this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
148 points (98.1% liked)

politics

28429 readers
2785 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Carr says the Federal Communications Commission has also opened an enforcement action into ABC’s the View

The chair of the US’s top media regulator claimed on Wednesday that journalists had been tricked into covering claims by the late-night host Stephen Colbert that he had been blocked by his network from interviewing a Texas Senate candidate.

Brendan Carr, the avowedly pro-Trump chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), made his comments after Colbert accused the Trump administration and CBS of censorship.

CBS has countered Colbert’s claims in a statement, saying it had not blocked him from interviewing James Talarico, a Texas Democrat, but had merely provided legal guidance that such an interview might trigger equal time regulations that would require him to also platform Talarico’s campaign rivals.

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JackFrostNCola@aussie.zone 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

The big irony of the whole situation to me is that getting colbert cancelled and trying to silence him and other talk show hosts is starting to backfire spectacularly.
You have given colberts show a death sentence and then tried to back him into a corner and he has decided that theres nothing left to lose, he doesnt give a shit about being level headed, reasonable and keeping the peace (unlike conservative media) or tip-toeing around the fascists, he is unleashed and is going to tell these fuckwits what he really thinks and throwing out some wicked barbs.

By trying to control the people they dont like they have gone full streisand affect and launched Talarico into the zeitgeist, politicians only dream of this kind of viral marketing for their campaign and the tide is going to turn, once the american people realise they actually have some NotShit™ options out there they might elect more and more people who are actually going to represent them and not the values/pockets of the elite.

Good, go after all the left comedians and media personalities, get them pissed off, lets see what they do when they are off the leash and start giving you back some of the vehemence the conservative media has been spewing all this time.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 10 points 1 day ago

So nooowwww they want the fairness doctrine...

[–] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 68 points 1 day ago (4 children)

So, why doesn’t Fox News Entertainment or Newsmaxxx have to abide by this fucked up FCC regulation? Why are they not compelled to platform “both sides equally”?

Hey, they do plenty of platforming of the other side. Haven't you seen when they interviewed John Antifa, the founder of Antifa? Or when they call Ilhan Omar a litany of slurs?

[–] Mister_Feeny@fedia.io 25 points 1 day ago

Couple reasons. First, the FCC doesn't regulate cable channels ever, only broadcast. Second, if they did, they wouldn't care about enforcing it for their side anyway.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 8 points 1 day ago

They aren't a BROADCAST platform, they are cable. Broadcasters have different standards.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] hector@lemmy.today 5 points 1 day ago

Fetterman is the poster child of a conservative that has captured the democratic party, and brought us to losing with his unpopular, shitty positions, attitude, and being entirely cynically sold out to powerful interests, believing in nothing. He's why people don't vote.

[–] Janx@piefed.social 16 points 1 day ago

By you? You know damn well the "equal time" rule does not apply, and has never applied to talk shows like The Late Show. Physically musing that you might try to remove their exemptions is your fascist group trying to intimidate or restrict free speech. It worked this time, but it won't always work...

[–] Blumpkinhead@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago

Fuck you, Brendan Carr

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 4 points 1 day ago

As a kid I learned an important way to tell if the government is lying to you. Just ask "are they producing words?" If the answer is yes, then they're fucking lying to you.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

For the frothing Crockett stans rushing in to defend the candidate that the GOP and establishment Dems are obviously not scared of, Colbert has had Crockett on at least three times. You can watch the interviews on Youtube.

From here you can contort and backflip if it "counts" but then you're just going to bat for Trump's cronies. This "rule" has never been enforced on or upheld by late-night talk shows who are not journalists and can do whatever they want.

I have nothing against Crockett, but between her zionist tendencies and lack of much substance past being sassy, I believe Talarico can do the most harm to the Trump administration, and so does the Trump administration. We don't win with sass, we win with convincing a lot of back-country hicks that they can have safe, comforting, Christian democratic leadership without fearing being placed in reeducation camps. Despite most of them needing reeducation camps.

