• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

FCC chair puts ‘The View’ under the spotlight after Kimmel pressure


There were protests at Disney's main offices in Burbank but it was originally in response to the Jimmy Kimmel "haitus"/"Suspension." Also we were originally talking about KABC-TV being affected by the FCC due to the Jimmy Kimmel show being filmed in LA and Disney's main office located there. This time ABC News offices and WABC-TV will have to respond to the same stuff from the FCC related to "The View." Note Chairman Carr appeared on "The Scott Jennings Show" to discuss those plans.


Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr again targeted ABC’s “The View” on Thursday, saying that the morning talk show may no longer be exempt from the commission’s equal opportunity broadcast rules.

On Thursday’s “The Scott Jennings Radio Show,” the chairman said that the FCC will determine whether or not the Whoopi Goldberg-led series is a “bonafide news show.” If not, it would be forced to offer opposing political candidates “equal time” on an FCC-regulated network like ABC. Carr’s comments against “The View” came just a day after the Disney-owned network suspended Jimmy Kimmel over comments he made Monday about Charlie Kirk’s alleged shooter.


“I would assume you can make the argument that ‘The View’ is a bona fide news show, but I’m not so sure about that,” Carr said Thursday. “I think it’s worthwhile to have the FCC look into whether ‘The View’ and some of the programs that you have still qualify as bona fide news programs and therefore exempt from the equal opportunity regime that Congress has put in place.”
 



Here we go again This time Disney owned WABC-TV has to watch out for the FCC this time given that The View is filmed in New York and the main offices of ABC News is there.

A couple of points:

1) When you agree to the initial terms of an extortionist, he/she does not quietly go away. No! They demand more. Universities and law firms have found this out so now it's the broadcasting industry's turn to learn this lesson.

2) When referring to the rule he would use to go after "The View,", Mr. Carr cited the "Equal Opportunity Rule." While this writer and most people reading and writing on this Board already know this, apparently Mr. Carr either actually doesn't know it's called the Equal Time Rule or he's pretending not to know to gain some sort of favor with a political group. I'd vote the latter.
 
As they say, in the children's books, if you give a moose a muffin, he'll want some jam to go with it.

What I've generally found about programs that honor equal time rules has been that few desire that time.
Most radio stations I worked for were small-town community focused and had elected leaders on frequently, often things like a city councilor promoting the July 4th festival or a charity motorcycle ride hosted by the county sheriff as part of our public affairs programs. We never turned down a bona fide candidate (i.e. someone who had secured a spot on the ballot) if they asked for equal time, and we advised the local Democratic and Republican chairmen of this policy. Even so, it was extremely rare for a candidate to make such a request.

One example that that came to mind was a primary election for Sheriff, maybe 20-22 years ago. One of the opponents of the incumbent sheriff wrote a letter complaining that we had the sheriff on so often. The GM called and explained our stance, that the sheriff is often a source for bona fide news, and that we have many local leaders appear on a regular basis. He offered this candidate time on our extended newscast, which he refused. It left this cub reporter (at the time) wondering why he bothered to complain.
 
A couple of points:

1) When you agree to the initial terms of an extortionist, he/she does not quietly go away. No! They demand more. Universities and law firms have found this out so now it's the broadcasting industry's turn to learn this lesson.

2) When referring to the rule he would use to go after "The View,", Mr. Carr cited the "Equal Opportunity Rule." While this writer and most people reading and writing on this Board already know this, apparently Mr. Carr either actually doesn't know it's called the Equal Time Rule or he's pretending not to know to gain some sort of favor with a political group. I'd vote the latter.

Here what it was originally when Jimmy Kimmel and ABC Network had to respond to the FCC and local affiliates pre-empting Kimmels Show. Now that the View is named as the next show on the list then we have to look at this from the angle FCC Chairman trying make Disney management panic especially from Disney Entertainment Television to ABC Owned Stations division in multiple issues the FCC has an ax to grind with all to look good in front of Trump.


 
A couple of points:

1) When you agree to the initial terms of an extortionist, he/she does not quietly go away. No! They demand more. Universities and law firms have found this out so now it's the broadcasting industry's turn to learn this lesson.
This is no different than, let's say, trying to get a dealer to discount a Porsche. Simply, there are situations where one party does not move at all... whether due to being stubborn, arrogant or simply holding the high cards.
2) When referring to the rule he would use to go after "The View,", Mr. Carr cited the "Equal Opportunity Rule." While this writer and most people reading and writing on this Board already know this, apparently Mr. Carr either actually doesn't know it's called the Equal Time Rule or he's pretending not to know to gain some sort of favor with a political group. I'd vote the latter.
I listened to the dialog, and I believe that Carr was paraphrasing the term "Equal Time", where the word "time" is a rather precise industry term in this case, to one that was easier to understand by the general public. Anyhow, an official name contained in the rule is "Equal Opportunities Requirement". I think "Equal Opportunity" in the era of "EEO" applied to everything is appropriate; it just makes the concept easier to understand. Either term seems equally correct.

