- 4 hours ago
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00This equal time rule, what is it? Give us some little historical context, if you will,
00:06and how does it apply in this situation? Because it sounds like it's changed a little bit over the
00:11years. Yeah, that's right. So this is when a 1934 law meets a very different political and media
00:20environment. And so the equal opportunity rule, you know, came in the 1930s requiring broadcast
00:28stations to give equal opportunities to political candidates. Obviously, that was a time when
00:34broadcast stations played a much more prominent role in American media than in the environment
00:42today. And that 1934 law that requires equal opportunity for candidates. I mean, that was
00:50radio, right? We were kind of talking and print or whatever. Yeah, exactly. Originally, this was
00:57written for for radio, and then it evolved to apply to the big TV stations. And now it says nothing
01:04about about new media and regulating them. But this is still on the books. And so and there's a there's
01:12there have been developments since 1934. So if you go back to just 2006, the FCC looked at Jay Leno's
01:20Tonight Show. And it said, Okay, if Jay Leno interviews a guest, does that qualify for the
01:29equal time rule? And the FCC staff then said no, you know, that Congress added these exemptions for
01:35bona fide news shows or bona fide news interviews, those don't apply. And so 2006, they said Jay Leno
01:42doesn't apply. But recently, in January, the FCC said, Hey, you know, that 2006 decision about Jay
01:49Leno, that might not be right, we might not be sticking with that. That's where we are today,
01:54after they put out that and get that guidance. That's why Stephen Colbert's producers had this
01:59reaction. I want to bring up a statement from CBS here, quote, the show was provided legal guidance
02:05that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal time rule for two other candidates, including representative
02:11Jasmine Crockett, and presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be
02:16fulfilled. You bring up a really good point about what happened in 2006, and what happened in January,
02:22who who is the ultimate arbiter of whether or not that rule applies to a late night show?
02:28Well, so the FCC is empowered by Congress to make rules interpreting the equal opportunity law.
02:37You know, Congress said that. And so there is some uncertainty on what is a bona fide news interview,
02:44a bona fide newscast, and the FCC is the body that's empowered to make that determination.
02:50So and when you look at that, that 2006 decision about Jay Leno, that was made at the staff level.
02:56So you
02:57don't even need a full commission vote. Brendan Carr, the FCC controls the staff, so he can have his staff
03:03take a completely different view on this issue. So the FCC gets the first crack at this. After that,
03:10you know, the broadcasters could fight that they could say, you're wrong on this FCC, you could,
03:14they could take it to court. The question is, does anyone really want to go through all that? And so,
03:20you know, that's the situation CBS finds itself in. Yes, if it really took a hard line on this stuff,
03:25it could probably say, hey, this law, it might have been good, you know, 70 years ago,
03:30the First Amendment is a real problem with it. Now, they could probably win that fight. But is it
03:35really worth, you know, getting on the wrong side of this administration over, you know,
03:40one late night interview or a couple late night interviews? I think right now, the calculus points
03:45to let's not let's not rock the boats. And so it's much easier to go along.
03:50I don't know, there's part of me, freedom of speech, being a journalist, broadcast, like,
03:54I don't know, there's part of me that's like, you think about the importance of,
03:58of being able to do this. Hannah Miller, I want to bring you in media reporter at Bloomberg News,
04:03you've been reporting and writing about this, as well. I mean, this is kind of a staple of late
04:10night of seeing different politicians from both sides of the aisle. I throw podcasts into this
04:15too. But I understand this is like traditional broadcast. What are you hearing about this?
04:21Yeah, so Brendan Carr had some really spicy comments this morning in the early afternoon
04:28in a press conference and talking to reporters. And he made very clear, you know, that there are
04:34these issues affect daytime shows and late night shows, that they fall under the equal time rule.
04:39And he really came down hard on the media for how they're reporting this,
04:44the issues around lack of trust in the media.
04:48But traditional linear television, is he getting, he's not getting into cable and other things,
04:52right? It's what's under the FCC basically airwaves.
04:56Yes. So yeah, that's his focus right now.
04:59Yeah, I want to get both your, both your takes on this. Hannah, I want to start with you because
05:02you've reported a lot on, on the new media, uh, and new media, but in an, in an age of
05:06like,
05:06you know, we call 2024 the first podcast election. It's like, does, does, does equal time actually
05:12matter in, in the era of Joe Rogan where, you know, or the era of YouTube where Stephen Colbert
05:18just posts this to YouTube or Joe Rogan has a, you know, a three hour interview with whoever,
05:23does it matter?
05:24Yeah. I mean, that's a really good question here because people pick what they want.
05:30They have so many options now with, you know, how things are so specialized in new media,
05:35you know, they can jump to a podcast on anything they want. Um, and yeah, the, these issues that
05:41Carr is looking at, they're really focused on the broadcasters here. Um, so right now,
05:46you know, that could be questions coming up in midterms and things like that and, and how
05:50podcasts should be governed. But right now the focus is on traditional TV.
05:54So, um, yeah, you've got a story out.
05:59I just saw, as you were walking in here, your story was literally published.
06:02One of our producers telling you to send it. Um, yeah, so I, you know, Matt, Matthew,
06:08come on back in here because I do think, you know, this is a different administration. Um,
06:14and many would say that various offices within this government is doing the bidding of the president.
06:20So I don't know, is this just something that is what this FCC wants to do? Or is, like,
06:27is there a bigger issue that maybe in times to come, we're going to look at the way people can
06:32view
06:33content and it's just kind of a different world. There's just so many outlets out there,
06:37especially when it comes to it's really full conversations.
