV operator DirectTV, which had already been planning to file separate federal antitrust suits against the merger, asked US District Judge Troy Nunley in Sacramento for an emergency restraining order that would prevent Nexstar from taking over Tegna’s assets. The order was granted on March 27th and on April 17, Nunley issued a formal injunction, ruling that Tegna must be operated as an independent financial entity, and Nexstar must take steps to ensure it remains separate from Tegna before further legal proceedings.
For now, Nunley has allowed the states and DirecTV to combine their cases, in which both argue that the merger was a clear violation of antitrust laws and would crush news competition.
Meanwhile, Republicans and Democrats in Congress are furious at Carr. On March 30th, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) sent the chairman a joint letter admonishing him for allowing his staff to waive the regulations to let the merger pass, instead of having the full commission of political appointees — one from the Biden administration — vote on it. “Under these circumstances,” they wrote, “any subsequent vote risks being largely procedural rather than a genuine exercise of commission responsibility.” They also pointed out that their hasty approval without the commission’s approval would now complicate the merger financially: “In a transaction of this scale, where integration proceeds quickly and unwinding becomes impractical, delay in judicial review can insulate the decision from meaningful challenge.” Notably, though they share similar ideological views on the media and deregulation, Cruz and Carr have frequently clashed over how to achieve their objectives. Cruz previously slammed Carr as a “mafioso,” for instance, for the way he’d used the FCC to silence Kimmel.
But even if it’s legally paused, the journalistic merger’s fallout has started to hit local news. NPR’s David Folkenfirk reported on Tuesday that Tegna journalists had already started receiving orders to stop broadcasting content from major broadcasters like ABC, CBS, and NBC — media outlets being targeted by Carr — and instead begin airing content from Nexstar’s NewsNation.
- Brendan Carr’s views on using the FCC to punish major broadcasters was outlined pretty extensively in the chapter he authored in Project 2025, an initiative led by the conservative Heritage Foundation on how to reform the federal bureaucracy to be more favorable to the American right.
- Exactly how much is local television losing to digital? According to industry publication NewscastStudio, in an investor call defending the purchase, Nexstar chairman Perry Sook cited a market research study from Borrell Associates, which found that “digital advertising in local markets exceeds $100 billion, compared to just $25 billion for local linear television advertising, with nearly two-thirds of digital ad dollars flowing to five major technology companies.”
- If you want to see exactly how much Keep Local News was trying to suck up to Trump, the ads are archived here.
- The Vergecast has a long-running segment called “Brendan Carr is a dummy.”
- The LA Times reported on last week’s preliminary hearings in front of Nunley, and how lawyers for Nexstar, the states, and DirecTV plan to argue their case.
- The Desk has insights from Kirk Varner, a former TV newsroom director, on how the case could go.
- Andrew Liptak covered Nexstar’s previous acquisition sprees for The Verge in 2018.
- Adi Robertson walks through exactly how the Kimmel suspension was an attack on free speech.
- Brendan Carr keeps trying to convince people that he’s not threatening to suspend broadcast licenses for reporting on unfavorable things like the Iran war, reports Lauren Feiner.
- The Vergecast has a long-running segment called “Brendan Carr is a dummy.”
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A Chinese-built humanoid robot beat the human half-marathon world record in Beijing on Sunday, marking a breakthrough moment in a high-stakes global race for technological dominance.
A robot developed by Chinese smartphone maker Honor completed the 21-kilometer (13-mile) race in 50 minutes and 26 seconds, beating the human record of about 57 minutes set by Uganda’s Jacob Kiplimo last month.
The performance marked a dramatic improvement from last year’s inaugural event, when the top robot finished in more than 2 hours and 40 minutes.
Dozens of humanoid robots competed alongside about 12,000 human runners, navigating a parallel course to avoid collisions.
CHINA’S COMPACT HUMANOID ROBOT SHOWS OFF BALANCE AND FLIPS
A robot crosses the finish line in the Beijing E-Town Half Marathon and Humanoid Robot Half-Marathon held in the outskirts of Beijing on April 19, 2026. (Andy Wong/AP)
Nearly half of the robots ran using autonomous navigation, while others relied on remote control, organizers said.
Despite the breakthrough, the race still saw glitches, with some robots stumbling at the start or veering into barriers.
Engineers said the winning robot was designed to mimic elite athletes, featuring long legs of about 37 inches and advanced cooling systems to sustain performance.
US TARGETS CHINESE ROBOTS OVER SECURITY FEARS
“Looking ahead, some of these technologies might be transferred to other areas,” said Du Xiaodi, an engineer with the Honor team. “For example, structural reliability and liquid-cooling technology could be applied in future industrial scenarios.”
