information

OpenAI has fired three researchers for allegedly mishandling information, including work that involved an external organisation that analyses artificial intelligence (AI) models.

“Our investigation confirmed that these individuals mishandled sensitive information outside established company procedures, violating our policies and breaking the trust essential to our work,” a spokesperson told the BBC.

The ChatGPT-maker did not name the sacked workers, but at least two of them were involved in safety research at the firm.

The firings come as the debate over AI safety and the risks the technology may pose to humanity has intensified in recent weeks.

“We have parted ways with three individuals for violating our policies on accessing and handling sensitive company information,” OpenAI’s spokesperson said.

The BBC understands the former employees were not let go for raising safety concerns but for allegedly mishandling sensitive information.

Concerns over AI safety have made headlines after some researchers and industry executives called for more guardrails around the technology.

OpenAI has come under under intense scrutiny after its models went rogue and hacked several platforms, including Australian government websites.

In an earlier incident an OpenAI system accessed the internet and breached the open-source developer platform Hugging Face.

That incident led OpenAI to conduct a broad review of the activities of its AI models – called agents, which are designed to execute tasks autonomously based on simple instructions.

The AI lab said this week that it has notified more than 100 organisations about incidents involving unauthoritised activity linked to its AI systems.

Being notified “does not mean that any private information was accessed” or that a system was compromised, OpenAI said.

Federal investigators have sent Los Angeles County elections officials at least five grand jury subpoenas for individual voter records as part of a criminal investigation into illegal voting, according to partially redacted records reviewed by The Times.

The subpoenas — released in response to a public records request — appear related to a nationwide effort by the Trump administration to identify noncitizens who have illegally cast ballots in U.S. elections.

The subpoenas were issued in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. They were sent to L.A. County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk Dean Logan’s office at the request of prosecutors in the office of First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli.

“The enclosed subpoena has been issued in connection with an official criminal investigation being conducted by the Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations,” Assistant. U.S. Atty. Michael Wheat — based out of the district’s Orange County office — wrote in a letter accompanying a Sept. 10 subpoena.

Wheat wrote that a custodian of records from Logan’s office must either appear before the grand jury to present the records or deliver the materials to a special agent from Homeland Security Investigations.

Four of the subpoenas — one issued on July 13 and three on Sept. 10 — request “any and all original and non-redacted voter records” from Jan. 1, 2020, to the present for a list of individual voters stretching across two pages. The lists were redacted by Los Angeles County officials, and it is unclear how many individuals each list contained.

Each of those subpoenas notes that records to be produced include information on individual voters, such as their “registration file” and “addresses listed, history and method of voting, [and] any and all attestation regarding citizenship status.”

A fifth subpoena, issued July 31, appears to request similar information for a single voter, and notes that the voter’s “ballot content or vote selections” should not be included.

Ciaran McEvoy, a spokesman for Essayli’s office, declined to comment on the investigations Monday.

The Times first reported the existence of the subpoenas, but not details from the records themselves, last week, after Logan confirmed that his office was complying with the federal inquiry despite having concerns that investigators may be using incorrect or outdated information to produce their lists of voters to investigate.

“We’re responding appropriately as directed through a subpoena, but that doesn’t afford the dialogue for us to get the background on what they’re looking for and how they came up with the names that they did,” Logan said. “There’s really no information being provided to us on that.”

President Trump has alleged for years that illegal voting by noncitizens is widespread, though experts say the problem — which they acknowledge occurs — is exceedingly rare. Homeland Security officials have been leading a campaign in recent months to identify such fraud nationwide, and the subpoenas received by L.A. County appear to match others received by elections officials elsewhere in the country.

Essayli — a Trump loyalist who has not been confirmed to lead the Los Angeles prosecutor’s office by the U.S. Senate and whose de facto leadership has been contested in court — has been vocal about his office’s pursuit of voter fraud, including by noncitizens.

His office has announced two voter fraud cases in recent weeks, including one involving the arrest of 30-year-old Honduran national on two felony charges of falsely claiming U.S. citizenship and fraudulently registering to vote. That man, Darwin Jonathan Rivera-Flores, has pleaded not guilty and is out on bond pending trial.

