Both are true. There is a federal law: Title 47 U.S.C. § 315 which establishes the equal‑time requirement.
The FCC Is empowered to interpret relevant federal law and write rules or regulations. The current FCC regulation — 47 C.F.R. § 73.1941 — contains four exemptions to the Equal Status law: 1. bona fide newscasts 2. bona fide news interviews 3. bona fide news documentaries (incidental appearances) 4. on‑the‑spot coverage of bona fide news events Late‑night shows have historically been treated as falling under the “bona fide news interview” exemption, this is what Colbert referred to. The FCC has recently issued guidance to broadcasters that they should no longer assume late‑night or daytime talk shows qualify for the bona fide news interview exemption, and that stations must be prepared to justify the exemption on a case‑by‑case basis. This increases the likelihood (always a possibility) that appearances by candidates on entertainment talk shows may trigger equal‑time obligations. The FCC has not issued a new formal rule, but has put stations on notice that the bar for justifying an exception to the Equal Time rule has been raised, which increases compliance risk. And of course it’s Brandon Carr who will ultimately decide whether or not any particular instance is justified. In the past, the FCC has tended to be liberal with exceptions for late night shows in part, particularly to avoid the appearance of the federal government favoring one type of candidate over another. The current federal government is not constrained by those kinds of concerns. Sent from Gmail Mobile On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 at 10:08 AM 'David Bruggeman' via TVorNotTV < [email protected]> wrote: > Equal Time is covered under Title 47, U.S. