On the menu today: Everything you need to know about the FCC’s equal-time rule, the odious lies of The Late Show host Stephen Colbert and Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico, and his rivals Jasmine Crockett and the little-known Ahmad Hassan. Read on.
You Can’t Ignore Inconvenient Laws
You can argue that the U.S. Federal Communication Commission’s equal-time rule is dumb and outdated in today’s media environment. But it is a regulation on the books.
The equal-time rule was part of the Communications Act of 1934. It states, “If any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station.”
Note that this applies to broadcast television stations include NBC, CBS, and ABC. The FCC’s equal time rule does not apply to cable channels like Fox News Channel, CNN, or MSNOW, because they don’t go out over public airwaves. (There are professional political pundits out there who don’t know or understand that distinction.)
In 1959, Congress adopted some reforms to the Communications Act and clarified some exceptions: “bona fide newscasts, bona fide news interviews, bona fide news documentaries and on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events.” In 2022, the FCC clarified, “A station is not required to seek out opposing legally qualified candidates and offer them equal opportunities.” It’s up to the other candidates to recognize their opportunities to request air time.
The equal-time rule existed for decades before Brendan Carr became chairman of the FCC on January 20, 2025, and before Bari Weiss started in her role at CBS News on October 6, 2025. That rule did not get invented by President Trump. It did not sneak up on people.
On January 21, 2026, the FCC published a public notice clarifying the rules regarding talk shows:
In 2006, the FCC’s Media Bureau determined that the interview portion of “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno” qualified for the equal opportunities exemption as a bona fide news interview. This was the first time that such a finding had been applied to a late night talk show, which is primarily an entertainment offering.
This was Arnold Schwarzenegger, declaring his candidacy for governor of California during the recall election over Gray Davis. Back in 2006, Democrats objected to that FCC ruling. Then-Representative Xavier Becerra — who served as Joe Biden’s secretary of Health and Human Services and who’s currently running for governor of California himself — wrote to the FCC, “Any argument that suggests that The Tonight Show would fall under the four exceptions listed in paragraph (a) of §315 would lack merit, especially given the fact that The Tonight Show is controlled and operated by NBC’s entertainment division, not its news division.”
That seems like a reasonable distinction; if you’re part of a broadcast network’s entertainment division, it is hard to argue that the program counts as a “bona fide news interview” under the law.
Carr’s notice in January concluded, “The FCC has not been presented with any evidence that the interview portion of any late night or daytime television talk show program on air presently would qualify for the bona fide news exemption.”
You can decide that the equal-time rule is stupid, but no broadcast television network is allowed to cite a “well, that’s stupid” provision when appealing a fine or punishment from the commission.
Texas holds its primaries on March 3, less than two weeks away. State Representative James Talarico and Representative Jasmine Crockett are the two best-known Senate candidates on the Democratic side, and different polls will give you different results on which one is ahead. A little-known third candidate, Ahmad Hassan, is also running for the Democratic nomination.
Stephen Colbert, the soon-to-be canceled $20 million per year host of The Late Show on CBS, wanted to have Talarico on his program Monday night.
But Colbert did not air his interview. Viewers watching at home saw Colbert at his desk, delivering a monologue:
[Talarico] was supposed to be here, but we were told in no uncertain terms by our network’s lawyers, who called us directly, that we could not have him on the broadcast. Then I was told in some uncertain terms that not only could I not have him on, I could not mention me not having him on. And because my network clearly doesn’t want us to talk about this, let’s talk about this.
Colbert continued:
But on January 21st of this year, a letter was released by FCC chairman and smug bowling pin Brendan Carr. In this letter, Carr said he was thinking about dropping the exception for talk shows because he said some of them were motivated by partisan purposes. Well, sir, you’re chairman of the FCC. So, FCC-U.
I think you are motivated by partisan purposes yourself, sir. Hey, you smelt it, because you dealt it. You are Dutch oven-ing America’s airwaves.
Ah, what wit! Can you believe CBS is losing $40 million per year on that show, and isn’t keeping that guy and his program around longer?
“Let’s just call this what it is. Donald Trump’s administration wants to silence anyone who says anything bad about Trump on TV because all Trump does is watch TV,” Colbert said.
Except Trump and his administration hadn’t “silenced” anyone. Nor, apparently, had Colbert’s bosses. A statement from CBS issued Tuesday pointed out that the network hadn’t told Colbert that he couldn’t air the interview with Talarico, as the host had claimed to his audience. They had simply reminded Colbert of the equal-time rule:
“THE LATE SHOW was not prohibited by CBS from broadcasting the interview with Rep. James Talarico. The show was provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal-time rule for two other candidates, including Rep. Jasmine Crockett, and presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be fulfilled. THE LATE SHOW decided to present the interview through its YouTube channel with on-air promotion on the broadcast rather than potentially providing the equal-time options.”
It gets worse; Talarico has been on a tirade on X since Monday, arguing that President Trump has tried to “silence” him, “censor” him, “block” the airing of the interview, and that he is a victim of “cancel culture.”
“His FCC refused to air my interview with Stephen Colbert,” Talarico claimed, apparently oblivious to the fact that the U.S. Federal Communications Commission is a government agency and not a broadcasting station and thus doesn’t “air” anything.
Last night on Lawrence O’Donnell’s program on MSNOW, Talarico argued that his constitutional rights had been violated:
It should be troubling to all of us that the most powerful politicians and corporate executives are working together to sell out the First Amendment. They are selling out our freedom of speech in order to protect their own power and their own wealth. An attack on any one of our First Amendment rights is an attack on all of our First Amendment rights — whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican, a progressive or a conservative, this should be concerning to all of us.
