12 ms·
CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC
- DeepYogurt 8mo agoSmacks of state media control don't it?
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- scoofy 8mo agoIt's a corrupt patronage system out in the open, not actually "state control," it's major companies (oligarchs) willingly being controlled. CBS doesn't "fear the FCC"... who didn't even have a rule. It's just open corruption. The administration wants to signal what it wants to CBS, without actually doing anything that they could lose in court. CBS wants to signal they are willing to help the administration by doing the censorship "out of fear" when really they just want a friendly relationship with the administration. It's exactly the way oligarchs will give patronage to maintain their position in the hierarchy where the leader gives the orders. It's what happens in Russia. It's literally how the mob does shit: "I didn't tell anyone to pay me any bribe. I just said that I'm in need of money and I'm kind to my friends. They chose to pay me of their own volition."
- anderber 8mo agoThat's insane. We're talking about the government threatening a station if they air an interview with a political rival.
- devmor 8mo agoThis is a terrifying level of chilling effects. What are we to consider about our nation at this point? "Free speech" has long been a term with contested definitions, but this certainly sounds like its death in every sense.
- colechristensen 8mo agoFree speech goes as far as the people who defend it. CBS and its parent company are greedy cowards. If they won't defend free speech they're the ones causing its downfall. Governments rule only with the consent of the people. If you lay down and give away your freedoms you aren't the victim, you're the perpetrator.
- croes 8mo agoVictim blaming? Greedy for trying to stay in business. If you didn’t fight hard enough it’s your fault? You let the government of the hook to easily. By your logic you‘re a perpetrator too because he don’t blame the real bad guy
- mikkupikku 8mo agoIf you give in and comply without a fight, are you actually a victim or are you actually a collaborator? CBS is controlled by Ellison, which makes this look a lot like collaboration.
- croes 8mo ago> If you give in and comply without a fight, are you actually a victim or are you actually a collaborator? That is victim blaming. Heard the same from judges about rape victims. > CBS is controlled by Ellison, which makes this look a lot like collaboration. That changes this completely. That isn’t being a coward, that’s just good old quid pro quo from billionaire buddies.
- mikkupikku 8mo agoWe're not talking about rape, and you're begging the question.
- croes 8mo agoYour statement just reminded me of a judge who said something similiar to a rape victim.
- Jordan-117 8mo agoTbh, in this case the fault lies more with CBS for obeying in advance. The FCC hasn't actually made the rule change yet.
- pdpi 8mo agoThe FCC opened a probe on The View[0] for hosting Talarico. They haven't made a rule change, but they're definitely acting as if the rules already say what they want it to say. [0]: https://www.fox7austin.com/news/fcc-opening-probe-the-view-after-appearance-talarico https://www.fox7austin.com/news/fcc-opening-probe-the-view-a...
- CGMthrowaway 8mo agoAlready in 2026, Colbert has hosted Senator Jon Ossoff and Governor Josh Shapiro who are both up for re-election this year. Why no probe in those cases?
- gamerdonkey 8mo agoCynicism warning, but my honest guess is they see that the Colbert problem will be solved in June and so don't feel the need to spend any effort on him.
- pdpi 8mo agoLike you said: re-election. Re-election just maintains the status quo. The concern here is Talarico specifically, and that he might flip Texas.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo agoTalarico's potential future senate seat is already occupied by someone in his own party though
- georgemcbay 8mo ago> Talarico's potential future senate seat is already occupied by someone in his own party though ...?? Both current Texas Senators are Republicans. Talarico (a Democrat) is running for Cornyn's seat
- CGMthrowaway 8mo ago[flagged]
- whattheheckheck 8mo agoSo it didn't air because? What evidence do we have? Gosh maybe the sun won't rise tomorrow because w have evidence of it rising tomorrow we just can't know. Unbelievable how dark your soul is for posting that comment with all of the context available to you to estimate the probability of truth.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo ago[flagged]
- DeepYogurt 8mo agoHow does that matter?
