NewsWorld
PredictionsDigestsScorecardTimelinesArticles
NewsWorld
HomePredictionsDigestsScorecardTimelinesArticlesWorldTechnologyPoliticsBusiness
AI-powered predictive news aggregation© 2026 NewsWorld. All rights reserved.
Trending
IranStrikesRegionalMilitaryCrisisIranianPowerGulfTargetsMarketTrumpMarchOperationsGovernmentTimelineEuropeanStatesDigestFacesDiplomaticCoalitionProtestsFlightRoutes
IranStrikesRegionalMilitaryCrisisIranianPowerGulfTargetsMarketTrumpMarchOperationsGovernmentTimelineEuropeanStatesDigestFacesDiplomaticCoalitionProtestsFlightRoutes
All Articles
Trump FCC's equal-time crackdown doesn't apply equally—or at all—to talk radio
Ars Technica
Published about 3 hours ago

Trump FCC's equal-time crackdown doesn't apply equally—or at all—to talk radio

Ars Technica · Mar 2, 2026 · Collected from RSS

Summary

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr's unequal enforcement of the equal-time rule.

Full Article

Skip to content Unequal time FCC Chairman Brendan Carr’s unequal enforcement of the equal-time rule. James Talarico and Stephen Colbert on the set of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. Credit: Getty Images In the Trump FCC’s latest series of attacks on TV broadcasters, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr has been threatening to enforce the equal-time rule on daytime and late-night talk shows. The interview portions of talk shows have historically been exempt from equal-time regulations, but Carr has a habit of interpreting FCC rules in novel ways to target networks disfavored by President Trump. Critics of Carr point out that his threats of equal-time enforcement apply unequally since he hasn’t directed them at talk radio, which is predominantly conservative. Given the similarities between interviews on TV and radio shows, Carr has been asked to explain why he issued an equal-time enforcement warning to TV but not radio broadcasters. Carr’s responses to the talk radio questions have been vague, even as he tangled with Late Show host Stephen Colbert and launched an investigation into ABC’s The View over its interview with Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico. 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.” Carr’s radio claim “a bunch of nonsense” Carr didn’t provide any specifics to support his claim that radio programmers have interpreted precedents correctly while TV programmers have not. The most obvious explanation for the disparate treatment is that Carr isn’t targeting conservative talk radio because he’s primarily interested in stifling critics of Trump. Carr has consistently used his authority to fight Trump’s battles against the media, particularly TV broadcasters, and backed Trump’s declaration that historically independent agencies like the FCC are no longer independent from the White House. 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.” Sean Hannity during a Fox News Channel program on October 30, 2025. Credit: Getty Images | Bloomberg Sean Hannity during a Fox News Channel program on October 30, 2025. Credit: Getty Images | Bloomberg Hannity, who hosts a Fox News show and a nationally syndicated radio show, pushed back against content regulation shortly after Carr’s FCC issued the equal-time warning to TV broadcasters in January. “Talk radio is successful because people are smart and understand we are the antidote to corrupt and abusively biased left wing legacy media,” Hannity said in a statement to the Los Angeles Times. “We need less government regulation and more freedom. Let the American people decide where to get their information from without any government interference.” Carr’s claim of misreadings relates to the bona fide news exceptions to the equal-time rule, which is codified under US law as the Equal Opportunities Requirement. The rule requires that when a station gives time to one political candidate, it must provide comparable time and placement to an opposing candidate if an opposing candidate makes a request. But when a political candidate appears on a bona fide newscast or bona fide news interview, a broadcaster does not have to make equal time available to opposing candidates. The exception also apples to news documentaries and on-the-spot coverage of news events. Equal time didn’t apply to Jay Leno or Howard Stern In the decades before Trump appointed Carr to the FCC chairmanship, the commission consistently applied bona fide exemptions to talk shows that interview political candidates. Phil Donahue’s show won a notable exemption in 1984, and over the ensuing 22 years, the FCC exempted shows hosted by Sally Jessy Raphael, Jerry Springer, Bill Maher, and Jay Leno. On the radio side, Howard Stern won a bona fide news exemption in 2003. Despite the seemingly well-settled precedents, the FCC’s Media Bureau said in a January 21 public notice that the agency’s previous decisions do not “mean that the interview portion of all arguably similar entertainment programs—whether late night or daytime—are exempted from the section 315 equal opportunities requirement under a bona fide news exemption… these decisions are fact-specific and the exemptions are limited to the program that was the subject of the request.” The Carr FCC warned that a program “motivated by partisan purposes… would not be entitled to an exemption under longstanding FCC precedent.” But if late-night show hosts are “motivated by partisan purposes,” what