Man, this has been a week. The fainting couch hysteria that has emerged over the contested appearance of Democrat candidate James Talarico on “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” continues to roil the media landscape. With all the accusations and insinuations flying, there is a need to address this in a sane fashion, given that so many in the media are getting these media details completely wrong.
That this concerns the administration is the start of so much of the hysterics. As soon as any attribute can involve President Trump, correctly or wrongly, you are assured that imbalanced thinking will be tossed into the mixture. So it is time to take a straightforward approach to this matter, for the sake of injecting sober thought.
If you need to catch up, the brief backstory is that ahead of Monday evening’s broadcast of “The Late Show,” it was announced that the Talarico interview was pulled, and the production was making it available on the internet. The candidate started braying about how he was being censored by President Trump, and Colbert, during the broadcast, directly stated he was manipulated by the FCC. For the entire story, I covered it previously.
UPDATED: Stephen Colbert Makes Newest Dumb Censorship Claim; CBS Responds
To start the autopsy on this controversy, the first thing to note is that both Talarico and Colbert are making charges sans evidence. There was nothing to establish meddling from the agency. Later, CBS came out with a statement that their legal team explained to Colbert's team that the interview could possibly run up against the FCC Equal Time rule. This is a broadcast standard we will explore fully in a moment.
What the CBS courtroom commandos were saying is that because of an impending election, there was a possibility that other candidates could stipulate they should be entitled to an equal amount of exposure on the network. The decision was made that instead of running the interview, it would be made available for web viewing. The network came out with an official statement:
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."
That last sentence is what needs to be highlighted, for reference going forward.
But of note is how there is no reference to the FCC making a statement to CBS about this interview. One would think that if they had been compelled by the agency to act, some mention of it would have been provided. Now, the impetus of this can probably be traced back to a letter concerning the Equal Time Rule written by FCC Chairman Brendan Carr in January, sent to ABC. He was expressing the possibility of the daytime gab-fest show “The View” running up against the FCC rule with impending elections and their guests.
Currently, there are accusations in the press and on social media that Trump/the FCC forced the Talarico interview off the air, that they are silencing opposition voices, and/or are demanding Republicans be given more airtime. These emotional outbursts are undone by two key facts in this case.
The application of Equal Time is not about squelching voices or appearances; it is the opposite – it provides the opportunity for more voices to be seen and heard. As for this alleged censorship with Colbert being done to shield Trump, or benefit Republicans, it is unwound because all of this is centered on the Democratic Party. James Talarico is running in the Democratic primary in Texas, and applying the Equal Time Rule means it would open the door for more DEMOCRATS to appear on CBS.
But these are just the beginning of the misconceptions regarding this standard. So let us do something rare in the press these days, and actually look at the law itself.
Full Time Spent On “Equal Time”
All of the furor today is concerning 47 U.S. Code § 315. This applies to media appearances for those seeking public office. It applies only to broadcasters using public airwave bandwidth, which is governed by the FCC. (Cable providers are not involved, as they transmit over proprietary hardware.)
The common complaint is that this is all a move by Trump to keep voices or opponents off the airwaves. This empty charge is dismissed by a simple statistic: Stephen Colbert’s ratio of Democrat guests to Republicans currently stands at 214/1. (And that lone “Republican” was Liz Cheney.) If targeting Colbert over his guests were the issue, it would have taken place years ago.
Equal time is a factor only in instances where it is a candidate making an appearance, and doing so within a specified time frame prior to the election for which they are on the ballot. Talarico is running in Texas, and their primary is currently in swing, with early voting having just begun. Now, his appearance is not itself a trigger on the Equal Time rule. The law states that following an appearance, a competing candidate has a week to file a request to the broadcaster for their chance to appear.