06:40Yeah. I mean, it's really hard to argue that these, you know, these rules really make a ton
06:47of sense to just apply them to broadcast and not to the other media and whether they're,
06:54you know, that that's fair. It's, there's really a substantial question of whether it's,
06:57it's consistent with the first amendment to keep these requirements for broadcast on the books.
07:03But what you have today is just such a politically charged environment. You have an FCC led by Brendan
07:09Carr that has said, look, we're not an independent agency anymore. We, we, we, we serve the president.
07:16And, and if there's a political benefit to go after the media, and there's a lot of uncertainty on
07:22these old laws, it creates an opportunity, um, for the administration to press the limits of the
07:29uncertainty in, in that law. And I think that's what you see here is, you know, because this form of
07:35media is still subject to these laws and no one really wants to have a big extended court fight
07:40about it. That's not really worth it to the companies. That's where we end up.
07:43I want to go back to Hannah, your story, um, and what FCC chair Brendan Carr said, he said,
07:48you had a Democrat candidate who understood the way the news media works. And he took advantage of all
07:54the viewers prior conceptions to run a hoax, apparently for the purpose of raising money
07:59and getting clicks. Uh, and this was in that open FCC meeting today. I mean, that's a, that's a pretty
08:05strong statement. Um, as many would say with a white house and a president who really understands how
08:11to use media. And I don't think I'm speaking out of terms. So, um, that's a pretty strong statement.
08:17It is. And he reiterated it several times today during, you know, that session. Um, you know,
08:23the question here is, is, you know, media manipulation. He's arguing, he's alleging that,
08:28you know, Tallarico, uh, knew what was going to happen here, that this was going to grab attention
08:33and also campaign donations. Um, and, you know, Tallarico's campaign reported that they raised $2.5
08:39million, a record single day haul after that interview got posted on YouTube.
08:45Matthew, coming back in here, I was intrigued with what you said about the, um, FCC, at least
08:50under Brendan Carr and the way that he's described it as serving at the pleasure of the president.
08:54Historically, when you look back at, at the role of the FCC, is, is that very different than,
09:00than how it's worked in, in modern history? Because my understanding is typically there are, uh,
09:05different members of the FCC that, uh, are part of different political parties for a reason.
09:11Yeah, that's right. I mean, we, we've had a long history, uh, of independence at the FCC. Now,
09:18now certainly the chair of the FCC has, has often aligned with the views of the president that
09:24appointed that, um, that commissioner, that chairman. But at the same time, there's also
09:30been an independent streak where sometimes, um, you, you saw the president insisting on one policy,
09:37but, but FCC chairman would push back and say, well, you know, maybe the first amendment,
09:42maybe the law doesn't let us go there. That sort of has gone away these days. Um, and you're going
09:48to see it in a Supreme court is, has a case teed up right now about whether there are independent
09:53agencies or not. I think everything is going in the direction against independence for, for at least
10:00for agencies like the FTC and the FCC. That means that a chairman like, like Brendan Carr can't stand
10:06up to the president on principle or else he's, he's at risk of losing his job. President Trump can fire
10:12him for any reason at all. And so Brendan Carr has very little choice other than to serve the political
10:18message that the president is, is asking him to serve. And, and the law maybe he gets, you know,
10:25put, put aside, you know, the need to save your own job. Hey, Hannah, um, to be fair, the FCC
10:34did
10:35talk to broadcasters, right back in January, um, about what talk shows and late night programs
10:41needed to do. So remind us that to be fair, it's, it's not like this is coming out of nowhere.
10:46They had sent, I guess, some stuff around. It's not. Yeah. It's not coming out of nowhere,
10:52especially because Tallarico had a similar incident when he appeared on the view, the daytime show. Um,
11:00and that trigger triggered an FCC probe, um, an equal time investigation. And that happened earlier
11:06this month. So that was sort of the standard here. And CBS is claiming like, Hey, yeah, we,
11:11we knew this could trigger something. Uh, and Brendan Carr also talked about that and said,
11:16you know, they're looking at enforcement action. All right. So where do we go from here,
11:21at least on this issue? I wonder, well, I wonder, Matthew, it goes back to the question about,
11:26you know, old media versus new media and the, the age of podcasts, the age of going directly to the
11:30consumer, the age of, you know, relationships that people have with individuals on social media and
11:35how many, you know, people can actually see something if it's on YouTube or on Instagram.
11:39And it raises the question about, is there a, a, a risk of a regulatory body saying to, uh, you
11:48know,
11:48the digital, the, the, the digital platforms and the owners of the digital platforms, the,
11:53the alphabets and the meta platforms, Hey, we're going to regulate you the way that the FCC
11:58regulates broadcast. Yeah. I don't think there's much of a risk of that because the first amendment
12:05would be a pretty big problem. So the Supreme court has, has read the first amendment to give,
12:11um, the internet and, and other outlets, pretty broad first amendment protection. So you couldn't
12:20see, you know, this is all sort of part of what, what used to be called the fairness doctrine,
12:25you know, mandates that every, that media have to be equal. There's no way that that would survive
12:30a Supreme court test for, for new media today. I'm not sure it would even survive for,
12:36for broadcast. If, if, if we brought up that issue, you're just saying that the, the broadcast
12:41companies don't necessarily have the resources or the desire to take this to the Supreme court.
12:46Right. Right. Do we really want to have that fight? Um, when, when it's going to have put us
12:52on the wrong side of this administration and we have bigger issues, the actual enforcement here
12:57against the TV stations is, you know, minimal. What is, what is the FCC actually going to do
13:02about all of this? You know, it can, it can investigate, but these licenses last eight
13:08years. None of them even are, are up for renewal during this administration. And so, you know,
13:14it's a lot of noise with not a lot of real concrete threats to the companies. And so it's best
13:20to kind
13:20of go along for now.
Comments