Rivera-Flores and his attorney declined to comment.

The Justice Department also recently announced it had charged 16 noncitizens in six other states with illegal voting and other election-related crimes.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin publicly claimed in July — without providing evidence — that there may be more than 190,000 such voters on California rolls, a claim California officials dismissed as baseless.

Three of the five subpoenas received by Logan’s office ask that the voter information be shared with Al Rossi, the acting assistant head of Homeland Security Investigations in Los Angeles.

Reached by phone, Rossi referred questions to an agency spokesperson, who did not respond to a request for comment.

Wheat had asked that the subpoenas be kept secret, so as not to impede an open investigation. Logan’s office released the records in accordance with California public records law, but redacted the names of voters on the grounds that doing so “protects those individuals from undue attention, harassment, intimidation, or possible harm” and “protects the integrity” of the investigation.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday upheld Trump’s expanded use of government data to search for noncitizens who are registered to vote. A lower court order had blocked use of the data over concerns — shared by the Supreme Court’s liberal wing — that the data are error-prone.

Voting rights experts have expressed concern that misuse of the data could lead to legitimate voters being purged from rolls.

States across the country, including California, have successfully fought off lawsuits from the Trump administration demanding the states’ complete voter rolls.

It is unclear why a subpoena for a single voter’s information would come between subpoenas for information on longer lists of voters. But it lines up with the case against Rivera-Flores.

In an affidavit filed with a criminal complaint against Rivera-Flores, Special Agent Christopher Kuzma — the same agent listed on the July 31 subpoena requesting a single voter’s information — said he received a series of texts he believed were from Rivera-Flores, who had previously been issued a misdemeanor citation on suspicion of disrupting immigration law enforcement operations at the federal building in Camarillo.

One text sent in April 2026 stated, “Your not the good guy I can’t wait until the mid terms you dont have qualified immunity then we can start and indict all you guys one bye one.”

Kuzma said in his affidavit that he took the message to mean Rivera-Flores “has both an interest in the voting process and an intent to participate in the election process.”

According to the affidavit, Kuzma said he conducted several record checks through public databases, including on the California secretary of state’s website, which “disclosed an online voter registration record” for a “Darwin Rivera” at Rivera-Flores’ address.

In July 2026, Kuzma said in the affidavit, he reviewed records from California Secretary of State Shirley Weber’s office for “Darwin J Rivera,” which showed the applicant had checked a box stating he was a U.S. citizen.

Kuzma’s affidavit said in August 2026 he received certified voter registration records from Los Angeles County.

The spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office did not respond to a question about whether Kuzma’s July 31 subpoena was specific to Rivera-Flores, but the office has previously said Wheat is prosecuting the case.

When Rivera-Flores’ arrest was announced, Essayli said it was “the first of many to come.”

Love is the name. Fraud allegedly was his game. And the list of his victims — several of whom said they became romantically involved with him — continues to grow.

Daejon Labrayae Love, 35, and his accomplice Taylor Jamie Chan, 18, remain in federal custody after their arrest Aug. 24 in Boise, Idaho, on wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud charges. The FBI charged the two men with scamming at least 26 women in four states out of at least $1.3 million.

Since then many more women have come forward to say they were victims of Love’s schemes, which often involved him impersonating a San Francisco 49ers player. The FBI said it has identified 35 additional women who say they were defrauded, ratcheting up the number of alleged victims to more than 60.

The latest development is especially troubling. A woman told ESPN on Tuesday that she submitted a complaint about Love on the 49ers website eight months ago on Dec. 20, 2025, yet the team apparently did little with the information.

Gwen Herndon submitted a complaint/concern form, writing “there is a federal investigation surrounding a man pretending to be a 49ers player.” She named Love, saying he stole money from women.

“I wanted you to be aware of the situation and are hopefully proactive in denouncing his involvement on your team,” she wrote in the message, which was reviewed by ESPN.

Herndon said the only response she received from the 49ers came from a Levi’s Stadium guest services account a week after her report, encouraging her to contact law enforcement agencies with the information.