Team members celebrate next to the winning Honor Lightning humanoid robot during a medal ceremony after the second Beijing E-Town Half Marathon and Humanoid Robot Half Marathon in Beijing, China, on April 19, 2026. (Maxim Shemetov/Reuters)
Spectators reacted with a mix of amazement and unease at the machines’ rapid progress.
“It’s the first time robots have surpassed humans, and that’s something I never imagined,” Sun Zhigang, who attended the event with his son, told The Associated Press.
HUMANOID ROBOTS HIT MASS PRODUCTION IN CHINA
“The robots’ speed far exceeds that of humans,” spectator Wang Wen told the outlet. “This may signal the arrival of sort of a new era.”
A robot starts alongside human runners at the Beijing E-Town Half Marathon and Humanoid Half Marathon on the outskirts of Beijing on April 19, 2026. (Ng Han Guan/AP)
Experts say the race highlights China’s accelerating push to dominate robotics and artificial intelligence, even as widespread commercial use of humanoid robots remains limited, according to Reuters. The experts said Chinese robotics firms are still working to develop the AI software needed for humanoids to match the efficiency of human factory workers.
Runners take pictures of a humanoid robot during the second Beijing E-Town Half Marathon and Humanoid Robot Half Marathon in Beijing on April 19, 2026. (Haruna Furuhashi/Pool Photo via AP)
“The future will definitely be an AI era,” engineering student Chu Tianqi told Reuters. “If people don’t know how to use AI now … they will definitely become obsolete.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The competition underscores a broader technological race between China and the United States, as Beijing invests heavily in advanced robotics as part of its long-term economic strategy.
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
According to Nikkei Asia, even as suppliers ramp up DRAM production, manufacturers are only expected to meet 60 percent of demand by the end of 2027. SK Group chairman has even said that shortages could last until 2030.
The world’s largest memory makers — Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron — are all working to add new fabrication capacity, but almost none of it will be online until at least 2027, if not 2028. SK opened a fab in Cheongju in February, but that is the only increase in production among the three for 2026.
Nikkei says that production would need to increase by 12 percent a year in 2026 and 2027 to meet demand. But according to Counterpoint Research, an increase of only 7.5 percent is planned.
The new facilities will primarily focus on producing high-bandwidth memory (HBM), which is used in AI data centers. With the companies already prioritizing HBM over general-purpose DRAM used in computers and phones, it’s not clear how much these new fabs will help alleviate the price crunch facing consumer electronics. Everything from phones and laptops, to VR headsets and gaming handhelds have seen price increases due to the RAM shortage.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Most people assume scammers need to hack something. A database. A password. A bank system. They don’t.
In most cases, everything a scammer needs to target you is already sitting online, publicly available, completely legal to access, and surprisingly easy to find.
Here’s what they’re actually looking at before they ever pick up the phone.
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
Data broker listings often include sensitive details like your address, phone number and relatives, making removal a critical first step. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
Your personal profile is already out there, and it’s more complete than you think
There’s an entire industry built around collecting and selling your personal information. It’s called data brokering, and most people have never heard of it.
Right now, without your knowledge or consent, your details are being published by dozens of websites, including:
- People search sites (like Whitepages, Spokeo, and BeenVerified): your full name, current address, phone numbers, and age.
- Address lookup tools: your current and past home addresses, sometimes going back decades.
- Relatives databases: the names and contact information of your family members, automatically linked to your profile.
- Property records: whether you own your home, what it’s worth, and when you bought it.
None of this requires a hack. It’s all pulled from public records, voter registrations, court filings, real estate transactions, marriage and divorce records and assembled into a profile that anyone can search for a few dollars or sometimes for free.
They’re not guessing. They’re researching
In 2024, federal prosecutors indicted a network of scam call centers operating out of Montreal that had defrauded hundreds of elderly Americans out of more than $21 million. What made the scheme so effective wasn’t sophisticated technology. It was a spreadsheet.
The scammers were working from lists of potential victims that included names, ages, and household income information pulled from commercial databases. They used those lists to identify targets, then called them pretending to be grandchildren in trouble. The calls were convincing enough that victims handed over thousands of dollars, sometimes in cash picked up at the door.
They didn’t hack anyone. They just did their research first.
WHY WIDOWS AND DIVORCED WOMEN ARE TARGETS FOR RETIREMENT SCAMS
A call that sounds personal or urgent often relies on real information found about you online. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
Three ways scammers turn your public data into a weapon
Scammers use your publicly available data to make their attacks more personal, believable and harder to detect. Here are three ways they do it.
