ABC Says FCC Violating Its Free Speech Rights as Agency Moves to End Disney-Owned Network’s Partisan Promotion
ABC on Friday accused the FCC of having a “chilling effect” to punish political content it disagrees with, as the agency seeks to prevent broadcast networks from promoting partisan candidates.
ABC filed a petition with the commission arguing that The view amounts to an “authentic” news program.
“‘The View’ aired under a genuine informational exemption granted to it more than twenty years ago…The Commission has taken no action over the past two decades to modify or reverse the declaratory ruling and there is no basis for doing so now,” ABC wrote in its filing with the FCC.
“The Commission’s actions threaten to upend decades of established law and practice and chill protected critical speech, both with respect to ‘The View’ and more broadly,” ABC continued.
A government source said Disney’s statement was “absurd on its face.”
“Ron Burgundy claims to be more ‘real news’ than Whoopi Goldberg,” the source said, referring to Will Ferrell’s character in Presenter.
The FCC, led by Chairman Brendan Carr, moved to require the broadcast network to adhere to statutory public interest rules that require equal time for political candidates. This includes late night and daytime talk shows on broadcast networks.
Daniel Suhr, president of the Center for American Rights (CAR), said anyone who believes Carr is on a “crusade” against these companies, he said Carr is giving them an opportunity to show their authentic information programs.
Surh explained: “It goes through the process and gives them the opportunity to show that they fall within the statutory exemption. My view is, no, they never have. Um, at least, you know, in recent years. And the appearance of James Talarico is just the latest in a long line of blatantly partisan misuses of the airwaves by ABC.”
Suhr added that it’s hard to believe that many of these talk shows, including The viewwhen the ratio of Democratic to Republican guests is “30 to 1.”
He added: “It becomes immediately obvious, as soon as you look at the guest list, that this is not a news program, this is a partisan circus. And the claim to be a bona fide news program is contrary to what Congress intended, its colors are contrary to how the commission has traditionally interpreted it.”
Even those on the left side of the aisle agree.
Gigi Sohn, co-founder of Public Knowledge and former senior staffer to then-FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, wrote:
When I was an attorney at the Media Access Project with Andrew Schwartzman, we litigated some cases in which we felt the Federal Communications Commission was granting too many exemptions for “good faith interviews” to shows that didn’t really deserve them – the long-canceled McLaughlin Group was one of them. We didn’t challenge the ruling that the interview portion of the Jay Leno show was exempt, but it wouldn’t have surprised me if we had.
For what? Because if what is actually an entertainment show can offer candidates for public office (and they must be candidates – the rule doesn’t apply to former regular members of Congress if they don’t run) the opportunity to have a free 15-minute campaign ad, then the law makes no sense. Would the public’s situation be better or worse if James Talarico had appeared on Colbert Monday night and CBS had to give its opposing candidates time to do the same? And just a reminder: “equal time” is a misnomer. The other contestants would not be allowed to appear on The Late Show, they would just be allowed to be exposed to an audience of a similar size. This is what happened when Trump complained about Kamala Harris’ appearance on SNL – he didn’t get time on the same show, but on a NASCAR show.
The Lawfare Blog stated that Carr’s interpretation of the equal time rule rests on “a stronger legal basis than his interpretations in the [Jimmy] The Kimmel saga.
Suhr continued: “The public interest is a healthy two-party system, the public interest is knowing the facts and hearing a variety of views and perspectives, the public interest is a strong marketplace of ideas, and the FCC is doing its job and truly protecting the core values of the 1st Amendment.”
He added: “When he points out that the networks are not meeting these standards. The other thing to keep in mind in the context of the, and the best way to remember it, is that the broadcasters’ First Amendment rights are not what’s important.”
Suhr said, “It’s the viewers’ right under the 1st Amendment. That’s the entire reading of the ABC petition and it’s all about ABC’s rights.”
