4 ms·

Tbh, 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 ago
The 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 ago
  Already 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 ago
    Cynicism 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 ago
    Like 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 ago
      Talarico'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
  - mandevil 8mo ago
    This whole fight is about something called the "bona fides news exception." Basically, in 2006 the FCC ruled that late night interviews were always bona fides news interviews (and therefore not subject to equal time), on January 21st FCC Chairman Brendan Carr wrote a letter suggesting (but not declaring) that the 2006 ruling was incorrect and might be revoked. Separately, currently elected politicians are pretty much always considered to be bona fides interview subjects, even if they happen to be running for reelection, because e.g. the Governor of Pennsylvania expressing opinions is news. If CBS lawyers wanted to fight and bring Talarico on, they would probably win- the letter is not actually changing the rule, and the FCC would have to defend the rule change in court and would probably lose. But the point is that CBS has determined to be working towards the Fuehrer, and wants to do so, and so they are doing what they are doing.
  - pseudalopex 8mo ago
    Ossoff and Shapiro had not filed as candidates reportedly.[1] [1] https://latenighter.com/news/jon-ossoffs-colbert-fcc-equal-time/ https://latenighter.com/news/jon-ossoffs-colbert-fcc-equal-t...
hackyhacky 8mo ago
Correct. CBS is now owned by Larry Ellison's son. They are big supporters of the current administration. This act, among others, shows that they are willing to silence dissenting voices on media properties they own.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo ago
  [flagged]
  - mikkupikku 8mo ago
    What other administration? It's no secret that Ellison is with Trump. There's no dog whistling here, you're just being obtuse.
  - vineyardmike 8mo ago
    What do you think dog whistle means?
benzible 8mo ago
The chilling effect is the entire point. An FCC source literally told CNN, "the threat is the point." CBS isn't being randomly skittish. Paramount needs regulatory approval for its WBD acquisition, paid $16 million to settle a Trump lawsuit right before needing FCC approval for the Skydance merger, and canceled Colbert days after he criticized that deal. ABC suspended Kimmel after FCC threats. The FCC opened an investigation into The View just for having Talarico on. And yes, Larry Ellison is a hardcore Trump supporter, but even if he weren't, this is how every network is behaving. Disney's Bob Iger is a Democrat and ABC still paid Trump and suspended Kimmel. When the government holds regulatory leverage over your business, "obeying in advance" isn't cowardice you can blame on the network, it's the intended mechanism of state pressure.
- mindslight 8mo ago
  > "obeying in advance" isn't cowardice you can blame on the network, it's the intended mechanism of state pressure. No, there is no reason to absolve the agency of anybody with power (eg money and platform). The ownership class is kowtowing to Trump because they think regardless of whatever happens, they personally will be relatively fine as long as they go along. And they are probably right, even as Trump leads our country off a cliff. But that doesn't mean they get to escape judgement for being cowards.
  - benzible 8mo ago
    That's not what I said. I said it isn't cowardice you can blame on the network instead of the FCC, which is what the parent comment did by saying the fault lies "more with CBS." CBS deserves blame. The administration wielding the threat deserves more. Resistance requires an active, costly choice. The entire structure of public companies, fiduciary duty, short-term shareholder pressure, regulatory dependency, incentivizes compliance. That's not an excuse, it's the point. The system is designed so that capitulation is the path of least resistance, which is exactly why the blame has to center on whoever is exploiting that structure rather than on each individual institution for failing to be heroic. The firms and universities that did fight back (Perkins Coie, Harvard, Jenner & Block) won in court every time, while the ones that cut deals (Columbia, Paul Weiss, Brown) gave up money and autonomy for nothing the fighters didn't get for free. But fighting required leaders willing to accept real personal and institutional risk. Expecting that as the default rather than addressing the coercion creating the dilemma is how you end up with a system where everyone folds and nobody's responsible except the victims. Of course, increasing the cost of capitulation is one place where consumers actually have power. Disney suffered 1.7 million streaming cancellations after suspending Kimmel, and Kimmel was back on the air within five days. That works. But notice what it required: massive organized public pressure aimed at the company and political pressure aimed at the FCC. Not just finger-wagging for being cowards.
lawstkawz 8mo ago
Nah the fault lies with the American public for talking the freedom/exceptionalism talk, social projection of grit and ruggedness while the reality is learned helplessness and codependency
- daseiner1 8mo ago
  democracies past, present, and future inevitably crumble as the need to cater to the demos grows greater and greater with every generation of voters. i know this is a contrivance but nevertheless: we don't consult the entire hospital how to treat my heart condition yet we accept on face value that obeying the vagaries of the hoi polloi is the best way to decide who controls the levers of power in civil society.
  - sapphicsnail 8mo ago
    Our country is being run by unaccountable elites and they're doing a terrible job. They're not catering to anyone other than their donors.
    - lawstkawz 8mo ago
      Having grown up rural, fixing farm equipment, rebuilding cars, which propelled me towards a degree in electrical engineering (and after that an MSc in math), my colleagues the last 20 years have watched a lot of TV and played all the video games but can barely bake a potato. "Unaccountable elites" are enabled by know-nothings in corporate management, software engineering teams, accounting, HR "just following orders". The lack of muscle memory to be self sufficient keeps people in their lane and unable to look away, fix their own stuff, make their own stuff. When labor knows nothing but just following orders leadership is empowered to build and fill gulags; what are the people going to do? Resist en masse? Not when they are addicted to GrubHub delivery of Subway.
    - daseiner1 8mo ago
      duh. why is this always phrased as if the populace is unaccountable for the very existence of these elites? why is it always assumed that these unaccountable elites are better held in check by the farce of democracy than a proud genuine elite in place of the ignoble “””elite”””? the people get what they deserve. if democracy was a functional system of government then by its own underlying assumptions the citizenry right now would be shooting, bombing, & stabbing these so-called elites. But we are held in subjugation as a result of our own fealty. It is a choice.
goku12 8mo ago
This is arguably worse, isn't it? The administration gets to say that it was the network's own decision and that they had no role in it. Taking over news and public media with the help of oligarch buddies is much more effect than a public spat with them.
- Jordan-117 8mo ago
  It's definitely worse, I'm just saying one shouldn't lay the blame entirely on the government here -- CBS is an eager partner in this, not a victim.
  - Rapzid 8mo ago
    Sure but the government officials are our representatives so they hold special and unique responsibility for this situation. As for the corpos.. Cancelled Disney and Hulu when Kimmel was taken off. Maybe it's time to cancel Paramount+ too.
hangonhn 8mo ago
This is exactly how effective censorship works. For example, what most people don't understand about Chinese censorship is that the foundation of their system is that everything is attributable to someone eventually. So they start by targeting anonymity. Then when something they don't like is published and gains traction, the originating party and the major distributors are punished -- sometimes very publicly. The chilling effect is that people will learn to self censor. Oh and they keep the rules really vague so you always err on the side of caution. CBS self censoring is basically the same thing. The Chinese government can then say "What censorship?" or "It's rare" and now the FCC can do the same. Playing whack-a-mole is not a good strategy for censorship. The chilling effect of self censorship is the winning strategy.