1) Impersonating your bank
A scammer calls and says, “Hi, this is fraud prevention at [your bank]. We’re seeing suspicious activity on your account ending in 4721.”
They already know your bank, your name, and possibly your address. That’s enough to sound legitimate. From there, they walk you through “confirming your identity,” which is really just you handing over the information they need to access your account.
This kind of scam starts with a simple people-search lookup. Your name and address lead to property records. Property records suggest your income range.
2) The family emergency call
Imagine getting a call: “Meemaw, it’s me. I’m in trouble. Please don’t tell Mom.” Scammers don’t guess. Instead, they research your family first. They use relatives’ databases to find your children’s names, ages and connections.
With that information, they build a story that sounds real. For example, they know to call you “Meemaw.” They also know which grandchild to impersonate. In some cases, they even mention a sibling’s name to make the story more convincing.
As a result, the call feels personal and urgent. However, none of it is random. It’s all based on information that was publicly available the entire time.
3) Targeted phishing with your own details
A phishing email that says “Dear Customer” is easy to ignore. One that says “Dear [your full name], we noticed unusual activity on your account registered to [your home address]” is a lot harder to dismiss.
Scammers use publicly available data to personalize attacks, adding your real name, city, or even a reference to your neighborhood to make a fake email or text look authentic. The more specific the details, the more likely you are to believe it.
“But I’m not on social media.” This is the most common objection, and it misses the point entirely.
You don’t have to be on social media for your information to be online. Data brokers pull from public records, not your Facebook profile. Your information is likely already listed on dozens of sites because of:
The less they think they’ve shared, the more surprised people usually are when they search for themselves on a people-search site for the first time.
DATA BROKERS ACCUSED OF HIDING OPT-OUT PAGES FROM GOOGLE
The more details a scam includes, the more likely it is built from your publicly available data. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
How to reduce your exposure
You don’t have to accept this as permanent. A few practical steps can help:
- Search your full name on Whitepages, Spokeo, FastPeopleSearch, and other people-search sites and submit opt-out requests.
- Look up your address directly, not just your name, since many listings are organized by location.
- Ask elderly family members to search for themselves, too, since older adults are disproportionately targeted.
- Be skeptical of any call that opens with personal details, as it can be a sign that someone researched you first.
How to remove your personal data and stop scammers from finding you
The challenge is that there are hundreds of data broker sites, each with its own removal process. Manually opting out of all of them can take hours, and your information often reappears weeks later when brokers refresh their databases.
That’s why ongoing automated removal is the only approach that actually works. That’s why I recommend using a trusted data removal service.
These services automatically contact data brokers on your behalf and request the removal of your personal information. They also continue monitoring those sites and submit new removal requests if your data reappears.
Many services remove personal data from hundreds of data broker and people-search websites, and some plans allow you to request removals from additional sites as needed.
Some have also received third-party assurance from independent firms, helping validate their claims.
The goal is simple: make it much harder for strangers, scammers, and cybercriminals to find your personal information online.
These services often include a money-back guarantee, so you can try them risk-free and see how much of your information is exposed online.
Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.com
Get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web: Cyberguy.com
Kurt’s key takeaways
Most scams don’t start with a breach. They start with a search. Your name, address, relatives and even income clues are already out there, quietly fueling more convincing and more dangerous attacks. That’s what makes this so unsettling. You can do everything “right” online and still be exposed because the system itself is built to share your information. The good news is you’re not powerless. Once you understand how scammers build their playbook, you can start disrupting it. Removing your data, limiting exposure and staying skeptical of anyone who knows a little too much about you can dramatically reduce your risk. The goal isn’t to disappear completely. It’s to make yourself a much harder target.
What should be done to stop scammers from using your publicly available data against you in the first place? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.
-
Crypto2 minutes ago1 Cryptocurrency to Buy While It’s Under $80,000
-
Finance8 minutes agoBudget crisis is top concern for MPS leader Cassellius | Opinion
-
Fitness14 minutes agoI’m a running coach — I’ve just tested shoes actually designed for women’s feet, and they’re a total game changer
-
Movie Reviews26 minutes ago‘Hen’ movie review: György Pálfi pecks at Europe’s migrant crisis through the eyes of a chicken
-
Business56 minutes agoVideo: Why Your Paycheck Feels Smaller
-
Culture1 hour agoFamous Authors’ Less Famous Books
-
Lifestyle1 hour agoSunday Puzzle: For Mimi
-
World2 hours agoPope Leo says remarks about world being ‘ravaged by a handful of tyrants’ were not aimed at Trump: report