Pearl River The equal time provisions under decades of FCC actions have largely been eroded and haphazardly enforced, if all. Ostensibly, provisions still exist on the books as statute and via FCC regulations. “Under section 315, if a broadcast station permits any legally qualified candidate for public office to use its facilities, it shall provide an equal opportunity to all other legally qualified candidates for that office.”
Keeping up with this isn’t easy and following the guidelines aren’t either. Once upon a time, more than just registered candidates could get equal time when there was a broader understand of the public character of broadcast licenses. That was then, this is now. For a broadcaster, this can be a close call, especially for a noncommercial station where the programming and content is produced by volunteer hosts running their own shows. Command and control don’t exist. Begging, hoping, and crossing your fingers in the chaos is closer to the order of the day. If a host schedules a guest, we often don’t know until after the fact. Was there political content or was an elected official updating constituents on contemporary issues, despite the fact that in November she might be a candidate for office once again? What is free speech by hosts and what is partisan politics, and how can we possibly draw a straight line? If a candidate asks, often they might be accommodated, but a broadcaster is usually not in a position to control this without help.
The FCC chair under Trump 2.0 has been aggressive on a number of issues, most famously threatening the license of ABC for remarks made on late night TV by Jimmy Kimmel. The chair has made no secret of his fealty to Trump and his program. Most recently under his leadership he warned day and night time talk shows on television that they would be subject to equal time provisions, claiming that the “View” and other shows were politically partisan.
Maybe this is more threat than promise? Determining partisanship in an interview show might not be that easy. The chairman seems to see it as simple. If a Democrat is on the air, then a Republican should be on the air, end of sentence.
How would this boil down to local stations? In a mayor’s race in New Orleans, there might be a baker’s dozen of candidates, many are from what our organizers in India call “parties of one.” Would all of them have the ability to demand equal time? Would the station be out of compliance with the FCC directives if they could not or would not provide such time?
The chairman may be counting on his threats to have a chilling effect on the networks, where it would trickle down to the producers and guest wranglers for the shows. In my in-box I had messages from conservative radio networks applauding the new guidance. Sinclair, the giant radio and TV network, has also publicly cheered the guidance. These stations, very partisan on the right, and with separate agendas with the administration, may see a way to leverage this or use it as cudgel.
The one Democrat FCC commissioner warned that this guidance was an effort to restrict free speech. I don’t think there’s much debate on that issue. It seems to be the acknowledged intention.