FTC Questions Apple News Over Right-Wing Bias Allegations

The Federal Trade Commission has signaled fresh scrutiny of Apple’s news curation after its chair, Andrew Ferguson, raised concerns about allegations that Apple News downranks or excludes conservative outlets. In a letter to Apple CEO Tim Cook, Ferguson cited a report from the Media Research Center claiming right-leaning publishers were absent from Apple News’ most prominent slots, and warned that practices at odds with Apple’s stated policies or consumer expectations could implicate the FTC Act.

What Triggered the FTC’s Letter to Apple About News Curation Bias

The immediate spark was a Media Research Center analysis alleging that Apple News’ “Top Stories” and other high-visibility modules rarely include conservative sources. The findings drew amplification from political figures, including a post from President Donald Trump on Truth Social, and were echoed by Federal Communications Commission chair Brendan Carr, who accused Apple of suppressing conservative viewpoints.

Apple News blends algorithmic ranking with selections made by a human editorial team. That hybrid model is designed to elevate timely, authoritative coverage, but it also means curation choices can have outsize impact on which outlets gain visibility. If an aggregator’s presentation diverges from what users reasonably infer from its marketing or policies, regulators can examine whether the gap amounts to a deceptive practice.

What the FTC Can Actually Do Under Section 5 of the FTC Act

The FTC is not a speech regulator and cannot mandate ideological balance. Its leverage lies in Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices. If Apple’s disclosures suggest neutral or policy-consistent curation but the product operates differently, that could trigger a deception inquiry. Ferguson’s letter urges Apple to review its terms, verify that real-world curation aligns with them, and move quickly to correct any mismatch.

The letter follows a broader agency inquiry launched last year into alleged “censorship by tech platforms,” which sought input from users who believed their political views led to reduced reach or removals. While such calls for information do not by themselves establish violations, they expand the FTC’s record on how platforms present and enforce their rules—and how those representations shape consumer expectations.

How Apple News Curates Content With Editors and Algorithms

Apple has long said Apple News relies on a professional editorial team guided by standards that emphasize relevance, quality, and trustworthiness, complemented by algorithms that tailor feeds to user interests. The company also vets participating publishers and offers dedicated slots like “Top Stories” and “Spotlight,” which can deliver significant traffic when a story is featured, according to several U.S. publishers.

Independent research on news gateways underscores why this scrutiny matters. The Reuters Institute’s Digital News Report has identified Apple News as a notable pathway to journalism for U.S. audiences, and publishers often view aggregator placement as a meaningful driver of readership. When a platform with that reach is accused of sidelining a segment of the media ecosystem, even unintentionally, the consequences ripple across audience growth, ad revenue, and trust.

Algorithmic systems can also reinforce existing patterns. Studies from academic centers focused on information ecosystems have found that ranking models can create feedback loops—promoting outlets and topics that previously performed well, while making it harder for others to break through. That dynamic puts pressure on platforms to audit outcomes against their stated goals, including political and geographic diversity.

How Political Pressure on Platforms Is Intensifying Across Parties

Scrutiny of content moderation has intensified across the political spectrum. Conservative critics argue major platforms demote their viewpoints; progressive advocates counter that platforms eased guardrails that once constrained misinformation. Pew Research Center has consistently found that Americans perceive bias in how news is distributed online, even when they disagree on its direction or cause.

Complicating the backdrop is Apple’s evolving relationship with the current administration. After public friction over manufacturing and tariffs, Apple sought to reset ties by pledging hundreds of billions in U.S. investment and was later spared certain smartphone tariffs. That political context doesn’t change the legal analysis, but it can shape how quickly high-profile disputes move and how they are framed in public debate.

What to Watch Next as Apple Reviews News Curation Practices

Apple has been urged to conduct an internal review and ensure Apple News’ operations match its policies. In practice, that could lead to clearer public explanations of curation criteria, more granular transparency reports showing source diversity in top modules, and expanded publisher appeals when placement disputes arise. External audits or consultations with independent experts are also tools platforms use to stress-test outcomes without exposing proprietary ranking logic.

For the FTC, the near-term question is whether Apple’s representations align with measurable reality. For publishers and readers, the larger stakes are visibility and trust: when the front door to news is a curated feed, even small shifts in ranking or selection can change which voices are heard. The commission’s concerns keep that tension squarely in view—and put Apple on notice to demonstrate that its practices match its promises.