Glenn Logan, once a prolific blogger himself, is an EA veteran who periodically shows his talent for forceful commentary, as in his Comment of the Day finishing off the Washington Post editors with a rhetorical haymaker after I had softened up the miscreants a bit. I admire Glenn’s precision in pointing out just how disingenuous the paper’s protest over the FCC’s revitalization of the Equal Time rule, which would never have been necessary if TV “entertainment” hadn’t devolve into single party propaganda.
Here’s Glenn’s Comment of the Day on the post, “No, Washington Post Editors, THIS Is What Stephen Colbert’s Spat With CBS Is REALLY About…”
***
Consider this:
“The government shouldn’t be dictating the political content of late-night television — or of any other entertainment Americans choose to consume. But that’s exactly what the equal-time rule does. It is rooted in an entirely different technological landscape; in the early 20th century, scarce radio frequencies meant that the means of mass communication were limited. That’s why Congress saw fit to try to mandate that all candidates got a hearing.”
First of all, in its “explanation” of the Equal Time rule, the Post deliberately muddles the intent of Congress in passing it. Congress wisely (omg, did I actually write that??) thought that it would be in the public interest to prevent networks from supporting only one side of the public debate on the publicly-owned broadcast spectrum. That spectrum, last time I checked, is still publicly owned, CBS is still a lessee and the subject broadcast was supposed to air on broadcast television.
For a Leftist outlet like the Post, fairness is supposed to be perhaps the most cherished touchstone of any debate, yet because reminding its audience of the two fundamental motivations for the FCC rule — fairness and the public interest — would undermine its argument, the post just glosses over them altogether and argues by implication that freedom of entertainment choice is the most important thing.
Again, it is with sadness that I observe many people, perhaps even a majority, are so unfamiliar with the concept of critical thinking that they will accept this editorial as holy writ. But make no mistake — this was a malicious, deliberately partisan and utterly facile argument, and the Post knows it.
Verdict: Deliberately and intentionally unethical.
Ethics Alarms 
Jonathan Turley reported on his blog that Colbert and Talarico committed a hoax by claiming censorship.
Our politics have become so stylized that many voters and viewers have no expectation of substance. Take the most recent hoax perpetrated by Stephen Colbert and Democratic Texas Senatorial candidate James Talarico. Colbert had another self-aggrandizing moment on his CBS Late Show, claiming he was prevented from airing an interview with Talarico because CBS caved to pressure from the Trump Administration and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair, Brendan Carr. In another faux Spartacus moment on the left, Colbert thrilled the audience by saying he aired it on YouTube anyway and treated CBS’s legal guidance as dog poop on air.
As usual, the media took it from there and breathlessly repeated the false story. It was so outrageously false that CBS took the rare move of issuing a public statement saying that it was completely untrue. It explained that CBS lawyers did not bar the interview but noted that, under equal-time policies, Colbert might be required to give the other two candidates, including Rep. Jasmine Crockett, the same opportunity.
For his part, Carr held a press conference that debunked Colbert’s claim and said that neither he nor the FCC had even heard of the interview until they were accused on the program.
Jonathan Turley linked to Fox News on this issue, including the interview with Carr from the FCC:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/fcc-chair-brendan-carr-sets-record-straight-stephen-colbert-censorship-claims
Other highlights from Fox News:
“The Late Show was not prohibited by CBS from broadcasting the interview with Rep. James Talarico,” CBS said in a statement.
“The show was provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal-time rule for two other candidates, including Rep. Jasmine Crockett [D-Texas], and presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be fulfilled,” the statement continued.
So Colbert has been lying to the public on this issue.
As I mentioned in a prior post, Colbert should have been walked out of the studio by security the moment the network decided to cancel his show. Who in their right mind thinks it a good policy to allow a fired employee oodles of time to wreak havoc on the way out?
Morons
Thanks for the COtD, Jack!