- CGMthrowaway 8mo ago[flagged]
- ishouldstayaway 8mo agoAnd you're accusing us of jumping to conclusions without evidence? Get a grip here dude.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo agoI didnt jump to any conclusions about the motive behind Colbert's statements. I presented possibilities, very clearly and explicitly labeling them "alternative" and "unlikely". And the idea that all press is good press is not too controversial either
- toraway 8mo agoPer another of OP's comments in this thread, they seem to suggest that CBS (of all organizations) is actually trying to help a Democrat with better chances in the general to defeat a Republican. So, therefore, they artificially manufactured a Streisand Effect stunt by killing the interview. Because that's somehow a more parsimonious explanation than the clear pattern of Brendan Carr's statements and actions using the FCC to accomplish the political goals of the administration.
- mikkupikku 8mo agoThat's fine context, but doesn't make any of this less insane.
- steve1977 8mo agoNormal authoritarian state behavior, no?
- georgemcbay 8mo ago> Normal authoritarian state behavior, no? Yes. And the most surprising thing about this particular story to me is that a lot of people (here in the comments) seem surprised about it. I don't mean to normalize this, because it isn't normal, but anyone surprised by this hasn't been paying attention over the past year+, this didn't arrive out of the blue.
- steve1977 8mo agoIt's like people are "oh I thought Project 2025 was just a meme, lol"
- claytongulick 8mo agoMy understanding (please correct me if it's incorrect) is that the "worst-case" scenario for a broadcaster is that they may have to upload a record of political air time to a public file. If an opposing candidate sees this, they can then request equal air time from that broadcaster. The rule is in place so that one party or viewpoint can't dominate broadcast media. That's a good thing right? The rule change here is that traditionally "bona fide" news programs have been, by default, issued an exception to the rule. That has spawned a bunch of "pseudo-news" shows that have also been claiming this exception. Here, the FCC is now saying "hey, you don't just automatically get granted an exception to the rule and get to call yourself a bona fide news program if you're not actually one"". That seems completely reasonable to me. Broadcast media is held to this FCC standard because they are granted a monopoly for a broadcast spectrum, and it isn't physically possible for a competitor to broadcast on the same spectrum. Streaming etc... doesn't need to follow these rules. I do think it's wrong that talk radio doesn't seem to be held to the same standard, though.
- patmorgan23 8mo agoUp until this month, talk show interviews were exempt from the equal time rule.
- vharuck 8mo agoThe worst case scenario now is not limited by process and law. Compliance with politics is taken into consideration for all government business. For examples, see the executive orders blacklisting specific law firms, the withholding of funds to states or areas that vote Democratic, and the threat of investigation into a network after a host said something the President didn't like.
- SpicyLemonZest 8mo agoThe worst case scenario for a broadcaster is that the FCC commissioner will fabricate an excuse to illegally yank their license, which both he and his boss have explicitly threatened to do to any broadcaster which won't agree to stop criticizing Donald Trump. I agree that one could imagine a reasonable system of broadcast regulation where opinionated talk shows don't host political candidates, but that's not what's going on here.
- martythemaniak 8mo agoI know things may look bleak, but America has a large, loud, well-funded contingent of free-speech advocates. As soon as Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, and Thomas Chatterton Williams hear about this, there'll be hell to pay!
- renegade-otter 8mo agoAnd Elon Musk will absolutely lose it on Twitter.
- lenerdenator 8mo agoWell, what can the average person do to get CBS to air it?
- munk-a 8mo agoCBS is responding rationally (cowardly, certainly, but also rationally) to an administration that is misusing the tools of state. Change the administration.
- georgemcbay 8mo ago> CBS is responding rationally (cowardly, certainly, but also rationally) to an administration that is misusing the tools of state. CBS is complicit. The Ellisons bought it and installed Bari Weiss for this very purpose of being a (very) lightly camouflaged state media.
- davidw 8mo agoI think corporate media is mostly lost. We need to build something new. Pay attention to things like The Bulwark or Liberal Currents. It's really early days for all that, so who knows where things go, but people like Bezos would rather destroy media outlets than sell them to someone who would allow them to speak out against the regime.
- renegade-otter 8mo agoI have been The Bulwark listener/subscriber since day one. Those people are keeping me sane. That said, their day will come. Just like in Russia, after the low-hanging fruit is cut, the state will come for The Bulwark and Steve Jobs's widow, because The Atlantic is going be get increasingly annoying.
