At many organizations, senior leaders have a positive view of their employees’ ability and willingness to use AI. In our recent survey of 1,400 U.S.-based employees, 76% of executives reported that their employees feel enthusiastic about AI adoption in their organization. But the view from the bottom up is less sunny: Just 31% of individual contributors expressed enthusiasm about adopting AI. That means leaders are more than two times off the mark.
Artificial intelligence is slowly entering the world of reserve management, but not in the way outsiders might assume. A new report by OMFIF’s Global Public Investor Working Group shows central banks approaching AI with caution shaped by years of market shocks, cybersecurity incidents and the hard lessons of operational risk. Behind the interest lies a simple tension. AI can make reserve management faster and more efficient, but it also expands the attack surface, accelerates market dynamics and exposes institutions to mistakes they cannot afford.
The working group, made up of BNY, Bridgewater and Capital Group, brought together 10 central banks through bilateral exchanges across Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America. Their discussions revealed a pattern that cuts across mandates and regional tensions. The technology is coming, but central banks want control before capability. They are not willing to let algorithms set the pace.
Adoption is happening, but mostly at the edges
Most institutions are experimenting with AI only in low-risk processes: scanning market news, flagging anomalies and summarising reports. According to OMFIF’s Global Public Investor 2025 survey, 61% of central banks say AI is not yet supporting their operations in any meaningful way (Figure 1.1). Those dipping their toes in describe it as a practical convenience rather than a strategic tool.
A European participant of the working group discussions noted that AI can help unclog routine bottlenecks, easing the burden on small teams. Others see potential in automated data processing or environmental, social and governance data screening. AI may accelerate workflows, but it is not allowed near decisions that carry financial, reputational or political consequences.
Figure 1.1. Adoption of AI is limited
How is artificial intelligence supporting your operations? Share of respondents, %
Source: OMFIF Global Public Investor 2025 survey
Those furthest ahead are also the most uneasy
A striking insight from the working group conversations is that the institutions with the most advanced use of AI are also the most concerned about its risks. They understand the potential, but they also see the limitations. Model reliability remains a top worry, especially given how often AI tools misinterpret unusual scenarios. Central banks, whose work revolves around rare but disruptive shocks, have little tolerance for such risks.
Cybersecurity is the bigger fear. One policy-maker warned that a breach involving reserves data would not just be an operational problem but a political one. In their words, prudence is credibility. Central banks are keenly aware that adopting AI without airtight governance could endanger both.
AI may make accelerate crises
One of the most interesting working group exchanges came from a central bank already testing AI-driven analytics in market monitoring. Its concern was not about errors in calm times, but about what happens when markets are stressed. Broader use of AI in trading could accelerate how quickly liquidity disappears, turning crises that once unfolded over days into minutes.
This concern is grounded in how these systems are built. Models trained on comparable datasets often respond in similar ways, which can help steady markets during quiet periods, though it also raises questions about how they might behave when conditions turn volatile. For reserve managers who rely on liquidity to defend currencies or stabilise markets, this poses a profound challenge.
Figure 1.2. Central banks prioritising digital capacity
Are you looking to introduce or expand your use of the following digital technologies? Share of respondents, %
Source: OMFIF GPI 2025 survey
The working group’s conversations showed that the divide between central banks on AI is not about enthusiasm but about capability (Figure 1.2). Some institutions have in-house data scientists and secure enterprise environments. Others have small teams, limited budgets and governance structures that make experimentation slow.
A participant said: ‘We lag, but we cannot lag forever’. For these institutions, AI is less a choice and more an inevitability. But they need training, digital infrastructure and peer support before it becomes safe to bring AI closer to core functions.
The next phase will be about control
Central banks have no interest in outsourcing judgement to machines. The working group report makes clear that human oversight is the anchor. AI can summarise, filter and accelerate, but decisions remain with people.
The question is not whether AI will enter reserve management. The question is how central banks manage the risks it brings. The institutions that move carefully but deliberately by strengthening cybersecurity, investing in skills and building internal capacity will be best placed to employ the technology without being overwhelmed by it.
AI can sharpen decision-making. It can also destabilise markets. Navigating that tension is becoming one of the defining tasks of modern reserve management.
Yara Aziz is Senior Economist at OMFIF.
Download ‘Redefining resilience in reserve management’.