about conservative talk radio hosts? Back in 2017, Hannity described himself as “an advocacy journalist.” In previous years, he said he’s not a journalist at all. “Remember when Sean Hannity used to claim he wasn’t a journalist, then claimed to be an ‘advocacy journalist’?” Harold Feld, a longtime telecom lawyer and senior VP of advocacy group Public Knowledge, told Ars. “Given that the Media Bureau guidance leans heavily into the question of whether the motivation is ‘for partisan purposes’ or ‘designed for the specific advantage of a candidate,’ it would seem that conservative talk radio is rather explicitly a problem under this guidance.” “To put it bluntly, Carr’s explanation that shows that Trump has expressly disliked are ‘misreading’ the law, while conservative radio shows are not, strains credulity,” Feld said. Conservative radio boomed after FCC ditched Fairness Doctrine Conservative talk radio benefited from the FCC’s long-term shift away from regulating TV and radio content. A major change came in 1987 when the FCC decided to stop enforcing the Fairness Doctrine, a decision that helped fuel the late Rush Limbaugh’s success. FCC regulation of broadcast content through the Fairness Doctrine had been upheld in 1969 by the Supreme Court in the Red Lion Broadcasting decision, which said broadcasters had special obligations because of the scarcity of radio frequencies. But the Reagan-era FCC decided 18 years later that the scarcity rationale “no longer justifies a different standard of First Amendment review for the electronic press” in “the vastly transformed, diverse market that exists today.” The FCC made that decision after an appeals court ruled that the FCC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in its enforcement of the doctrine against a TV station. Even where the FCC didn’t eliminate content-based rules, it reduced enforcement. But after decades of the FCC scaling back enforcement of content-based regulations, Donald Trump was elected president. Trump’s first FCC chair, Ajit Pai, rejected Trump’s demands to revoke station licenses over content that Trump claimed was biased against him. Pai and his successor, Biden-era FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, agreed that the First Amendment prohibits the FCC from revoking station licenses simply because the president doesn’t like a network’s news content. After winning a second term, Trump promoted Carr to the chairmanship. Carr, an unabashed admirer of Trump, has said in interviews that “President Trump is fundamentally reshaping the media landscape” and that “President Trump ran directly at the legacy mainstream media, and he smashed a facade that they’re the gatekeepers of truth.” Carr describes Trump as “the political colossus of modern times.” President-elect Donald Trump speaks to Brendan Carr, his intended pick for Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, as he attends a SpaceX Starship rocket launch on November 19, 2024 in Brownsville, Texas. Credit: Getty Images | Brandon Bell President-elect Donald Trump speaks to Brendan Carr, his intended pick for Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, as he attends a SpaceX Starship rocket launch on November 19, 2024 in Brownsville, Texas. Credit: Getty Images | Brandon Bell Carr has led the charge in Trump’s war against the media by repeatedly threatening to revoke licenses under the FCC’s rarely enforced news distortion policy. Carr’s aggressive stance, particularly in his attacks on ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel, even alarmed prominent Republicans such as Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Cruz said that trying to dictate what the media can say during Trump’s presidency will come back to haunt Republicans in future Democratic administrations. With both the news distortion policy and equal-time rule, Carr hasn’t formally imposed any punishment. But his threats have an effect. Kimmel was temporarily suspended, CBS owner Paramount agreed to install what Carr called a “bias monitor” in exchange for a merger approval, and Texas-based ABC affiliates have filed equal-time notices with the FCC as a result of Carr’s threats against The View. Colbert said on his show that CBS forba


Share this story

Read Original at Ars Technica

Related Articles

Ars Technicaabout 7 hours ago
AMD will bring its "Ryzen AI" processors to standard desktop PCs for the first time

First wave of Ryzen AI desktop CPUs targets business PCs rather than DIYers.

Ars Technica1 day ago
The strange animals that control their body heat

Some creatures can dramatically alter their internal temperature and outlast storms, floods and, predators

Ars Technica2 days ago
Trump moves to ban Anthropic from the US government

The Defense Department pressured Anthropic to drop restrictions on how its AI can be used by the military.

Ars Technica2 days ago
In puzzling outbreak, officials look to cold beer, gross ice, and ChatGPT

An AI chatbot convinced health investigators they had the right answer.

Ars Technica3 days ago
Google quantum-proofs HTTPS by squeezing 2.5kB of data into 64-byte space

Merkle Tree Certificate support is already in Chrome. Soon, it will be everywhere.

Ars Technica3 days ago
The Air Force's new ICBM is nearly ready to fly, but there’s nowhere to put it

"There were assumptions that were made in the strategy that obviously didn’t come to fruition."