- davidw 8mo agoThis is doomerism, and I get the pull of it, but I have been trying to avoid it lately, because at the end of the day, it is doing the work of the fascists for them. It is "complying in advance" to prematurely admit defeat. We are not Russia.
- mcs5280 8mo agoWeird how Larry Ellison manages to do this to everything he touches
- biophysboy 8mo agoIf its any consolation, I think CBS news will fail miserably. The new captains are at the helm of a sinking ship, which has been taking on water for decades. Maybe a cynic will say "this was the plan", but if it was, its not a very good plan? If anything, tech executives benefited enormously from their opponents being overly attached to legacy media communication strategies. When Bezos kills the Post or Ellison kills CBS, the talent doesnt magically disappear.
- jajuuka 8mo agoNot Larry, David his son. For some reason people want to keep pretending that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree though. Seen multiple puff pieces about how David just loves movies so much and his dad is the political one.
- mcs5280 8mo agoIt's always daddy's money funding these projects
- Centigonal 8mo ago“They were careless people, David, Megan, and Larry- they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- pphysch 8mo agoRecall it was the same lawnmower^W Ellison-owned CBS that last minute pulled a 60 Minutes report on CECOT. They didn't blame that one on the government. Given that, I believe the higher ups at CBS wanted this to happen, but are colluding with the executive branch or misrepresenting the situation to shift responsibility.
- loeg 8mo ago[flagged]
- etchalon 8mo ago"unobjectionable" doing a lot of work in that sentence.
- benzible 8mo ago"Unobjectionable editorial reasons" is Orwellian framing. This is not how journalism works, and the fact that a major news org is now being operated this way is a five alarm fire, not business as usual. The segment was screened five times and cleared by both CBS attorneys and Standards and Practices. Correspondent Sharyn Alfonsi wrote internally that "pulling it now, after every rigorous internal check has been met, is not an editorial decision, it is a political one." Alfonsi's team had requested comment from the White House, State Department, and DHS. They refused. Weiss then used that silence to kill the story, saying they needed "the principals on the record and on camera." As Alfonsi put it, "Government silence is a statement, not a veto." Weiss's other objections included demanding the men be called "illegal immigrants" instead of "Venezuelan migrants" (many had applied for asylum and were not here illegally), and pushing for a Stephen Miller interview, which the administration had already declined. Under Bari Weiss' standard, the administration has a pocket veto over any story simply by not responding. Again, not how any of this has worked, ever!
- burkaman 8mo agoYou can't say "unobjectionable" and then link to three sources full of objections.
- 8mo ago
- calgarymicro 8mo ago> Carr suggested the exemption should no longer apply to programs he characterized as being “motivated by partisan purposes.” I know the timing makes this seem cravenly partisan, but revoking an exemption like this could be motivated by a desire to ensure fairn- > while the FCC chair was targeting late-night talk shows, he had made clear that right-wing talk radio would not be subject to the equal time notice. Ah, well.
- rconti 8mo agoThe right has an extremely large chip on their shoulder when insisting that the their _more popular media outlets_ do not count as "mainstream media" because... reasons.
- malfist 8mo agoFox news, who constantly tells it's listeners that it's #1 in the world for news, also lambasts "mainstream media". After bragging their the most mainstream of mainstream
- gz5 8mo agowe'll need more facts but if there is substance to this then the reaction from Bari Weiss (now cbs news editor-in-chief and a long-time public advocate of free speech) and team will be interesting.
- giraffe_lady 8mo agoWill it? Weiss seems to understands her role here very well. Her competence at it is still in question but she is consistent. CBS is state media now, she'll say what she's expected to say.
- Avshalom 8mo agoIt will not be interesting because she has never been an advocate of free speech.