Interested in this topic? Subscribe to OMFIF’s newsletter for more.
BRUSSELS, November 26, 2025 – More than 200 CEOs and senior executives from the world’s leading businesses in hydrogen are gathering next week in Seoul, South Korea for the Hydrogen Council’s Global CEO Summit, to align on action needed to accelerate hydrogen deployment and unlock commercial-scale demand by 2030.
Co-hosted by Hyundai Motor Group Vice Chair Jaehoon Chang, Co-Chair of the Hydrogen Council, the Summit will be joined by Korean political leadership – such as Vice Minister of Climate, Energy and Environment and the Governor of Jeju, government officials from France, Germany, Switzerland, The Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Australia and Indonesia, and top representatives from international organizations such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). In addition, a delegation of Hydrogen Council CEOs will participate in the World Hydrogen Expo and a high-level pre-meeting with Korea’s Minister of Climate, Energy and Environment, Sung-hwan Kim.
With USD 110 billion in committed investment across more than 500 projects past financial investment decision (FID), in construction or operation globally – a ten-fold increase since 2020 – the technology is proven, projects are being built, and the industry is ready to scale. Against this backdrop, discussion at the CEO Summit will focus on shaping the next chapter of hydrogen build-out through action on demand, regulations, infrastructure and standards.
The CEO Summit will make history as the world’s first major international business event to use 100% -powered transportation. Attendees will ride exclusively in Hyundai NEXO vehicles and fuel cell buses, providing a real-world demonstration of hydrogen mobility.
“As Co-Chair of the Hydrogen Council, we are honored to host the Global CEO Summit 2025 and proud to welcome global leaders to South Korea where we are delighted to showcase the strength and progress of Korea’s hydrogen industry,” said Jaehoon Chang, Vice-Chair of Hyundai Motor Group. “This Summit not only highlights the industry’s dedication to hydrogen technology but also reinforces our collective commitment to turn vision into action. As demand becomes our next big test, public-private collaboration will be essential to realize hydrogen’s full potential in the next phase of scale-up.”
Ivana Jemelkova, CEO of the Hydrogen Council, said: “In just five years, the global clean hydrogen sector has scaled at remarkable pace, with investment growing over 50% year-over-year. As the world’s largest and only CEO-led business initiative on hydrogen, the Hydrogen Council brings together top global leaders to work together, and with governments, to unlock the next stage of growth.”
Nvidia has claimed it is “a generation ahead” of rivals in the artificial intelligence (AI) industry amid growing suggestions a rival may emerge to threaten to its market dominance – and multi-trillion dollar valuation.
Shares in the chip giant fell on Tuesday, following a report Meta planned to spend billions on AI chips developed by Google to power its data centres.
In a statement on X, Nvidia, the world’s most valuable company, said it was the only platform which “runs every AI model and does it everywhere computing is done”.
In response, Google said it was committed to “supporting both” its own and Nvidia’s chips.
Nvidia’s chips have become a critical part of powering the data centres behind many of the most popular AI tools, such as ChatGPT.
In October it became the first company ever to be valued at $5tn (£3.8tn).
The American firm has been looking to expand its reach further in recent months, announcing an agreement in October to supply some of its most advanced artificial intelligence (AI) chips to South Korea’s government, as well as Samsung, LG, and Hyundai.
Google rents access to its chips, called tensor processing units (TPUs), through Google Cloud to AI developers.
In other words, they are not sold externally – but kept for the tech giant’s own data centres.
But if recent reports are correct – that the tech company could be in talks to sell its chips to power other data centres – it would represent a significant change.
The news saw Nvidia shares fall nearly 6% on Tuesday, whilst those in Alphabet, Google’s parent company, rose by nearly the same percentage.
In the hours following the drop, the chip giant posted on X to state it still offered “greater performance” and “versatility” than the types of chips Google is producing.
In the past year, both Amazon and Microsoft have announced they also have AI chips in development.
Dame Wendy Hall, Regius Professor of Computer Science at the University of Southampton, told the BBC’s Today programme the news of the potential deal between Google and Meta was “healthy” for the market.
“Investment is pouring into this area,” she said.
“At the moment there is no real return on that investment except for Nvidia”.