pdpi 8mo ago

The 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 ago
Already 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 ago
  Cynicism 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 ago
  Like 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 ago
    Talarico'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
- mandevil 8mo ago
  This whole fight is about something called the "bona fides news exception." Basically, in 2006 the FCC ruled that late night interviews were always bona fides news interviews (and therefore not subject to equal time), on January 21st FCC Chairman Brendan Carr wrote a letter suggesting (but not declaring) that the 2006 ruling was incorrect and might be revoked. Separately, currently elected politicians are pretty much always considered to be bona fides interview subjects, even if they happen to be running for reelection, because e.g. the Governor of Pennsylvania expressing opinions is news. If CBS lawyers wanted to fight and bring Talarico on, they would probably win- the letter is not actually changing the rule, and the FCC would have to defend the rule change in court and would probably lose. But the point is that CBS has determined to be working towards the Fuehrer, and wants to do so, and so they are doing what they are doing.
- pseudalopex 8mo ago
  Ossoff and Shapiro had not filed as candidates reportedly.[1] [1] https://latenighter.com/news/jon-ossoffs-colbert-fcc-equal-time/ https://latenighter.com/news/jon-ossoffs-colbert-fcc-equal-t...

hackyhacky 8mo ago

Correct. CBS is now owned by Larry Ellison's son. They are big supporters of the current administration. This act, among others, shows that they are willing to silence dissenting voices on media properties they own.

CGMthrowaway 8mo ago
[flagged]
- mikkupikku 8mo ago
  What other administration? It's no secret that Ellison is with Trump. There's no dog whistling here, you're just being obtuse.
- vineyardmike 8mo ago
  What do you think dog whistle means?

benzible 8mo ago

The chilling effect is the entire point. An FCC source literally told CNN, "the threat is the point." CBS isn't being randomly skittish. Paramount needs regulatory approval for its WBD acquisition, paid $16 million to settle a Trump lawsuit right before needing FCC approval for the Skydance merger, and canceled Colbert days after he criticized that deal. ABC suspended Kimmel after FCC threats. The FCC opened an investigation into The View just for having Talarico on. And yes, Larry Ellison is a hardcore Trump supporter, but even if he weren't, this is how every network is behaving. Disney's Bob Iger is a Democrat and ABC still paid Trump and suspended Kimmel. When the government holds regulatory leverage over your business, "obeying in advance" isn't cowardice you can blame on the network, it's the intended mechanism of state pressure.