- droopyEyelids 8mo agoShe has always and consistently advocated for free speech when it was beneficial to her or her allies/benefactors
- datsci_est_2015 8mo agoEither the OP was being sarcastic or they’re unaware of the difference between free speech and Free Speech™
- gz5 8mo agowhat i meant is this may be a good real world litmus test. i dont claim to know if there are differences or not between her word and actions - i have not followed her closely. but i always like 'tests' like this for heads of media orgs as free speech (Free Speech) imo needs to be the backbone of those orgs
- 7402 8mo agoShe has defended free speech disliked by both the left and the right on occasions. She famously left the NY Times after defending the publication of a contrarian op-ed by (Republican) Sen. Tom Cotton. https://www.npr.org/2025/10/06/nx-s1-5563786/bari-weiss-cbs-news-free-press https://www.npr.org/2025/10/06/nx-s1-5563786/bari-weiss-cbs-... Although apparently not a fan of Jimmy Kimmel as a comedian, her Free Press objected to his suspension. "... the FCC’s coercion undermines our most fundamental values" https://www.thefp.com/p/jawboning-and-jimmy-kimmel-free-speech-censorship https://www.thefp.com/p/jawboning-and-jimmy-kimmel-free-spee... And on the same topic, the FP editors wrote: "At last, something we can all agree on: Pam Bondi has no idea what she's talking about." https://www.thefp.com/p/pam-bondi-vs-the-first-amendment-free-speech-charlie-kirk https://www.thefp.com/p/pam-bondi-vs-the-first-amendment-fre... For president, she has voted for Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden. It's fair to call her a centrist.
- MyHonestOpinon 8mo agoThe interview in YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiTJ7Pz_59A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiTJ7Pz_59A
- sixsevenrot 8mo agoBarbara Streisand
- sixsevenrot 8mo ago1.5M views
- financetechbro 8mo agoNow at over 3M
- lyu07282 8mo agoIt's kind of ironic, so much drama all for a safe centrist corporate democrat. Although perhaps that's why it's such a big deal for liberals, it's oligarchical infighting. It's even more confusing that he's funded by the same billionaires that trump is. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/21/james-talarico-miriam-adelson-billionaire-donations-00517288 https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/21/james-talarico-miri...
- nebula8804 8mo agoI cheer on and have volunteered for progressive candidates before on the east coast. NYC keeps putting out rockstars. I guess its something about this diverse pressure cooker of a city? I don't know but they keep doing it. You are talking about Texas, an also ran mess that has a lot of work to do. Lets put aside the fact that they love their unique flavors of voter suppression. At best, for now all we can hope is whichever nobody gets elected does not cause trouble for the party like Fetterman. And lets be real, they will be gone once the heat dies down post Trump and the state flips back to Republican. All states seem to be going towards an enlightenment towards the left but at wildy different rates. Progressives focusing on the coasts + the rust belt make sense as those states have a history of economic populism (and are swing states) whereas Texas might come around a long time from now once the oil companies decline enough and the modern company towns made by people like Musk fall apart like they always historically have. You need a trigger of extreme economic pain for the people to finally bite the bullet and try something new. Texas is not there yet. They have better cost of living and enough industry but they are definitely on the road to disaster in many areas.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo ago[flagged]
- Jordan-117 8mo agoIt's a change Carr has publicly contemplated making, but hasn't yet. This is more about CBS under Ellison-controlled Paramount (who is on a quest to consolidate a conservative media empire) to curry favor with the administration by obeying in advance. (The CBS policy is new.)
- toraway 8mo agoUh, why exactly are we inventing a completely speculative alternate possibility when this is perfectly in line with Brendan Carr's multiple public statements and recent examples wielding FCC regulatory power to strong arm media organizations that he claims have a pattern of liberal bias, as well as the recent actions of CBS.
- shermantanktop 8mo agoWe could also speculate that the poster throwing out speculations is itself an account controlled by a foreign state actor (or a domestic one) trying to muddy the waters of discussion. We shouldn't do that, but we could. A strong piece of evidence against the FSA theory is that the posts are pretty ham-handed and unsubtle. But maybe that's part of the plan.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- ratmice 8mo agoIn FCC DA 26-68 they gave public notice of their change of interpretation/enforcement of the equal time rules to apply to this situation.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo ago> In FCC DA 26-68 Jan 21. Shapiro appeared Jan 26.
- mikestew 8mo agoI'm sure the CBS political officer^W^Wombudsman advised against airing the interview: https://www.npr.org/2025/09/12/nx-s1-5537152/cbs-news-ellison-steps-appease-trump https://www.npr.org/2025/09/12/nx-s1-5537152/cbs-news-elliso...
- CodeSalad 8mo agoIf only they could "slip on some tea"...