This website of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, N.J., USA (the “company”) includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of the company’s management and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. There can be no guarantees with respect to pipeline candidates that the candidates will receive the necessary regulatory approvals or that they will prove to be commercially successful. If underlying assumptions prove inaccurate or risks or uncertainties materialize, actual results may differ materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements.
Risks and uncertainties include but are not limited to, general industry conditions and competition; general economic factors, including interest rate and currency exchange rate fluctuations; the impact of pharmaceutical industry regulation and health care legislation in the United States and internationally; global trends toward health care cost containment; technological advances, new products and patents attained by competitors; challenges inherent in new product development, including obtaining regulatory approval; the company’s ability to accurately predict future market conditions; manufacturing difficulties or delays; financial instability of international economies and sovereign risk; dependence on the effectiveness of the company’s patents and other protections for innovative products; and the exposure to litigation, including patent litigation, and/or regulatory actions.
The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements can be found in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and the company’s other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) available at the SEC’s Internet site (www.sec.gov).
No Duty to Update
The information contained in this website was current as of the date presented. The company assumes no duty to update the information to reflect subsequent developments. Consequently, the company will not update the information contained in the website and investors should not rely upon the information as current or accurate after the presentation date.
Nuclear-powered containerships have the potential to eliminate bunker costs, cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and deliver faster transit times, while maintaining safety and economic competitiveness.
The findings are drawn from a new Lloyd’s Register and LucidCatalyst report for Seaspan Corporation Pte. Ltd. The report examines the technical, economic, and regulatory potential of integrating small modular reactors (SMRs) into the containership fleet. LucidCatalyst performed a comprehensive analysis of the costs and benefits for Seaspan’s business model and collaboratively developed requirements that, if met, would create significant value.
For vessel operators, nuclear-powered vessels eliminate their largest operating costs, up to $50 million annually in bunker fuel and an estimated $18 million in carbon penalties.
According to the analysis, a single 15,000 TEU nuclear-powered containership operating at 25 knots (39% faster than conventional vessels) could deliver up to 38% higher annual cargo capacity compared to conventionally fuelled vessels through a combination of increased speed (enabling 6.3 versus 5 round voyages annually) and 5% additional container space from the elimination of fuel tanks and systems.
The report highlights that translating these requirements into a rigorous, requirements-led supply chain and procurement strategy, through a cross-industry consortium, is essential for widespread success. If industry pledges to purchase more than 1,000 units in 10–15 years, it estimates that modular reactors could be produced for US$750–1,000 per kilowatt, significantly cheaper than conventional nuclear power plants, and maintained within standard vessel drydock cycles. Each unit would be designed to operate for around five years between refuelling, drastically reducing downtime and providing independence from global bunkering networks.
The study outlines a roadmap showing how manufactured nuclear propulsion units could reach commercial readiness within four years of starting an intensive program, with total system costs below $4,000/kW and fuel costs under $50/MWh. Market modelling indicates potential uptake of 40–90 GW by 2050, depending on regulatory progress and industry adoption.
The findings also point to best practices for designing a competitive supply chain that provides depth of supply, competition on price and performance, and avoids vendor ‘lock-in’, as well as innovative reactor and fuel-leasing models that could help shipowners and operators manage upfront costs while maintaining safety and regulatory compliance.
The report forms the first phase of a three-part programme. The next stage will focus on concept design and regulatory readiness, including engagement with shipyards, port authorities, and nuclear regulators. A final phase will create a detailed implementation roadmap, outlining risk management, certification, and investment strategies for large-scale deployment.
Meg Dowling, Senior Engineer – Nuclear Technology and Alternative Fuels, Lloyd’s Register, said: “The energy transition and long-term sustainability challenges of shipping demands long-term solutions that can scale. Nuclear propulsion offers not just a decarbonised solution, but a transformative economic opportunity for shipowners and charterers alike. The results of this research give us a strong foundation to define how systems can be integrated within the commercial fleet to provide a credible pathway towards safe, commercially viable, zero-emission shipping.”
Peter Jackson, Chief Technology Officer at Seaspan Corporation Pte. Ltd., said: “As part of our ongoing efforts to find safe and commercially viable energy transition pathways, we have partnered with LR and Lucid Catalyst to explore nuclear propulsion for containerships. Small Modular Reactors (SMR’s) is a very exciting technology offering several desirable benefits for shipowners and operators, as outlined in this report. Naturally there are challenges to overcome, but I am confident that ongoing work in this area and studies like this will soon allow nuclear powered containerships to be operating safely, economically, and emission free.”