“We take reports of individuals misrepresenting themselves as members of the San Francisco 49ers very seriously,” the 49ers response said. “For safety and legal reasons, the team cannot comment on ongoing investigations or specific individuals…. Our internal team will also monitor any instances of impersonation and take action as appropriate to protect fans and the team’s reputation.”

A 49ers spokesperson declined to confirm that Herndon’s email was viewed by team officials, citing the ongoing FBI investigation.

Federal investigators, meanwhile, are working to verify that the 35 women who have come forward in recent days are in fact victims of Love and Chan, Portland FBI Special Agent in Charge Doug Olson said in a news conference.

“We were surprised how many people were victimized in such a short period of time and then to have that many more come forward,” Olson said. “It’s a large volume for just a couple of subjects. Our concern is that this fraud could be replicated by other individuals that are out there victimizing other people in similar schemes.”

The FBI alleges that from February 2022 until they were arrested, Love and Chan fraudulently solicited money from women in California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho.

Love portrayed himself on Instagram as a 49ers wide receiver who went undrafted but worked his way onto the roster. He met many of the women through dating apps and developed romantic relationships with several, according to the FBI. Chan falsely posed as Love’s financial adviser.

In an Instagram Story titled “NFL Journey,” Love held a 49ers helmet while driving and said, “I’m on my way to get my mom. I know I get a lot of fans who want to know how football works or how I got involved in the league…. If you know me and see me in person I’ll explain.”

Experts on interpersonal relationships say that a person can instantly assume someone is trustworthy who exudes warmth and confidence as a first impression — especially if they find the person attractive.

“When we meet someone for the first time, our brains are quietly trying to answer two big questions: Can I trust this person, and do they seem capable and confident?,” said Tammi Pickle, an executive at the personalized matchmaking agency Elite Connections. “Someone who comes across as confident might suddenly seem smarter, kinder, more successful and even more trustworthy simply because of the way they carry themselves.

“When we are attracted to someone, our brains have a tendency to fill in the blanks with positive assumptions. The catch? Those assumptions aren’t always accurate.”

Love quickly gained the trust of dozens of women, allegedly convincing them to give him large sums of money. The FBI said Love instructed several women who did not have cash to invest to take out personal loans, assuring them they would quickly be repaid.

“The scheme relied on Love’s creation of fictitious personas and display of a lavish lifestyle which Love presented to victims both in person and on social media websites,” federal authorities said in a press release.

“Chan and Love also hosted three-way FaceTime calls in which they showed victims falsified investment gains and encouraged victims to part with their money. Victims sent Love and Chan money due to their belief that their money would be invested in legitimate investment vehicles on the victims’ behalf.”

One women who didn’t fall for Love’s scheme told KPTV in Oregon that she went on a 2024 date with him in 2024 after meeting on a dating app. He told her his name was John Prince and claimed he was a Swiss real estate developer.

Anderson said his behavior during their first date raised suspicion.

“He said, ‘I’m very intentional and efficient when it comes to dating, and if I pursue you, you will be the only one I pursue. I need someone who has been around money, who understands that, you know, these things aren’t luxuries to me. This is just my normal life.’

“Within five minutes, I decided I wasn’t gonna see him again.”

Love also manipulated AI. Search engines and AI rely on web scraping and frequency of mentions, and the sheer volume of his fake posts caused AI to mistakenly identify him as an NFL wide receiver. He showed screenshots of erroneous AI search summaries to alleged victims, convincing them he was worthy of their trust.

On an Instagram story, he posted a one screenshot of a webpage AI Overview that says “Daejon Love is a wide receiver for the San Francisco 49ers and information about his position, contract and teammate texting habits is available online. He is also associated with the team in various social media content and articles.”

Love then turns the camera on himself and says, “That’s Google. That’s not me, that’s Google.”

He goes on to explain why he isn’t currently playing, lifting a crooked finger to the camera and saying he is injured. He concludes the story by again saying he wants “full transparency” because “people ask, what do I do? How can I afford a $500,000 car? How can I afford a $300,000 [Lamborghini] Urus? “

He says that he is driving to pick up his mother, then concludes by inviting those watching to reach out to him in person.