- web-cowboy 8mo agoRough spot in time to be: - Once print newspapers were no longer a thing, even local news outlets are struggling to stay alive, and are resulting to sensationalism and entertainment as news - Corporate sponsors retain a huge influence in mainstream news (or have outright purchased it and use it for partisan politics). - "Social" media resides in (you guessed it) corporate-owned walled gardens. - Even those willing to speak out are being targeted by federal agencies Wondering where others are finding great places to learn what's going on, what's actually relevant to me, and what I can actually do about it.
- tdb7893 8mo agoThere's a decent amount of non-profit news. I read NPR a lot and donate to them and Propublica. I think one of the big issues is advertising so news you actually pay for is a lot less likely to clickbait you.
- kjkjadksj 8mo agoPablo Torre, the last true sports journalist in America.
- ctoth 8mo agoAh yes, NPR who famously doesn't advertise but just tells us about new products! That sponsor programs!
- ajross 8mo agoThere's something "Very HN" to see a comment in a discussion about literal political censorship of the news media pointing out the horrifying hypocrisy in one of those media sources running... something sort of like advertisement. Is this what kids mean when they tell people to touch grass? My generation would accuse you of having lost the plot.
- DangitBobby 8mo agoBeing forced to run advertisements because one political party in particular decided being unbeholden to corporate interests is a dangerous thing for a news organization to be.
- 1970-01-01 8mo ago"Didn't air" doesn't mean what you think it means. It means the interview didn't go over the airwaves via broadcast towers. The full interview is online, which thanks to the Streisand effect already has millions of views and therfore helped CBS in terms of funding. This can be seen as a 4D chess move by CBS. They'll certainly do this again if they're hitting millions of views. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiTJ7Pz_59A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiTJ7Pz_59A
- hackyhacky 8mo ago> This can be seen as a 4D chess move by CBS. It isn't. CBS is owned by the Ellisons, who are big Trump supporters. They are absolutely complicit in attempts to quash dissenting voices. You're right that the Streisand effect is in play here, but it's not 4D chess. It's garden-variety incompetence, because the policy makers in the government are too old to see anything other than broadcast TV as the most valuable medium.
- mindslight 8mo agoComedians have a knack for succinctly expressing the truth: > "Let's just call this what it is: Donald Trump's administration wants to silence anyone who says anything bad about Trump on TV because all Trump does is watch TV," Colbert joked.
- tialaramex 8mo agoTechnically doesn't Trump also spend a lot of time golfing, and attending events where people praise Trump - admittedly for broadcast on TV but not necessarily while watching TV? I see that it's become harder to track because the White House doesn't disclose what he's doing as much, but yeah, lots of golf still.
- mindslight 8mo agoSure, jokes are often technically incorrect while performing a directionally-correct summation of the truth of the matter. But also, the few times I've been unfortunate enough to have to go to mega golf venues, the clubhouses generally have TVs prominently all over the place. So there is quite the demographic overlap.
- csours 8mo agoUnlimited Free Speech, itty bitty living space. - Aladdin's Genie
- pimlottc 8mo agoI have no idea what this means
- ceejayoz 8mo agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se14aJNY5nc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se14aJNY5nc
- csours 8mo agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ85y3q6K8c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ85y3q6K8c Many people in or related to the current administration have spoken in favor of free speech, which feels quite ironic.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo ago>Many people in or related to the current administration have spoken in favor of free speech, which feels quite ironic. Indeed. Our government, like most governments across the world in 2026, has moved way beyond the naive notion of "free speech." Talking about it now is either nostalgia, or lies
- signatoremo 8mo agoThe interview is on YT. Instead of complaining here, share it with your network https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiTJ7Pz_59A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiTJ7Pz_59A
- tastyface 8mo agoIt is trivial to do both.
- outside1234 8mo agoAll we need now is for zompolits* to be attached to all companies and we too can raise the sickle and hammer! * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_commissar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_commissar
- sega_sai 8mo agoIt is a great illustration of how transition to the authoritarianism happens (I've seen it happen in Russia in 2000s). At first you don't even need censorship, you just need to scare owners of channels/newspapers enough, so that they self-censor.
- dsl 8mo agoFear is the enforcement mechanism because it can't be challenged in court. It is long past time for everyone in tech to take a long hard look at the current situation and stop doing anything that financially benefits Musk, Ellison, or Thiel.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo agoChilling effect has a long history of being well considered as unconstitutional harm in the courts https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/chilling-effect/ https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/chilling-effect/
- amanaplanacanal 8mo agoWho would have standing to challenge this though?