Eric Ingersoll, Managing Partner, LucidCatalyst, added: “Nuclear propulsion transforms shipping economics, not just emissions. Our analysis shows that nuclear-powered containerships will likely outcompete conventionally fuelled and green fuelled competitors—dominating their trading routes through superior performance without requiring green premiums. The key to unlocking this advantage is organising the market through sophisticated supply chain and technology strategies. By forming a cross-industry consortium, we can build a responsive supply chain and achieve competitive reactor costs, making nuclear the economically optimal choice for shipowners and charterers alike.”
LR has been leading industry efforts to develop the safety, regulatory and assurance frameworks needed for nuclear propulsion at sea. It is a founding member of the Nuclear Energy Maritime Organisation (NEMO) and an active contributor to the IAEA’s Atomic Technologies Licensed at Sea (ATLAS) programme. Both initiatives are shaping the global regulatory landscape for commercial nuclear shipping.
LR recently issued Navigating Nuclear Energy in Maritime, a new guidance document providing the first roadmap for the safe and responsible use of nuclear technology in commercial shipping and offshore industries. This guidance builds on LR’s industry-leading Fuel for Thought: Nuclear research programme, which brings together decades of classification, safety and compliance expertise with specialist nuclear insight to provide an evidence-based framework for project teams at every stage of development.
Addis Ababa, 26 November 2025. Ethiopian Airlines, Africa’s leading aviation group, has adopted Accelya’s FLX Select, a rapid-to-deploy NDC (New Distribution Capability) service. Through this adoption, Ethiopian Airlines aims to unlock new revenue streams, reduce distribution costs and offer passengers an improved shopping experience.
NDC provides travel sellers and passengers with greater visibility and choice, offering richer and more relevant offers, and expanded access to ancillary and bundled services. By adopting FLX Select, Ethiopian Airlines leverages the capabilities of Accelya’s NDC to enhance travel retailing capabilities and strengthen relationships with travel sellers.
Ethiopian Airlines’ choice of FLX Select demonstrates a strategic focus towards retailing, reflecting the need to expand distribution options amid rising travel demand. Accelya’s track record in NDC implementation offers a clear roadmap for airlines to optimize distribution, broaden retail opportunities, and keep pace with evolving market expectations.
“NDC adoption is a practical step toward the future of Offer and Order retailing,” said Sam Gilliland, CEO at Accelya. “As Africa’s largest airline brand, Ethiopian Airline’s approach shows how airlines can make progress without disruption – modernizing at their own pace with open, modular technology that keeps them in control.”
Rahel Assefa, Group Vice President Marketing at Ethiopian Airlines, said: ” Our adoption of FLX Select marks a pivotal step in delivering a more personalized global travel experience and reinforcing our mission as the airline of choice for customers worldwide. This partnership redefines our retail strategy and underscores our commitment to innovation and customer-centricity.”
FLX Select is part of Accelya’s FLX ONE platform, powered by Amazon Web Services (AWS). Through a Strategic Collaboration Agreement with AWS, Accelya is accelerating the delivery of scalable, secure cloud solutions that help airlines modernize Offers and Orders. The platform enables airlines to manage Offer, Order, Settle, and Deliver processes through open, modular architecture. According to independent research firm T2RL, Accelya powers nearly 50 percent of global NDC transactions, helping airlines modernize retailing while maintaining full control over how their products are created, sold, and serviced.
ENDS
About Accelya
Accelya is a global leader in airline software, powering over 200 airlines with an open, modular platform that enables them to drive growth, enhance customer experiences, and take control of their retailing. Our FLX ONE platform empowers airlines to transform across Offer, Order, Settlement, and Delivery (OOSD), in line with IATA’s standards for modern retailing.
With a cloud-native infrastructure powered by AWS, Accelya processes more than 30 billion unique offers daily, settles over $100 billion annually, and delivers more than 50% of global NDC volumes. Our solutions span the entire retail lifecycle, both above and below the wing, giving airlines the flexibility, performance, scalability, and reliability they need.
Backed by 40 years of industry expertise, long-term support from Vista Equity Partners, and 2,500 employees across 10 global offices, Accelya has the scale and proven track record to meet the evolving needs of the airline industry.