In the month before his arrest, Love traveled to New Mexico, California, Oregon, Nevada, Utah and Idaho to meet with women, according to investigators. He allegedly used several fictitious names, including Jon Love, Avril Lyto Love and Jordan Love.

The romp abruptly ended at the Boise airport when Love and Chan were removed from a white sports car by federal agents, according to a video obtained by TMZ. Love appears to be wearing red Niners gear as he is handcuffed.

“Victims were encouraged to take out personal loans and make life-altering financial decisions based on the belief they were building a future with someone they cared about,” said Olson, the FBI special agent. “Once the money was taken, the victims were cut off, left without answers, without funds, and often without closure. Many lost not only their savings, but their sense of security and confidence.”

A three-part series following investigative reporters and police investigators who were instrumental in holding Gary Glitter accountable for his sex abuse crimes has been paused

Netflix has paused the release of an investigative docuseries into disgraced Gary Glitter’s history of sexually abusing minors.

The streaming giant has issued a statement confirming that the three-part series will no longer be released on October 14 as they originally announced.

A spokesperson for Netflix said: “We have made the decision to pause the release of Hunting Gary Glitter originally due to launch on October 14.

“This follows new legal information we recently became aware of. We’re not able to share further detail at this time, but we’ll provide an update as soon as we’re in a position to do so.”

The synopsis for the series states: “A string of dogged journalists chases fugitive pop star Gary Glitter across the globe — from Cuba to Cambodia to Vietnam — determined to expose the child sexual abuse he concealed behind decades of chart-topping fame.

“This documentary follows their pursuit alongside the survivors who speak out, charting Glitter’s 1997 conviction, through to his years on the run, and eventual incarceration.”

The rocker, real name Paul Gadd, was a popular British glam rocker in the 1970s and sang numerous hits like Do You Wanna Touch Me and I Love You Love Me Love.

In 1999, his popularity was derailed by numerous allegations of child sexual abuse and subsequent conviction for possession of child pornography.

Later, in 2006, he was jailed in Vietnam for the sexual abuse of two girls. In 2015, he was convicted of sexually abusing three additional young girls.

In 2023, Gadd was released for a short time on probation before being reincarcerated. Police did not publicly say how he violated the terms of his release.

Featured in the trailer of Hunting Gary Glitter, the docuseries uses first-person interviews to detail Gladd’s original convictions and years hopping from country to country, including Vietnam, Cuba, and Cambodia to avoid prosecution and jail time.

The advert was released alongside the initial announcement but has now been pulled as has all the other assets from Netflix’s media website.

Hunting Gary Glitter was due to be released on Netflix on October 14 but has been paused

It remains illegal in California for a school district to force teachers and other staff to alert parents about their child’s gender identity, but parents must be told when they ask about it, a judge ruled Tuesday in a widely watched case dealing with parental rights.

San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge Michael Sachs, weighing both state law and a Supreme Court order, rejected an attempt by the Chino Valley Unified School District to reinstate its mandatory parent-notification policy.

“There is no requirement that the school district, on its own, after learning of transgender issues, contact parents and let the parents know of them,” Sachs said in court. At the same time, “in the event a parent makes an affirmative inquiry of a minor child regarding their status, whether transgender or not, that will trigger an obligation by the school district to respond.”

Under the Chino Valley policy, approved in July 2023, a school would have to notify parents of any request by a student “to use pronouns that do not align with the student’s biological sex or gender listed on the student’s birth certificate or other official records.” The same notification rules applied to the use of bathrooms or participation in sports.

State Attorney General Rob Bonta immediately challenged that policy in court and it was put on hold. In October 2024, Sachs had ruled that most of the policy was discriminatory — and therefore illegal — because it singled out a group of students for treatment that was different than the treatment of other students.

As an example, he cited the possibility that a student would come out confidentially to a school counselor — and then that counselor would immediately be required to alert the parents, even against the student’s wishes.

