>KCXL has no ties to Russia and is against the country’s conflict with Ukraine, Schartel told us Wednesday. But he needs the money, and he’d lose his business if he pulled the plug on Radio Sputnik.
If your business cannot survive without being propped up by payments from a foreign adversary, you don't have a legitimate business.
KCXL: "At KCXL 102.9fm and 1140am, we bring you the truth. We tell you the things that the liberal media wont tell you."
The Voice of America and BBC World Service have been blasting Eastern Europe and Russia from 100kW++ stations since WW2. Sounds like RU found a cheaper way.
Criticizing him for it isn't a slippery slope towards censorship, but stopping him from broadcasting Russian propaganda is censorship. We get to hear and see American and Ukrainian propaganda in many channels - why not one (or more) for the Russian perspective?
There has not been much in the way of recent case law; one has to go back to the Sedition Act or the acts during WW II to find aggressive laws outright banning foreign propaganda. So it's hard to say quite where the line might be with its interaction with the current interpretation of the 1st amendment (which does apply to non-citizens). But the US federal government does likely have some constitutionally-valid powers to regulate, and perhaps restrict, foreign propaganda.
If your business cannot survive without being propped up by payments from a foreign adversary, you don't have a legitimate business.