For more information, visit the Accelya Website.
Media Relations: accelya@missive.co.uk
About Ethiopian
Ethiopian Airlines Group (Ethiopian) is a true African success story, transforming a visionary dream into a globally renowned reality for nearly eight decades. Operating flights to more than 160 domestic and international passenger, and cargo destinations across five continents, Ethiopian bridges the gaps between Africa and the world. Emphasizing passenger comfort and environmental sustainability, Ethiopian utilizes ultra-modern aircraft such as Boeing 737s, 777s, 787s, Airbus A350-900, A350-1000 and De Havilland Q400.
Ethiopian, the Star Alliance member airline, champions in various coveted awards including Skytrax’s ‘Best Airline in Africa Award’ for eight consecutive years, APEX ‘Best Overall in Africa’ award and ‘Leadership in Connecting Africa through Transport’ Award among others. Ethiopian aims to further excel in its success through a strategic plan dubbed ‘Vision 2035’ and become one of the top 20 most competitive and leading aviation groups in the world. Embracing a Pan-African spirit, Ethiopian is pursuing multi-hub strategy through hubs in Lomé, Togo with ASKY, in Lilongwe, Malawi with Malawi Airlines, in Lusaka, Zambia with Zambia Airways, and in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) with Air Congo.
For more information, visit our website at www.ethiopianairlines.com email us at CorporateCommunication@ethiopianairlines.com , or call us at (251-11)517-8913/8165/8907.
Kevin KeaneScotland environment, energy and rural affairs correspondent
Getty ImagesIt’s being viewed as a make or break moment for Europe’s energy capital – as Aberdeen waits to see whether the chancellor will scrap the windfall tax.
The industry says the tax, which was introduced when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine caused oil prices to spike sharply, is crippling the sector.
The oil price has since halved, to about $60 a barrel, and companies say there are no profits to be made under such a high tax regime so are taking their cash to other parts of the world.
Investment in the North Sea is at a record low and a study from Robert Gordon University says jobs are being “quietly” lost at a rate of 1,000 a month.
Whoever you speak to in the north-east, from oil executives to taxi drivers and hairdressers, they know a surprising amount about this unusual corporation tax.
Formally known as the Energy Profits Levy, it means that operators are handing over 78% of their profits to the Treasury.
The rate is one of the highest in the world and, though the headline figure is matched by Norway, our North Sea neighbour has much more favourable tax reliefs.
It’s a difficult dance for political parties, many of whom have prioritised tackling the climate crisis which is driven by greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels.
The simple argument is that more oil and gas production from the North Sea equals more emissions, but it’s actually much more nuanced than that.
The Climate Change Committee has made it clear that our economy will need hydrocarbons in ever-diminishing quantities for decades to come and replacing domestic production with imports makes no sense.
In fact, emissions from producing a barrel of North Sea crude are much lower than many Middle Eastern oil fields, and shipping it halfway across the world burns even more fuel.
That’s part of the reason why the Scottish SNP government has stepped away from its “presumption against” new oil and gas, saying instead that each application must be made on its merit.
The UK Labour government appears to be giving some ground too as it’s reported that a review of the future of the North Sea will allow small “tiebacks” where existing oil and gas fields stray into currently-unlicenced areas.
In theory, that would help prolong the future of the North Sea, with some green groups even suggesting that it’s a reasonable compromise.
Getty ImagesThe main concern for environmentalists is that the UK doesn’t allow any more Rosebank-scale oil fields, which is so big it requires entirely new infrastructure.
But for the industry, this offer on tiebacks would be seen as meaningless, throwing a few crumbs of comfort while entirely avoiding the biggest deterrent to investment.
One urged me not to be “hoodwinked” into believing that tiebacks were the answer to the North Sea’s woes.
If the headline tax rate remains at 78%, companies would simply keep their cash off the table, whether the investment would be in new discoveries or small extensions through tiebacks.
And that’s where the comparisons with the closure of the coal fields come in – an energy policy which destroyed communities.
In this case, many of the jobs that are going are highly-skilled roles such as engineers and geologists.
Those people aren’t going to be on the dole as their craft is in high demand in other parts of the world.
Many of us in the north-east already have neighbours who work overseas or who have moved their entire families with them. Some have retired early.