Even Google's AI gives more than one name to the Equal Time Rule:

"The FCC "equal time rule," officially known as the equal opportunities requirement, mandates that U.S. radio and television broadcasters provide equivalent access to competing political candidates. If a station allows one legally qualified candidate to use its facilities, it must offer the same opportunity to all other legally qualified candidates for that office. The rule is enforced by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). "

So the "official" definition of "equal opportunities requirement" does, in fact, use the word "opportunities" as well as "time". I'd say that both are correct... and in any case, this is a senseless argument of semantics.
 
Last edited:

ABC’s The View was ordered not to talk about the Kimmel Incident by upper management at Disney. Question here is why did Chairman Carr decided to go after another Disney talk show after Kimmel got suspended besides to make Disney management panic from ABC Network and ABC owned stations.

The View has not commented on why the Kimmel situation was not brought up. A source said that the show was not told by corporate higher ups to stay away from the topic. The show addressed CBS’s cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s show several days after the announcement was made last July.

On Benny Johnson’s podcast on Wednesday, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr condemned the remark and said, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”




Sinclair and Nexstar have been lobbying the FCC over regulatory issues, and Nexstar is seeking approval for its planned acquisition of Tegna. Disney is seeking Trump administration approval of its proposed acquisition of NFL Network, with the league taking a 10% ownership stake, as well as a combination of Hulu + Live TV with Fubo.
 
The other clue is here and this time it’s coming from the White House directly. This partially explains why Chairman Carr decided to go after another show after Kimmel.


 
This looks so bad for ABC. Are they hoping viewers of The View won't notice the censorship, when they avoid discussing a story this big, while sitting at the table.
 
Mr. Carr either actually doesn't know it's called the Equal Time Rule or he's pretending not to know to gain some sort of favor with a political group. I'd vote the latter.

As I keep saying, there is no fairness doctrine. If the chairman would like to bring it back, we'd love him to apply it to talk radio.

ABC has a big staff of lawyers. They know the law. The chairman has nothing.

The fact is they don't really want "equal opportunities." They just want the show to go away. It's all about creating chaos.
 

Update a law firm files an FCC complaint against KABC-TV over the Jimmy Kimmel issue, Jimmy Kimmels show is filmed and that Disney’s main office is in Los Angeles. We need to wait for a similar FCC complaint directed at WABC-TV New York over Chairman Carrs beef against The View on ABC and also ABC News main office is in New York.

A law firm with conservative ties has filed a formal complaint to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) against a Los Angeles television station that is directly tied to the Walt Disney Company and ABC’s decision to suspend its late night talk show “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”

On Thursday, the Center for American Rights (CAR) filed the complaint against KABC-TV (Channel 7), alleging talk show host Jimmy Kimmel acted with “callous disregard of the facts” in his opening monologue on Monday, during which he wrongfully implied that a man suspected of shooting political activist Charlie Kirk was politically aligned with supporters of President Donald Trump.
 


Yes The View on ABC continues to remain silent Friday on the Jimmy Kimmel issue some of this is because they are also a target on the FCC. Also KABC-TV Los Angeles where Disney's main office is at just got a notice of an FCC complaint related to the Kimmel situation.
 
As I keep saying, there is no fairness doctrine. If the chairman would like to bring it back, we'd love him to apply it to talk radio.

ABC has a big staff of lawyers. They know the law. The chairman has nothing.

The fact is they don't really want "equal opportunities." They just want the show to go away. It's all about creating chaos.
The law is useless at thing point.
 
This looks so bad for ABC. Are they hoping viewers of The View won't notice the censorship, when they avoid discussing a story this big, while sitting at the table.
Or, from the business side, they are looking at the possible loss of 1/3 (and real temporary suspension) of all their affiliates which was threatened by two station owners after the Kimmel incident.
 
Or, from the business side, they are looking at the possible loss of 1/3 (and real temporary suspension) of all their affiliates which was threatened by two station owners after the Kimmel incident.

Keep in mind they’re not a long player in linear TV. They could also shop the affiliation as they did in Miami.
 
Or, from the business side, they are looking at the possible loss of 1/3 (and real temporary suspension) of all their affiliates which was threatened by two station owners after the Kimmel incident.
This is a good argument against tte removal of ownership caps. It's scary how one broadcaster (Sinclair) can yield this much power over a television network.
 
This is good argument against tte removal of ownership caps. It's scary how one broadcaster (Sinclair) can yield this much power over a television network.

Because they're not broadcasting in the public interest, but in the interest of their personal political ideology. Using their own argument, they should have their licenses revoked. They are licensees, not Kimmel.

They are demanding that Kimmel speak for them, while at the same time, they're ignoring the views of their own viewers. Especially in their home city of Baltimore.
 


Back
Top Bottom