Except no one’s First Amendment rights were attacked or impeded. (Surprisingly, no case involving the equal-time rule have ever been adjudicated before the U.S. Supreme Court.)
Again, the Trump administration didn’t do anything, and CBS’s lawyers didn’t tell Colbert that he couldn’t air anything. They just reminded him of the equal-time rule, and Colbert and Talarico are acting like they’re in George Orwell’s 1984.
Note the irony here, that CBS lawyers are reminding Colbert of a rule designed to protect the other candidates in the race, which in this case are Crockett and Hassan.
Crockett, appearing on Jen Psaki’s program on MSNOW last night:
We actually received a phone call, and that was a little bit earlier today. And in that call they explained that they actually told CBS that they could go ahead and move forward with the interview of James Tallarico. They just needed to offer me equal time.
I did not get a request from The Colbert Show to go on. As you know, I’ve been on Colbert multiple times. And frankly, and you know, if we would have gotten an offer, that would have been great. But we’re in the middle of early voting. So I’m kind of focused on being in Texas at this moment. . . .
I mean, we’ve never run into an issue with Colbert and even as you talked about The View, you know, supposedly this FCC complaint came about because I had more time than Mr. Tallarico when I went on there after I declared my candidacy. So, you know, listen, I will tell you that I have no love for Bari Weiss. I have no love for Brendan Carr whatsoever. But I do think that, as you also mentioned [Jimmy] Kimmel, it is important that we resist in this moment.
And so there were a number of options that could be put on the table. And frankly, you know, The Late Show decided that this was the option. And I think that it was a good strategy.
Again, The Late Show is not part of the CBS News division. Bari Weiss has nothing to do with any of this.
Crockett appeared on ABC’s The View on January 6. Then on February 2, The View had Talarico as a guest. A few days later, Carr’s FCC announced they were opening a probe into whether The View violated the equal-time rule.
As far as I can tell, no major national program has had Ahmad Hassan on their program. He and his campaign really need to call up The Late Show and The View. Remember, the program doesn’t have to reach out to the other candidates.
For what it’s worth, Hassan seems like an impressive enough guy — a medical doctor who worked at McConnell Air Force base in Kansas. He’s a bit of a gadfly, having run for Senate in 2024 . . . in Minnesota. And in Texas in the same year. And for Harris County, Texas, judge in 2022. And for Senate in Minnesota in 2020, as well. And for Texas State Senate in 2018.
But even if Hassan is a nut, the equal-time rule is designed to protect guys like that. If you’re a broadcast network, and you’re going to roll out the red carpet for one candidate in a non-news program in a three-candidate race, then if one or both of the other candidates request equal time, then you must roll out the red carpet for the other candidates, too. If you don’t like the rule, then rescind that provision in the law. But until you do that, you can’t just ignore it because you find it inconvenient.
Somewhere out there, somebody’s objecting, “Jim, shows like Colbert have political figures and elected officials as guests all the time!” Yes, I’ve noticed. But the equal-time rule doesn’t apply to just any interview of any political figure. It only applies to broadcast network programs that are not “bona fide news programs” interviewing a declared candidate for public office and refusing the same opportunity to the other candidates. It only applies to broadcast networks because those networks use public airwaves. It doesn’t apply to newspapers, or magazines, or websites, or cable news, or podcasts, because none of those use a public resource to reach their audiences.
Colbert objected that Carr and the Trump administration are hypocrites because they contend that political talk shows on radio, which also use public airwaves, aren’t subject to equal-time rules. As far as I can tell, no candidate has ever challenged a right-of-center radio talk show that interviewed one candidate but hasn’t interviewed others. Maybe some of those candidates ought to do that.
Colbert posted his interview with Talarico on YouTube, where it has more than 5 million views as of this morning. Talarico’s campaign says it has been raking in donations ever since.
This morning, Politico’s Playbook newsletter declares this is “the Talarico moment”:
In years past, a broadcast network ditching your big interview on the night voting starts would have been a body blow for a state senator still trying to get national recognition. But not in this era. . . .
Dems have learned quickly these past 13 months that nothing fires up their own base like being attacked by Trump.
Except none of that is true. The “network” didn’t ditch Talarico’s interview. “Trump” didn’t attack Talarico, at least in this circumstance. I thought the point of a news organization was to tell its readers the truth, not play along with a Democratic campaign’s preferred narrative.
It is not exactly surprising that Colbert and Talarico are choosing to cosplay as the French Resistance, wildly mischaracterizing what CBS actually told the program, and that almost no one in the mainstream media is rushing to correct that perception. There’s an old saying among lawyers: When the law is on your side, argue the law. When the facts are on your side, argue the facts. And when neither the law nor the facts are on your side, pound the table and shout a lot.
There’s a whole lot of shouting going on here.
ADDENDUM: As our Charlie Cooke observes, it must be nice to be Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and know that when you completely fumble your way through an appearance at the Munich Security Conference and demonstrate that you’ve never really thought about issues like what the U.S. should do if China invades Taiwan, you can just call up a New York Times reporter and they’ll write an entire article about how your comments were “microscopically dissected through the lens of what it meant for a hypothetical White House campaign.”
I think the word he was looking for is “quoted.” The critical coverage quoted AOC; it didn’t “microscopically dissect” anything. As Charlie notes, there wasn’t much there to dissect.