Those who want to work are not going to be joining the dole queue, but the hairdressers, taxi drivers, waiting staff and shopkeepers left behind will find life increasingly difficult with less money being spent by the people who have moved away.
And the industry has long pointed out that those same engineers are the ones we need to retain in the UK to help build the green energy industry of the future.
Global law firm White & Case has received four “Deal of the Year” awards at the IJGlobal Investor APAC Awards 2025.
The winning matters are:
IJGlobal Investor Energy Transition Deal of the Year: Acquisition and financing of Limestone Coast North Energy Park BESS
White & Case advised financiers to Intera Renewables on the acquisition of the 250 MW / 500 MWh Limestone Coast North BESS in South Australia.
IJGlobal Investor Digital Infra Deal of the Year: Rakuten Mobile Japanese mobile network assets sale-leaseback
White & Case advised a consortium of global infrastructure investors led by Macquarie Asset Management on the establishment and investment in the sale and leaseback of a portion of the Japanese mobile network assets of Rakuten Mobile Inc., a subsidiary of Japanese e-commerce giant Rakuten Group.
IJGlobal Investor Refinance Deal of the Year: Global Power Generation’s Australia renewables portfolio
White & Case advised Global Power Generation on a A$2.3 billion portfolio financing facility to support the development of its 1.8 GW portfolio of solar, wind and battery storage projects in Australia.
IJGlobal Investor Oil & Gas Deal of the Year: Acquisition of 2.6 percent in PNG LNG Phase I (Kumul Petroleum Holdings)
White & Case advised Kumul Petroleum Holdings Ltd., Papua New Guinea’s national oil and gas company, in its US$602 million acquisition of a 2.6 percent interest in the PNG LNG Project from Santos Limited.
Facing aggressive questioning from Mary Bruce, an ABC News White House correspondent, about the murder of Jamal Khashoggi and the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, Donald Trump last week suggested a form of punishment he thought would be appropriate for her “crappy company”: the Federal Communications Commission should revoke ABC’s license, the US president declared.
It wasn’t the first time he has done so. As he has sought redress for what he has considered to be unfair reporting about him and his administration, Trump has suggested at least 28 times over the last eight years that a television network should lose its license, according to analysis by the Guardian.
But while the FCC does not actually license national networks, it does license the local television stations they own or strike affiliate deals with.
Anna M Gomez, the lone Democrat on the FCC, said after a commission meeting last week that Trump’s threats are hollow. “Aside from the ability to make things difficult for those we retaliate, this FCC is powerless to truly retaliate against a news network,” she said, noting that no local station licenses are up for renewal “any time soon.”
Here is the full history of Trump’s threats:
“Network news has become so partisan, distorted and fake that licenses must be challenged and, if appropriate, revoked. Not fair to public!”
“With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their License? Bad for country!”
“NBC FAKE NEWS, which is under intense scrutiny over their killing the Harvey Weinstein story, is now fumbling around making excuses for their probably highly unethical conduct. I have long criticized NBC and their journalistic standards-worse than even CNN. Look at their license?”
“You know, in the old days, when you used public airwaves free, you had to get a license. I keep saying if they’re reporting fake news, how come they can keep getting a license? Whether it’s ABC, whether it’s NBC, CBS, or of course CNN, which is, I mean, it’s one of the great jokes of all time: CNN or MSDNC.”
“Last night, NBC and CNN refused to air my victory speech. Think of it, because they are crooked, they’re dishonest, and frankly, they should have their licenses or whatever they have taken away.”
“I think ABC took a big hit last night. I mean, to be honest, they’re a news organization. They have to be licensed to do it. They ought to take away their license for the way they did that.”
“ … I felt that also, but no Politician should ever do a Debate with ABC News. They have proven NOT WORTHY, and hopefully an investigation will be done as to whether or not they gave the Debate questions to Comrade Kamala, whose best friend is a top ABC Executive. If she did give the questions to Kamala, ABC’s license should be TERMINATED. Remember, Donna Brazile works for ABC, and she gave the questions to Hillary Clinton!”
“60 Minutes is a major part of the News Organization of CBS, which has just created the Greatest Fraud in Broadcast History. CBS should lose its license, and it should be bid out to the Highest Bidder, as should all other Broadcast Licenses, because they are just as corrupt as CBS – and maybe even WORSE!”