A policy that could result in mandated actions by a school employee continues to conflict with the intent of a 2025 California law that barred a school system from forcing teachers to tell parents about a student’s gender, Sachs concluded.

“That’s inappropriate and it’s still inappropriate,” Sachs said Tuesday.

New rules, new rulings

What has changed in the legal landscape, he added, is what happens when a parent requests information about their child’s gender status or sexual orientation or any number of other issues affecting that child.

Trial court rulings — affirmed by a Supreme Court majority in March — said that parents have the right to demand information about their child’s gender identity at school. School staff cannot lie to parents — including matters that a student wishes to conceal from their parents.

Attorney Emily Rae, representing Chino Valley, said Sachs was correct to acknowledge that parents had the right to information about their child, but that his ruling did not go nearly far enough — and that parent notification should be mandatory statewide.

Chino Valley also has a separate pending court challenge to the 2025 California law, contending it is at odds with the direction of the Supreme Court, which should take precedence.

Dept. Attorney General Delbert Tran, representing the state, declined to be interviewed Tuesday, but in his exchanges with Sachs, it was clear that he saw the ruling as about as much of a win as would be possible, given the Supreme Court’s recent directives.

He also said that supporters of parent-notification policies misstate or misunderstand the parent-teacher relationship that exists in practice and under state law. Parents, he said, have the legal right to observe classes and meet with teachers, and the expectation is that teachers will communicate freely and often with parents about a child’s needs and progress.

Chino Valley champions its view of parent rights

Chino Valley, a school district of 26,000 students in San Bernardino County, has adopted and defended a series of policies favored by parent activists, religious conservatives and President Trump under the leadership of school board President Sonja Shaw, a Republican currently running for the office of state superintendent of public instruction.

Under her leadership, the school system has taken a stand for a flag-ban policy in schools and classrooms, widely viewed as targeting gay pride flags; for removing school library books with passages deemed to be sexually obscene, and for working to ban trans athletes from girls sports and girls locker rooms.

Shaw attended Tuesday’s hearing and criticized Sachs’ reasoning.

“When he talks about a parent has a right to know now only if they ask, how do you know you’re being lied to or secrets being kept?,” Shaw said after the hearing. “That absolutely makes no sense.”

Shaw said the judge should have done “what’s right: Upheld parents’ constitutional right to the upbringing of their own child.”

In anticipation of Sachs’ ruling against the original policy, the Chino Valley school board revised the policy, expanding it to all students. Under the current policy, if any student “requests a change to their official or unofficial records, parents/guardians shall be notified to ensure that parents/guardians are informed and involved in all aspects of their child’s education.”

In other words, if a straight male student named William suddenly decided he wanted to be referred to as Robert on the class roll sheet — an official record — his parents would be notified.

In 2024, Sachs accepted this version of notification because students were not singled out for different treatment on the basis of their gender.

That form of the policy remains in effect.

Since that time, Shaw said, the district has been “transparent” with parents regarding important issues in the lives of their children. And Tuesday’s ruling would not change that.

Moving forward, she added, the district could assertively ask parents if they want to be informed about their child’s gender issues and that permission — if given — would continue to apply as the student proceeds through grade school.

ATLANTA — Security researchers say rapid advances in artificial intelligence are making it more critical to address a flaw in Georgia’s voting equipment that can allow voters to be matched to their ballots after they have been cast.

The system’s vulnerability has been drawing increased attention, with election security advocates criticizing state election officials for failing to fix it before the November elections. Georgia election officials say they have taken steps to address the potential harm, but some advocates say the state is not going far enough.

The vulnerability does not allow votes to be changed or cast doubt on election results, but it could let someone see how others voted. That is important because ballot secrecy is a fundamental right under the state constitution, and violations could create an opening for legal challenges.

The development comes in an election season of uncertainty, as President Trump threatens to interfere with the midterms, and he has long demanded that states turn over voter rolls. Georgia has been a particular focus, as Trump continues to deny he lost the state in 2020 to Joe Biden. Earlier this year, the FBI seized ballots cast in that election from a Fulton County election hub.