Another gripe being tossed around is that either FCC Chairman Brendan Carr is enforcing a rule rarely addressed, or is doing so when talk shows are allegedly exempted from these FCC standards. This is a complete misreading of the law. What the rule has exceptions for, essentially, are bona fide news items involving a qualified candidate on bona fide news broadcasts. The only set-asides you see in the law are listed thusly:
(1) bona fide newscast,
(2) bona fide news interview,
(3) bona fide news documentary (if the appearance of the candidate is incidental to the presentation of the subject or subjects covered by the news documentary), or
(4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events (including but not limited to political conventions and activities incidental thereto),
It is easy to say that “The Late Show” is not under this umbrella. Some have quarreled that Equal Time is an infringement on a broadcaster’s free expression rights. This has already been addressed by the Supreme Court in a few ways, mainly leaning on the fact that public airwaves are in play.
In one case, the Court sided with an FCC rule granting the right of an individual to respond to a personal attack by a broadcaster. Likewise, when it was argued that a broadcaster should have a right to editorial control, SCOTUS ruled in favor of “An effort by Congress to assure that an important resource - the airwaves - will be used in the public interest. We hold that the statutory right of access, as defined by the Commission and applied in these cases, properly balances the First Amendment rights of federal candidates, the public, and broadcasters.”
The “Yeah But…” Arguments
Now with these uncomfortable facts established, there has still been griping that Carr is wielding the FCC in an overly aggressive fashion. It has been accused that he went after Colbert in an effort to control the network through compelled self-censorship. But like every other accusation involving this matter, there has been no evidence of any such pressure. It is always assumed. There is not even an indication that Carr, or anyone in the administration, was aware that the Talarico interview took place.
Here is the proof needed to see that there was no threat levied on CBS or Colbert: The FCC had nothing to act upon on Monday. For there to be actionable efforts, it would be contingent on all three steps:
IF the interview had been broadcast
IF the 7-day period passed
IF a candidate requested equal time and had been refused
None of these transpired. The claim that the mere threat of action was enough to generate the removal of the interview does not hold up. What took place was that the producers were informed that IF they ran the interview, they MIGHT have to agree to hosting other candidates. This was all contingent on possible action being taken – by Democrats. The decision was then made to move the Talarico segment to YouTube.
This is where I refer back to that sentence from the CBS Statement. It was “The Late Show” production team that made this decision. They elected to avoid the possibility of entertaining other candidates. I leave it to you all to speculate what motivated that avoidance, but the fact remains that all the decisions made and actions taken were done in-house at CBS.
What has been amazing is to watch the supposed experts in the media getting things so monumentally wrong. Joe Scarborough, for one, was well off base, as he was drawing comparisons to talk radio and did so in an ignorant fashion.
#BREAKING: Morning Joe: “The HYPOCRISY of these so-called conservative free speechers, these free speech absolutists who’ve just turned into…oppressors of free speech…we see time and time again trying to get people arrested in their workplace for tweets. In this case, I mean,… pic.twitter.com/fL0Q4tAk55
— Emoluments Clause (@Emolclause) February 19, 2026
What Scar Joe was referring to was actually the Fairness Doctrine, which was pushed by those who wanted to control all content on talk radio. Again, the Equal Time rule is reserved only for candidates and is applied in a finite time frame. The Fairness Doctrine wanted to control content on radio broadcasts year-round.
Another one getting this wrong was Kaitlan Collins, as she sat in with Colbert. She went so far as to draw a line from Republican-favored outlets to this current controversy. I’m not sure how much Colbert appreciates having his program compared to talk radio, but there she was doing just that.
Here is the summation of all of the follicle ignition and garment rendering taking place this week. Brendan Carr, and by extension President Trump, are accused of engaging in authoritarianism, censorship, and broadcast control – over a ruling that would have led to MORE voices being heard, and those being primarily Democratic voices.
This is the emotional paradox so much of the media is engaged in any longer. If it involves Trump, it just HAS to be regarded as criminally negative…even when it benefits their side.
One final thought about CBS, the FCC, and "equal time:"
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) February 19, 2026
This is all about power – using regulatory power to reshape the culture in ways that Republicans want.
Then again, as @SeanHannity said, "we need less government regulation and more freeom." Yep, I quoted Sean here: pic.twitter.com/3DK4ubS260
Editor's Note: The mainstream media continues to deflect, gaslight, spin, and lie about President Trump, his administration, and conservatives.
Help us continue to expose their left-wing bias by reading news you can trust. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
3:3
Join the conversation as a VIP Member