EB: Well they can! They should, gollydarnit! What is your point?
Why are you limiting your thinking as to what constitutes media? The 1st Amendment is there to protect open discourse of ALL kinds. That means me talking to you on this forum, talking to a friend over lunch, Brit Hume talking to millions each night, advertisers paying for time to tell people their views, etc. All these people have a right to express their views (for advertisers, provided the networks will sell them time) without government regulation.
You have limited your definition of "media" to the traditional talking heads on the alphabet channels, when in fact their speech is no more or less protected than any of ours. CFR essentially agrees with you: it protects the traditional media while damaging the ability of people like ourselves to communicate OUR views (whether by paying for an ad ourselves or donating to an org such as the NRA). IOW, the power to influence views will be further concentrated in the hands of a few, while everyone else will be moved further from the process.
Please show me where I have defined "media" at all in my posts. I think you are making an assumption.