While the flaw in Georgia has been known for a few years, the widespread adoption of AI tools and the blistering pace of its sophistication have election security experts raising alarms.

This is “a bit of a wake-up call because it illustrates how much more easily vulnerabilities can be exploited now that AI can do all of the technical work for you,” said J. Alex Halderman, a voting technology specialist at the University of Michigan who was part of the team that exposed the flaw.

Other jurisdictions across the country use the same voting equipment made by Liberty Vote, which was known as Dominion Voting Systems before the company was sold. But many have applied a software update to fix the flaw, and some other states do not allow the public release of records that are needed to exploit it, said Mark Lindeman, policy and strategy director at Verified Voting, a nonpartisan group focused on election technology.

Georgia, a presidential battleground with one of the nation’s most closely watched U.S. Senate races this year, is the only place where the system is used statewide. Lindeman said that, combined with an open records law that has allowed access to key documents, creates a “perfect storm.”

“It’s really embarrassing that this is still a possibility,” Lindeman said.

How does voting work in Georgia?

Georgia voters make their selections on touchscreen voting machines that print paper ballots voters insert into scanners to tally the votes.

Such cast-vote records detail the votes from each ballot. Those records and electronic ballot images created by the scanners are randomized. But the software flaw allows them to be put back in the order they were cast, according to a report by researchers who discovered it in 2022.

Along with other publicly available data, that information could be used to match voters to their ballots, the researchers wrote.

Max Springer, a Princeton University researcher who was not involved in the original research and studies AI, said he gave a publicly available AI assistant that research. He said it was able to reverse the shuffling of electronic ballot records from Georgia’s May primary and then tell him what other records it would need to match names to ballots.

He then gave the AI assistant the early voting list for the counties he examined and the cast-vote record file, which could be obtained through a public records request. It was able to create “buckets of ballots and potential voters,” he wrote in a blog post. In many instances, that made it possible to match voters to their ballots.

In cases where ambiguity remained, he wrote, he got the public audit log for the ballot scanners and precinct check-in records and was able to match most ballots to specific voters.

“AI coding tools are essentially supercharging laymen people to exploit vulnerabilities,” Springer said in an interview.

Why does ballot secrecy matter?

Georgia’s Constitution says elections “shall be by secret ballot,” and state law requires voting machines to “permit voting in absolute secrecy so that no person can see or know any other elector’s votes.”

A lack of ballot secrecy can make it easier to buy or sell votes and increase the danger of coercion to vote a certain way by family members, political organizations, employers or government officials. It also is information that could be invaluable to political campaigns.

Gabriel Sterling, special projects manager in the secretary of state’s office, pushed back on the concerns. He said it would be easier to use mail ballots if vote-buying or coercion was the goal and that it probably would be cheaper for campaigns to just increase outreach to voters who fit a certain profile than try to identify voters this way.

State Election Board member Salleigh Grubbs proposed a rule during the board’s August meeting that would have required the secretary of state’s office to apply the software update recommended by the manufacturer by Tuesday.

“Each [voter] has one vote, and no one is entitled to know how it was cast,” Grubbs said. “That privacy protects more than the individual voter. It protects the integrity of the entire election.”

In a letter to the election board, an agency lawyer argued that the update has not been certified by the secretary of state, the implementation would take months, and the Legislature has not provided necessary funding. The board rejected Grubbs’ proposal. Some members said they did not believe they had the authority to order the secretary of state to act and they raised concerns about the short timeline before the November midterms.

Board member Sara Tindall Ghazal, who voted against the proposal, said it is “intensely frustrating” that the software update has not been applied. But she pointed out that it is a felony to reveal how someone voted, which should serve as a deterrent.

“I hate the fact that it’s even physically possible, but there are very, very severe penalties if somebody were to actually do this,” she said.

What’s being done?

The secretary of state’s office sent guidance to county election officials instructing them to refer open records requests for certain records to the secretary of state’s office. It will release them with the problematic information blacked out and decline to release other information and documents.

Sterling said the office is working with a vendor to scramble the original order of ballot images and cast-vote records before they are made public. Halderman said that precaution would be necessary to keep someone from reconstructing the order.

