Brendan Carr Can’t Explain Why ‘Equal Time’ Rule Doesn’t Apply To Right Wing Radio
from the words-are-but-wind dept
We’ve noted repeatedly how Trump FCC boss Brendan Carr has been abusing the FCC’s “equal opportunity” (or “equal time”) rule to try and threaten daytime and late night talk shows with government retribution if they refuse to enthusiastically coddle Republicans.
Late night shows had historically been exempt from the dated rules, which required that any airing of a political candidate on “publicly owned” airwaves is countered with the appearance from a candidate from the opposing party. But Carr isn’t interested in equilibrium; he’s interested abusing FCC authority to try and silence critics of Donald Trump and his increasingly unpopular policies.
But folks have increasingly noted that Brendan Carr doesn’t appear to have any interest in enforcing the same standard on radio, where (especially on AM), listeners are constantly served up a lopsided dose of race-baiting agitprop pretending to be news. When he’s been asked about this inconsistency, Carr has been painfully and curiously vague:
“In a press conference after the FCC’s February 18 meeting, Deadline reporter Ted Johnson asked Carr why he has not expressed “the same concern about broadcast talk radio as broadcast TV talk shows.”
The Deadline reporter pointed out that “Sean Hannity’s show featured Ken Paxton in December.” Paxton, the Texas attorney general, is running for a US Senate seat in this year’s election. Carr claimed in response that TV broadcasters have been “misreading” FCC precedents while talk radio shows have not been.
“It appeared that programmers were either overreading or misreading some of the case law on the equal-time rule as it applies to broadcast TV,” Carr replied. “We haven’t seen the same issues on the radio side, but the equal-time rule is going to apply to broadcast across the board, and we’ll take a look at anything that arises at the end of the day.”
It’s of course far worse on the radio side, which has been utterly dominated by outright right wing propaganda since the early 90s. And he will, of course, not be “taking a look at anything that arises,” because, again, he’s not remotely interested in abusing this rule consistently because he’s an authoritarian hack.
Ars Technica spoke to Gigi Sohn, whose appointment to the FCC under Biden was, if you’ll recall, dismantled by a telecom and media company homophobic smear campaign:
“Carr’s claim that TV but not radio broadcasters have misread FCC precedents is “a bunch of nonsense,” said Gigi Sohn, a longtime lawyer and consumer advocate who served as counselor to then-FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler during the Obama era. Carr “was responding to criticism from people like Sean Hannity that the guidance would apply to conservative talk radio just as much as it would to so-called ‘liberal’ TV,” Sohn told Ars. “It doesn’t matter whether a broadcaster is a radio broadcaster or a TV broadcaster, the Equal Opportunities law and however the FCC implements it must apply to both equally.”
This is very typical Carr. The law and earthly logic are malleable constructs that easily bend to whatever his goal is at any given moment. This blatant, mindless inconsistency has always been absolutely central to who he is, even before he became the authoritarian government’s top censor. It was evident way back during the fights over net neutrality and telecom oversight.
It’s why anybody with sense (including this website) recommended that the man be allowed nowhere near actual levers of power and policy-making.
Filed Under: brendan carr, censor, censorship, equal time, fcc, first amendment, partisan hack, radio, sean hannity, tv
Comments on “Brendan Carr Can’t Explain Why ‘Equal Time’ Rule Doesn’t Apply To Right Wing Radio”
Rules for thee but not for me
I would say this is a clear situation where rules only apply when I say they do.
But this is getting much worse, its “Tow the line or face my wrath”. We’re clearly in a situation where Trump favors a business that business gets lots of benifits for doing awful things or simply allowing Trump to do awful things. At the same time any business thats just doing its own thing is at risk of being run over.
This is obviously resulting in a job and business market that is totally stuck since you already need funds just to pay the bribes to Trump to get around all the roadbolocks he put up.
Equal time applies anytime the opponent requests the equal time. (Crockett had) If the opponent doesn’t request it it’s a null issue.
Read an ffffing book, damn.
Re:
Tell that to Brendan Carr, because he’s the one who doesn’t seem to know what the “Equal Time” rule means.
Re: Re:
Well, no, cuz the question didn’t even make sense. If you want to big deal out of soundbite answer to a useless question, sure, whatever, but that’s just not how any of that works so you’re only making yourself look stupid (like how Karl just did)
Re:
Except Crockett did not request equal time. She mistakenly believed that CBS had an obligation to reach out to her first. Also, equal-time only applies after a broadcast station actually airs (using FCC-allocated limited spectrum radio waves) a political opponent. CBS stopped equal-time from applying by not airing the Talarico interview.
Sure, you toootally expect Brendan Carr to unselectively apply the rule to conservative talk radio. We believe you, bud.
When Colbert is replaced by a Fox News host or some internet sh*thead like Steven Crowder, Carr is going to magically discover that the equal time doctrine doesn’t apply to CBS, ether. We live in calvinball times, where the only thing that matters is Republicans getting forced onto every show and the hosts have to just sit silently through the lies.
It’s not that he can’t explain. The whole goal of this administration is to put 1984 in effect without being (more) obvious.
Even if elections are held ‘normally’ this year there’s no democracy where only fascist, right-wing content is allowed and incentivized on most media. Heck, there’s no democracy when a handful of super rich own the majority of media outfits.
There’s no democracy when there are a handful of super rich(ie: there shouldn’t exist super rich).
The utterly shocking thing is that someone finally fucking asked the question.
If, WE THE PEOPLE get enough persons to follow us, CAN WE FIRE persons in charge?
Just say yes. Please.
The real problem is finding a quick way yo make a petition and get it signed.
Use Facebook, and you all you need, but WHAT is acknowledged as Legal.
This blatant, mindless inconsistency has always been absolutely central to who he is, even before he became the authoritarian government’s top censor.
Blatant, mindless inconsistency is a job requirement in this administration. Hypocrisy is a weapon of fascists.
"Equal Time"
It’s really very simple. The “equal time rule” you refer to no longer exists, and hasn’t for quite some time. It was known as “The Fairness Doctrine’, and was unilaterally ABOLISHED by Ronald Reagan in 1987.
Re: "Equal Time"
They’re two different things.
The Fairness Doctrine was an FCC policy introduced in 1949 and was in effect until 1987. It was intended to “promote the public interest” by exposing audiences to diverse viewpoints on important matters of public concern. It was not limited to political candidates or elections. This is what Reagan
The Equal Time rule is a different policy that applies specifically to political candidates, defined in Section 315(a) of the Communications Act of 1934. It requires that broadcast licensees must permit equal use of broadcast facilities to all legally-qualified candidates for political office, and that the licensee may not censor the candidates’ messages.
For more about why the rule should be better understood in general as dealing with “equal opportunities” (as opposed to “equal time”), see https://www.radioworld.com/columns-and-views/gregg-skall/the-fcc-and-the-equal-opportunities-rule