mindslight 8mo ago
> "obeying in advance" isn't cowardice you can blame on the network, it's the intended mechanism of state pressure. No, there is no reason to absolve the agency of anybody with power (eg money and platform). The ownership class is kowtowing to Trump because they think regardless of whatever happens, they personally will be relatively fine as long as they go along. And they are probably right, even as Trump leads our country off a cliff. But that doesn't mean they get to escape judgement for being cowards.
- benzible 8mo ago
  That's not what I said. I said it isn't cowardice you can blame on the network instead of the FCC, which is what the parent comment did by saying the fault lies "more with CBS." CBS deserves blame. The administration wielding the threat deserves more. Resistance requires an active, costly choice. The entire structure of public companies, fiduciary duty, short-term shareholder pressure, regulatory dependency, incentivizes compliance. That's not an excuse, it's the point. The system is designed so that capitulation is the path of least resistance, which is exactly why the blame has to center on whoever is exploiting that structure rather than on each individual institution for failing to be heroic. The firms and universities that did fight back (Perkins Coie, Harvard, Jenner & Block) won in court every time, while the ones that cut deals (Columbia, Paul Weiss, Brown) gave up money and autonomy for nothing the fighters didn't get for free. But fighting required leaders willing to accept real personal and institutional risk. Expecting that as the default rather than addressing the coercion creating the dilemma is how you end up with a system where everyone folds and nobody's responsible except the victims. Of course, increasing the cost of capitulation is one place where consumers actually have power. Disney suffered 1.7 million streaming cancellations after suspending Kimmel, and Kimmel was back on the air within five days. That works. But notice what it required: massive organized public pressure aimed at the company and political pressure aimed at the FCC. Not just finger-wagging for being cowards.

lawstkawz 8mo ago

Nah the fault lies with the American public for talking the freedom/exceptionalism talk, social projection of grit and ruggedness while the reality is learned helplessness and codependency

daseiner1 8mo ago
democracies past, present, and future inevitably crumble as the need to cater to the demos grows greater and greater with every generation of voters. i know this is a contrivance but nevertheless: we don't consult the entire hospital how to treat my heart condition yet we accept on face value that obeying the vagaries of the hoi polloi is the best way to decide who controls the levers of power in civil society.
- sapphicsnail 8mo ago
  Our country is being run by unaccountable elites and they're doing a terrible job. They're not catering to anyone other than their donors.
  - lawstkawz 8mo ago
    Having grown up rural, fixing farm equipment, rebuilding cars, which propelled me towards a degree in electrical engineering (and after that an MSc in math), my colleagues the last 20 years have watched a lot of TV and played all the video games but can barely bake a potato. "Unaccountable elites" are enabled by know-nothings in corporate management, software engineering teams, accounting, HR "just following orders". The lack of muscle memory to be self sufficient keeps people in their lane and unable to look away, fix their own stuff, make their own stuff. When labor knows nothing but just following orders leadership is empowered to build and fill gulags; what are the people going to do? Resist en masse? Not when they are addicted to GrubHub delivery of Subway.
  - daseiner1 8mo ago
    duh. why is this always phrased as if the populace is unaccountable for the very existence of these elites? why is it always assumed that these unaccountable elites are better held in check by the farce of democracy than a proud genuine elite in place of the ignoble “””elite”””? the people get what they deserve. if democracy was a functional system of government then by its own underlying assumptions the citizenry right now would be shooting, bombing, & stabbing these so-called elites. But we are held in subjugation as a result of our own fealty. It is a choice.

goku12 8mo ago

This is arguably worse, isn't it? The administration gets to say that it was the network's own decision and that they had no role in it. Taking over news and public media with the help of oligarch buddies is much more effect than a public spat with them.

Jordan-117 8mo ago
It's definitely worse, I'm just saying one shouldn't lay the blame entirely on the government here -- CBS is an eager partner in this, not a victim.
- Rapzid 8mo ago
  Sure but the government officials are our representatives so they hold special and unique responsibility for this situation. As for the corpos.. Cancelled Disney and Hulu when Kimmel was taken off. Maybe it's time to cancel Paramount+ too.

hangonhn 8mo ago

This is exactly how effective censorship works. For example, what most people don't understand about Chinese censorship is that the foundation of their system is that everything is attributable to someone eventually. So they start by targeting anonymity. Then when something they don't like is published and gains traction, the originating party and the major distributors are punished -- sometimes very publicly. The chilling effect is that people will learn to self censor. Oh and they keep the rules really vague so you always err on the side of caution. CBS self censoring is basically the same thing. The Chinese government can then say "What censorship?" or "It's rare" and now the FCC can do the same. Playing whack-a-mole is not a good strategy for censorship. The chilling effect of self censorship is the winning strategy.