### The Equal Time Tango: Steven Colbear and the FCC’s Rules
In a world where laughter meets politics, comedian Steven Colbear has found himself in a pickle, facing off against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) over their equal time demands. It seems Colbear believes he’s being silenced by a grand conspiracy, but is that really the case? Let’s dive into this amusing yet complex issue, highlighting the real difference between entertainment and news, and why it matters.
On the surface, Colbear’s criticisms may seem like a rallying cry for free speech. He lashed out at the FCC’s reminder to CBS that equal time must be provided to all candidates running for office. His argument? This is a blatant attempt to shush him. However, let’s unpack what the FCC’s equal time rule actually entails and why his late-night gig might not fit the mold he thinks it does.
Historically, the fairness doctrine was born out of a desire to ensure that broadcasters provided a balanced perspective on important issues, especially when there is limited airtime. However, that doctrine was tossed out of the window in the 1980s when President Reagan and the Supreme Court declared that the airwaves were no longer a scarce resource—after all, cable TV was on the rise, bringing a cornucopia of choices for viewers. This means that stations aren’t obligated to give equal airtime to all viewpoints when discussing news. So what does this mean for folks like Colbear?
While news programming is exempt from the equal time rule, entertainment shows, including late-night talk shows, are not. So, while Colbear might have classified his show as a platform for discussion, it’s primarily aimed at entertainment. The FCC has made it clear: when it comes to bringing candidates on shows that fall into the entertainment category, fairness matters. If one candidate gets a spot on Colbear’s show, others should too—fair is fair, right?
Moreover, there’s an interesting twist to this tale. The FCC had been somewhat idle over the years, with previous administrations either neglecting to enforce the rule or simply ignoring it altogether. But as the media landscape has changed, the lines have blurred. Covering news doesn’t mean you get to turn a comedy show into a political soapbox without the responsibilities that come along with it.
The playful back-and-forth between Colbear and the FCC is a reminder of how easily the terms “news” and “entertainment” can get tangled up in the wild west of broadcast television. This dispute isn’t merely about Colbear wanting to get his jabs on traffic or climate change; it’s about ensuring that all candidates have a shot at being heard, while keeping the entertainment side of things in check. If everybody starts playing by their own rules, where does it end?
So, the next time someone raises an eyebrow at the FCC’s actions regarding equal time, it’s essential to consider the historical context and modern-day implications. While laughs will be had and punches will be thrown—figuratively speaking, of course—the underlying rule of fair access for all candidates must prevail, particularly in the land of late-night chuckles. After all, one can be both funny and fair. And in the larger scheme of things, fairness in media might just be the punchline we all need.