This is why everyone is scared of Talarico, he can do a lot to flip Texans and maybe the state broadly, as well as go a long way to purge Israel ties to Senate.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Didn't you hear?

Late night variety/talk shows: journalism, they must abide by FCC 'equal time' rules

Fox News: purely entertainment, no FCC rules apply.

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I too like sass. But genocide support is non negotiable to me. That makes her unqualified.

I hope she changes her views on that. Maybe in the future she can run again but she's gotta make some firm statements and stop being associated with Israel in any way.

She's obviously highly intelligent and educated. It's a shame she's in support of Israel.

[–] medicsofanarchy@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

But Carr told reporters that the FCC was simply enforcing the rules on the books. “If you have a legally qualified candidate on, you have to give comparable air time to all other legally qualified candidates, and we’re going to apply that law,” he said.

This is interesting - the rules are for "equal time" but not "Equal time to answer the same interview questions", which would be fun although we've seen how some folk can't answer questions (cough Pam Bondi cough).

I wonder if the same rules should apply for advertising, since those are going out over networks? If a Grand Old Pedophile gets a 1-minute ad, should the network give a 1-minute space to an opponent?

Edit: Yeah, the rule says they gotta offer time "at the same rate". That seems fair, I guess. As long as we're still buying elections.

[–] Blade9732@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

This whole thing is a mis statement of the rule. The only violation Colbert would face, is if the other candidates request the air time, and they denied them. This whole thing is completely blown out of proportion, due to the fact that the election in question, is the democratic primary, not a general election. The two other candidates are Democrats also. I also believe that the FCC couldn't actually enforce the rule on a primary election anyway, as it is not covered by normal election rules. A party is under no obligation to even hold a primary election, they can nominate any candidate with any rules they see fit.

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Meh, do it, lets see how these ghouls stand up to a grilling from Colbert. I'm sure they will be fine with risking that kind of negative press.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Part of the issue is that there's like 8 people running for that one position at this point, before the primaries.

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What was the interview, like 10/20 minutes? Doesn't seem like a big drama, particularly when half the candidates will likely not want to risk the potential for hard questioning and looking like a moron.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And you think it's reasonable to devote 40-80 minutes of show time of a national comedy show to interviewing every candidate for a single state race?

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It doesn't have to be the same episode, and if there is one outstanding candidate then yeah let's give him some time and allow the others to demonstrate their incompetence. It's hilarious watching bigoted arseholes try to justify the garbage ideas. There's no rule about treating them all the same or not having bias in interview strategy, just giving them the time.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 0 points 12 hours ago

You missed the important part where this is just one of thousands of races going on in the country. It's a comedy show, they're not going to spend an entire week doing interviews for one single race.

[–] Retail4068@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

Colbert will call this bluff. Host a bunch of progressives in the next week.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

SureJan.gif

[–] hector@lemmy.today 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Good one Carr! He can get Sinclair to claim they were tricked into covering the story, and then? Something something, cancel the show early, pay a personal indemnity to the president for a personal lawsuit cbs will be compelled to accept, and they will appoint a censor to the network from the administration.

I'm joking obviously, they will try to get him fired earlier, but they have nothing here, not that that stops them necessarily. If the rot wasn't so deep people would be osttracized from polite society for dishonoring their positions in government like Carr is, but as a tribe of nihlistic self serving oligarchs and their lawyers anything goes.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Bari Weiss is the appointed censor at the network.

It's just that Colbert has an iron clad contract, so they have to let him ride it out. That doesn't mean that they won't fuck with him.

[–] Tempus_Fugit@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

As if anyone in the Trump admin has any credibility. You fucks burned through that during Trump's first term. Very few people believe a word out of your demon mouths.

[–] Zier@fedia.io 5 points 1 day ago

The liar... hold on to your britches... is... Brendan Carr.