- f_devd 8mo agoThere is no "who", once stabilizing institutions 'fall' the only remaining option is social pressure (which can come in various forms) but that does require a critical mass as it's very much reliant on network effects.
- appplication 8mo agoA history of anything in the courts doesn’t seem to be given too much consideration nowadays.
- tim333 8mo agoIt kind of explains quite a lot of behavior of the Russian government like low level aggression in the west, interesting ways of killing people and the like. Maybe also the Epstein files - he was in touch with Moscow a lot, and the behavior of Trump who seems pretty scared by that stuff.
- bfbcu763 8mo agoThe prob has always been the FCC didnt recognize the internet as a Broadcast Medium. Which it is. Anyone can get their message out to a billion people if the algos deem its going to make the platform money. This means the platform support 1 to All messaging ie Broadcast. Thanks to Claude Shannon we know if everyone is given free broadcast capability like giving everyone a mic connected to the same sound system, without a coordination mechanism we get massive noise. How do ppl react to not being heard? They shout louder and louder or keep repeating their message. Amplifying the noise even more. Thats exactly whats happening on the internet today. We had the same issue with radio back in the day when anyone could stick tower on their roof and start broadcasting. This is why Spectrum gets licensed to solve the interference and noise problem. Americans are fed from birth that Free Speech is a right. But no one tells people before the internet Broadcast was not free. You either owned a newspaper, radio station, TV/sat spectrum to broadcast. There is a serious category error happening because the FCC didnt recognize the platforms are really broadcast mediums.
- jahsome 8mo agoThe difference is the airwaves are a limited transmission method. A broadcast medium is not regulated because it's dangerous, it's regulated because it's scarce.
- thaumasiotes 8mo agoNone of the statements in your comment support the idea that the internet is a broadcast medium in the sense relevant to the FCC. It's a medium made entirely of 1-1 connections. Note that newspapers are an older technology than radio, and they function in exactly the same way that the internet does, and there's never been a question of whether they are secretly "broadcast media".
- JackFr 8mo agoIt's a terrible look for CBS. At the same time, I find it unbelievable that they don't fire Colbert. This is obvious gross insubordination, and he is an employee. His final show is coming in May, and I'm sure that they can expect Colbert to continue to embarrass them (as the spineless sycophants they are) every week until then. It's a tremendous self own.
- msie 8mo agoHa, it's spineless that they are self-censoring themselves. Whatever happened to Freedom of the Press?
- wildzzz 8mo agoColbert is not a CBS employee. He runs Spartina Productions which, along with Busboy Productions, produces The Late Show for CBS. It's a coordinated project of the three companies, he's not their employee and likely can't just cancel the show except for very specific circumstances.
- ishouldstayaway 8mo ago> likely can't just cancel the show Because they already have?
- wildzzz 8mo agoThey just didn't renew the contract. When I say cancel, I mean an abrupt end to the show.
- unethical_ban 8mo agoFiring satirists is moral now?
- hn_acker 8mo ago> This is obvious gross insubordination Really? CBS's lawyers cited the equal time rule, which only applies to broadcasts sent over limited airwaves. I think the equal time rule doesn't actually apply in this case (because why couldn't CBS provide equal time in the near future? who even requested equal time and was denied it?), but more relevantly the equal time rule does not apply to publishing the same interview over the internet instead of over the "air".
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- throw7 8mo ago[flagged]
- tclancy 8mo ago>The change here is that late night interviews are not "bona fied news" so equal time rule kicks in I'll give you "fear" is the wrong word for a company openly courting the administration, but if the equal time clause applies here because CBS is over-the-air using "a public good", it feels like we're long past a time where it should apply to _at least_ cable stations. Ideally, the whole thing would be put back in place how it was before the Regan or Rush Limbaugh era decimation of it (IIRC), but with the net and podcasts and youtube, et al, this is just me getting old and seeing some weird value in locking the splinters of the barn door.
- nkozyra 8mo ago> The change here is that late night interviews are not "bona fied news" Not always the case with Section 315, and late night and talk shows have been exempted in the past. The problem here is that this is on a case-by-case basis, and we have a particularly politically-charged executive agency.
