ABC Challenges FCC’s Actions on Political Content

On Friday, ABC accused the FCC of imposing penalties on political content it disagrees with, describing this as a “chilling effect,” particularly as the agency looks to limit broadcast networks from endorsing partisan candidates.

In a petition to the Commission, ABC claimed that The View qualifies as a “genuine” news program. They noted, “The View has operated under the bona fide news exemption granted over 20 years ago. The Commission hasn’t altered or revoked this ruling in that time, and there’s no reason to do so now.” This was stated in a filing with the FCC.

ABC further asserted, “The Commission’s actions could disrupt decades of established law and practices while inhibiting vital protected speech, specifically regarding ‘The View’ and beyond.”

Responses from government officials suggested that Disney’s statements were, well, “unreasonable.” One official even compared former newscaster Ron Burgundy—Will Ferrell’s character in Anchorman—to Whoopi Goldberg, implying the latter lacks credibility.

Chairman Brendan Carr is spearheading an initiative requiring broadcast networks to adhere to public interest rules that mandate equal air time for political candidates, impacting not just nightly news but also daytime and late-night talk shows.

Daniel Sarr, president of the American Rights Center, mentioned that while some see Carr as waging a “crusade” against media companies, he’s offering them a platform to prove their compliance with existing statutory exemptions. Sarr expressed skepticism that they do comply, citing ABC’s efforts as part of a broader pattern of partisanship.

He pointed out the disparity in guest appearances on The View, where Democratic representation reportedly outweighs Republican views significantly. “The ratio is about 30 to 1,” he remarked. “It’s clear that this isn’t a straightforward news program but rather a partisan spectacle. Claiming otherwise contradicts congressional intent.”

There’s not much disagreement on this point from those more left-leaning. Gigi Sohn, co-founder of Public Knowledge and former staff member for a past FCC chair, noted that during her legal practice, she observed many programs that were labeled as “genuine news” were actually entertainment shows, which seemed problematic. She questioned the fairness of giving a candidate extensive airtime on purely entertainment platforms.

She then presented a hypothetical: Would it have been beneficial if James Talarico appeared on a late-night show with opposition candidates given equal time? “Equal time” isn’t precisely accurate; other candidates just don’t receive the same access to a given platform, as was highlighted when Trump objected to Harris’ SNL appearance but got time elsewhere, instead.

The Lawfare blog remarked that Carr’s take on the equal time rule “has a legal basis,” while noting that the public’s interest lies in maintaining a healthy two-party system, which requires exposure to various ideas and opinions. Carr’s actions, they argued, uphold the essential values of the First Amendment.

Soule concluded that ABC’s arguments centered primarily on its rights rather than the viewers’, stating, “This isn’t about the broadcaster’s First Amendment rights—it’s about the rights of the audience.”