“A giant Fake News Scam by CBS & 60 Minutes. Her REAL ANSWER WAS CRAZY, OR DUMB, so they actually REPLACED it with another answer in order to save her or, at least, make her look better. A FAKE NEWS SCAM, which is totally illegal. TAKE AWAY THE CBS LICENSE. …”
“CBS should lose their license. You know they have a license – they have a license which is worth billions of dollars, and they pay nothing. All of these networks are all crooked as hell. You saw that with ABC.”
“60 Minutes should be taken off the air for what they’ve done. You know what else? They should lose their license. They have licenses, these networks. They’re worth billions of dollars, but the one thing is it says you have to be honest. That’s election interference. They’re interfering with the election. Am I right? They should lose their license, and 60 Minutes should be taken off the air.”
“They pay nothing. They should take that license away from CBS. They should absolutely – they violated the whole covenant of the license.”
“60 Minutes and CBS should lose their license for that.”
“60 MINUTES SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY TAKEN OFF THE AIR – ELECTION INTERFERENCE. CBS SHOULD LOSE ITS LICENSE. THIS IS THE BIGGEST SCANDAL IN BROADCAST HISTORY. …”
“It’s so bad they should lose their license, and they should take 60 Minutes off the air.”
“60 Minutes, CBS, and they ought to lose their license, and they ought to take it off the air.”
“CBS. You know, they have to be licensed by the federal government. They should take their license away.”
“CBS should lose its license. You know, the government, the government gives us license to NBC fake news, ABC fake news, and CBS fake news. If they had to pay, they’d pay billions of dollars. They get them for nothing. They pay nothing. They’re public airways, they pay nothing. The one thing is you have to be honest, and they were very dishonest.”
“60 Minutes, CBS. They should lose their license. This isn’t just editing.”
“I think CBS should lose its license, but I think ABC should lose its license also because of what they’ve done. We’ll see … They should lose their license, which is worth billions of dollars.”
“What 60 Minutes did and CBS, I think the license should be taken away from CBS. And I think that 60 Minutes should be forced to either close or take a very extended stay.”
“On behalf of the people, we sued 60 Minutes and CBS. And we think their license should be taken away. I think it’s the greatest breach. I think it’s the greatest insult to the American citizens.”
“ … CBS should lose its license, and the cheaters at 60 Minutes should all be thrown out, and this disreputable ‘NEWS’ show should be immediately terminated. …”
“… I am so honored to be suing 60 Minutes, CBS Fake News, and Paramount, over their fraudulent, beyond recognition, reporting. They did everything possible to illegally elect Kamala, including completely and corruptly changing major answers to Interview questions, but it just didn’t work for them. They are not a ‘News Show,’ but a dishonest Political Operative simply disguised as ‘News,’ and must be responsible for what they have done, and are doing. They should lose their license! Hopefully, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), as headed by its Highly Respected Chairman, Brendan Carr, will impose the maximum fines and punishment, which is substantial, for their unlawful and illegal behavior. CBS is out of control, at levels never seen before, and they should pay a big price for this. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”
“Why is it that ABC and NBC FAKE NEWS, two of the absolute worst and most biased networks anywhere in the World, aren’t paying Millions of Dollars a year in LICENSE FEES. They should lose their Licenses for their unfair coverage of Republicans and/or Conservatives, but at a minimum, they should pay up BIG for having the privilege of using the most valuable airwaves anywhere at anytime!!! Crooked ‘journalism’ should not be rewarded, it should be terminated!!!”
“I read someplace that the networks were 97% against me. I get 97% negative, and yet I won it easily. I won all seven swing states, popular vote, I won everything. And they’re 97% against, they give me only bad publicity. I mean, they’re getting a license. I would think maybe their license should be taken away. It would be up to Brendan Carr.”
“… This is just one of the many reasons that the Federal Communications Commission should look into the license of NBC, which shows almost exclusively positive Democrat content. Likewise, ABC Fake News – About the same thing, 97 percent negative to Republicans!”
“I think the license should be taken away from ABC because your news is so fake and it’s so wrong. And we have a great commissioner, the chairman, who should look at that because I think when you come in and when you’re 97% negative to Trump, and then Trump wins the election in a landslide, that means obviously your news is not credible and you’re not credible as a reporter.”
