Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 278 posts

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#201

Post by aftbit »

nebula8804 wrote: post #177
lyu07282 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why the rightward shift is unavoidable and corporate Dems like Talarico only further this shift into fascism. Even if liberals win it only means the next right-wing candidate is going to be even more extreme than the last. People think that's crazy talk, even though it's happening right in front of their faces since Obama, we're cooked.

AOC has just improves her ranking big time in the last few days. If she keeps this up she 'maybe' she has a shot at the White House (maybe, its going to be a long two years). Think about it: A bernie Sanders type candidate not taking corporate PAC money is currently in the running for the White House! We saw with Mamdani they will throw everything at her. Will she falter? Hope not but feeling better than I have felt…

I'd really like to see a more centrist progressive in the White House in 2028. American politics is a pendulum. We should hope to dampen its amplitude, not intensify it. If we swing that far left, we'll swing even further right in 2032 or 2036.

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#202

Post by kylehotchkiss »

lyu07282 wrote: post #157
MyHonestOpinon wrote: post #16

The interview in YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiTJ7Pz_59A

It's kind of ironic, so much drama all for a safe centrist corporate democrat. Although perhaps that's why it's such a big deal for liberals, it's oligarchical infighting. It's even more confusing that he's funded by the same billionaires that trump is. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/21/james-talarico-miri...

Not about being a democrat.

A man in seminary renounced christian nationalism. Ruling party wants to own the religion-party entanglement

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#203

Post by lern_too_spel »

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #115
sega_sai wrote: post #90

It is a great illustration of how transition to the authoritarianism happens (I've seen it happen in Russia in 2000s). At first you don't even need censorship, you just need to scare owners of channels/newspapers enough, so that they self-censor.

Indeed. Mark Zuckerberg has long said the administration pressured Facebook to censor COVID-related content, including satire and humor. And now the administration has ended public funding for NPR and PBS. Chilling effect It goes back even further, just see the 1941 FCC “Mayflower Decision” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayflower_doctrine

> Mark Zuckerberg has long said the administration pressured Facebook to censor COVID-related content, including satire and humor.

He said this once and did not describe the pressure. In that same letter, he said that the company didn't agree and government officials "expressed a lot of frustration." There were no threats of fines or lawsuits.

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#204

Post by jajuuka »

lesuorac wrote: post #182
mrandish wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "the administration", it's worth noting you're describing actions by two different administrations. Both political parties have tried to silence dissenting views through soft censorship.

No hes not. He's describing the same administration in two different terms. Mark has no problems lying to people that Biden administration sued Meta (it was Trump's [1]) and individuals like Joe Rogan have no problems not calling him out on it. Trump was president in 2019, 2020. Covid starts in 2019. It's his administration that the twitter files is talking about when they mention censorship. It's his administration…

This seems like a tenuous connection at best. The Biden admin were actually sued for their relationship with social media companies. The suit failed but the conclusion was still that the administration was involved in pushing social media companies to take specific actions. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/court-cases/murthy-v-...

There are also correspondence about moderation right after Biden was elected from his admin. So he's not blameless here. https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/115561/documents/...

Personally I don't care, but we should at least be factual in criticism.

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#205

Post by lern_too_spel »

aftbit wrote: post #196
dsl wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Censoring an interview with a political opponent is a far cry from spreading disinformation that is counter to broadly accepted medical advice during a pandemic with the intent of harming the general population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...

Sure, but that's the straw-man version of the argument. During COVID, there was aggressive censorship of _everything_ related to the virus that didn't exactly toe the party line. Satire, comedy, and truly live questions (like the weak version of the lab leak hypothesis, that SARS-CoV-2 accidentally escaped from a lab into human population) were censored alongside the obviously false, harmful, and misleading takes abo…

> During COVID, there was aggressive censorship of _everything_ related to the virus that didn't exactly toe the party line.

Not by the government. This was by companies that wanted their customers not to die, so they could make money.

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#206

Post by jajuuka »

mcs5280 wrote: post #9

Weird how Larry Ellison manages to do this to everything he touches

Not Larry, David his son. For some reason people want to keep pretending that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree though. Seen multiple puff pieces about how David just loves movies so much and his dad is the political one.

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#207

Post by Rover222 »

"In an emailed statement, CBS said: “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."

Show me the Fascism, please.

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#208

Post by Herring »

aftbit wrote: post #201
nebula8804 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AOC has just improves her ranking big time in the last few days. If she keeps this up she 'maybe' she has a shot at the White House (maybe, its going to be a long two years). Think about it: A bernie Sanders type candidate not taking corporate PAC money is currently in the running for the White House! We saw with Mamdani they will throw everything at her. Will she falter? Hope not but feeling better than I have felt…

I'd really like to see a more centrist progressive in the White House in 2028. American politics is a pendulum. We should hope to dampen its amplitude, not intensify it. If we swing that far left, we'll swing even further right in 2032 or 2036.

This is the problem with a 2-party system. There's an implicit bias that the truth is democratically in the middle. But in this case, the right wing doesn't know how to solve its own problems.

Since the end of WW2, Democratic administrations have presided over significantly higher job growth than Republican administrations. https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.c...

"A broad middle class can act as a counterweight against oligarchy." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class

The US right wing doesn't do "middle class". It does tax cuts for the rich and hunger games for the rest. If you pander to them, things will just get worse and the far right will surge even more ... which is probably what they want.

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#209

Post by renegade-otter »

davidw wrote: post #70
renegade-otter wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been The Bulwark listener/subscriber since day one. Those people are keeping me sane. That said, their day will come. Just like in Russia, after the low-hanging fruit is cut, the state will come for The Bulwark and Steve Jobs's widow, because The Atlantic is going be get increasingly annoying.

This is doomerism, and I get the pull of it, but I have been trying to avoid it lately, because at the end of the day, it is doing the work of the fascists for them. It is "complying in advance" to prematurely admit defeat. We are not Russia.

People will be accusing others of TDS even when Trump is well into his 3rd term. If I listed half the things that happened in the last year, you would have called me "hysterical".

The US government is telling a comedian who he can and cannot interview.

Russia has a pretty professional riot police that does not pop off cannons for funzies. Russian corruption has to be exposed. It's not out in the open - Putin is not excepting gold bar bribes on live TV.

So, yeah, we are not Russia, in a way.

Re: CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC

#210

Post by claytongulick »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #200
claytongulick wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding (please correct me if it's incorrect) is that the "worst-case" scenario for a broadcaster is that they may have to upload a record of political air time to a public file. If an opposing candidate sees this, they can then request equal air time from that broadcaster. The rule is in place so that one party or viewpoint can't dominate broadcast media. That's a good thing right? The rule change here is t…

The worst case scenario for a broadcaster is that the FCC commissioner will fabricate an excuse to illegally yank their license, which both he and his boss have explicitly threatened to do to any broadcaster which won't agree to stop criticizing Donald Trump. I agree that one could imagine a reasonable system of broadcast regulation where opinionated talk shows don't host political candidates, but that's not what's g…

> but that's not what's going on here.

How?

Everything I've seen is that is specifically what's going on, do you have different information?

The only threat to pulling a license would be if they didn't comply with the FCC rule change, that we've both agreed is reasonable, correct?

Do you have specific examples of the administration threatening to pull a license due to criticism? If that's the case, I'd certainly be vehemently against such action, just as I was when the government illegally acted to suppress and censor alternate viewpoints during covid.

Post reply on HN