While some other jurisdictions have applied the software update that reportedly fixes the problem, some have done what Georgia is now trying to do by restricting public access to the records needed to exploit the flaw.

Marilyn Marks is executive director of the Coalition for Good Governance, which advocates for election transparency and security and raised the alarm about the vulnerability. She argued that withholding documents is not the solution and that steps need to be taken to ensure ballots cannot be traced to voters in the first place.

“When Georgia’s election records contain identifiers that can be used to trace ballots to voters, the only legal and acceptable answer is to stop recording that information — not restrict public access to sensitive unlawful information to insiders and commercial vendors,” she said.

With time growing short before the elections, Marks said a workable interim solution would be to collect ballots in locked boxes at precincts and then shuffle and scan them at a central tabulating center.

Brumback writes for the Associated Press.

Fox Corp.’s $22-billion acquisition of San José-based Roku, operator of streaming services and seller of hardware devices, seemed like a straightforward deal when it was announced in June: A growing media company was looking to bolster its presence in the fast-growing streaming industry.

But, on Wednesday, the Trump administration weighed in.

Fox Corp. and Roku said that the companies received requests from the Justice Department on Tuesday for additional information in connection with its review of the merger.

While Fox and Roku downplayed the requests, saying that they had expected the outreach, the timing of the move raised eyebrows among some analysts, who said it could signal further scrutiny of the transaction by the Justice Department.

“The president has been outspoken on the fact that he will take retaliatory action against networks that say things that he doesn’t agree with, or they do things that he doesn’t agree with,” said Rob Enderle, principal analyst at advisory services firm Enderle Group.

The action follows President Trump’s surprise over Fox’s ouster of anchor Maria Bartiromo. She was pushed out after she had shared internal company texts with the White House, which sources told The Times may have been the breaking point.

Trump said on social media that he couldn’t believe that Bartiromo will no longer have her shows on Fox. “Her fans, of which there are many, will not be happy,” he wrote on Truth Social on Sept. 3.

Associate Atty. Gen. Stanley Woodward said the Justice Department could not comment on pending matters but said in a statement: “We can affirm that this DOJ under President Trump’s leadership will continue to prioritize affordability for all Americans across our economy.”

Fox announced in June its plans to acquire Roku for $22 billion, which would give the company access to Roku’s 100 million households that use its platform to connect to different streaming services. The deal would benefit Fox’s advertising business, as well as make it less reliant on traditional pay TV platforms.

Fox and Roku said they expect the merger to be done by the first half of 2027, subject to regulatory and shareholder approval, according to a Sept 9 filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

“FOX and Roku will continue to work cooperatively with the DOJ in its review of the Mergers,” Fox said in its filing.

Some legal experts said it is fairly standard for the Justice Department to make an additional request for information.

“It doesn’t mean that their review is going to be more extensive than usual,” said Ray Seilie, an entertainment attorney at law firm Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapir.

For example, the Justice Department made a second request for information when it reviewed Paramount Skydance’s deal to buy Warner Bros. Discovery, he said. The merging companies typically send information that helps the government figure out what the market impact will be of a merger, he added.

The Justice Department ultimately approved Paramount’s planned acquisition, despite opposition from some industry stakeholders. State attorneys general and the Writers Guild of America have sued Paramount over the deal, raising antitrust concerns. Others have pointed out close ties between Trump and Larry Ellison, a financial backer of the deal, who has also donated money to a group that supports Trump. Ellison’s son, David, is chief executive of Paramount Skydance.

Legal experts and analysts said they don’t think the combination of Fox and Roku raises antitrust issues because they are not dominant players in streaming and have businesses that complement each other.

But one wild card is Trump.

“You never know what Trump is going to seize on and decide he wants to do,” said Bryan Sullivan, a partner with law firm Early Sullivan Wright Gizer & McRae on whether Trump will take retaliatory action through the Justice Department in the Fox-Roku deal. “It’s chaos in the federal government and it could very well happen because of that reason, but it could also just be a blip and not a big deal.”

Times staff writer Stephen Battaglio contributed to this report.