- Larrikin 8mo agoThey cite that this goes against the long standing rule and they cite the selective enforcement against Colbert and Kimmel before the interview. Two people the president has directly attacked. They also cite that they have elected to not enforce the rule against conservative radio hosts.
- Herring 8mo agoReminder that the most reliable way to prevent the rise of the far right is to implement robust safety nets and low inequality, to reduce status anxiety and grievance. Support for such measures (welfare, healthcare, unionization, high taxes etc) is usually low among Americans. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/10/welfare-cuts-are-fuelling-far-right-rise-warns-un-expert https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/10/welfare-cuts...
- lyu07282 8mo agoThat's why the rightward shift is unavoidable and corporate Dems like Talarico only further this shift into fascism. Even if liberals win it only means the next right-wing candidate is going to be even more extreme than the last. People think that's crazy talk, even though it's happening right in front of their faces since Obama, we're cooked.
- Herring 8mo agoLast time it took a huge depression to get people to start working together (FDR's socialism lite). I think part of the problem is capitalism itself. Most US companies are run like tiny little fascist dictatorships, which is a great training ground for the real thing. It doesn't socialize people to cooperate. Contrast eg Norway, where businesses operate inside a formal 3-way agreement (Trepartssamarbeidet) between the government, employers associations, and trade unions.
- nebula8804 8mo agoAOC has just improves her ranking big time in the last few days. If she keeps this up she 'maybe' she has a shot at the White House (maybe, its going to be a long two years). Think about it: A bernie Sanders type candidate not taking corporate PAC money is currently in the running for the White House! We saw with Mamdani they will throw everything at her. Will she falter? Hope not but feeling better than I have felt in a while.
- Herring 8mo agoObvious question: How is she going to get anything past the gridlocked Congress and hostile Supreme Court? Obama often couldn't after the midterms, and it's much worse this time.
- throwgrammar 8mo ago[dead]
- mindslight 8mo agoAll marketing is meant to induce feelings that compensate for reality's deficiencies. I use cat litter that is "99% dust free". I'll give you one guess what that remaining 1% by weight is.
- legitster 8mo agoFrom Umberto Eco's essay on Fascism: > On the morning of July 27, 1943, I was told that, according to radio reports, fascism had collapsed and Mussolini was under arrest. When my mother sent me out to buy the newspaper, I saw that the papers at the nearest newsstand had different titles. Moreover, after seeing the headlines, I realized that each newspaper said different things. I bought one of them, blindly, and read a message on the first page signed by five or six political parties — among them the Democrazia Cristiana, the Communist Party, the Socialist Party, the Partito d’Azione, and the Liberal Party. > Until then, I had believed that there was a single party in every country and that in Italy it was the Partito Nazionale Fascista. Now I was discovering that in my country several parties could exist at the same time. Since I was a clever boy, I immediately realized that so many parties could not have been born overnight, and they must have existed for some time as clandestine organizations. What I think is fascinating here in this case isn't just the suppression of any old free speech, it's trying to hide the presence of political options.
- PearlRiver 8mo agoAmerica has only two parties instead of a dozen. This makes political options disappear. Everyone had to rally behind Biden or Trump last time.
- drooopy 8mo agoWe had little marco rubio (not capitalised on purpose) over here in Europe lecturing us about freedom of speech. Every accusation is a confession.
- juliusceasar 8mo agoUSA turned into China, Russia and soon N-Korea. You are not allowed to say anything bad about the current administration and Israel. Little country pulling the strings here.
- bentt 8mo agoThis is how you get a candidate’s name out there. Master stroke by CBS. :/
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 8mo agoAiring on broadcast TV (cf. publishing on YouTube) does not offer the same opportunity for surveillance of the audience
- Rover222 8mo ago"In an emailed statement, CBS said: “THE LATE SHOW was not prohibited by CBS from broadcasting the interview with Rep. James Talarico. The show was provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal-time rule for two other candidates, including Rep. Jasmine Crockett, and presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be fulfilled. THE LATE SHOW decided to present the interview through its YouTube channel with on-air promotion on the broadcast rather than potentially providing the equal-time options." Show me the Fascism, please.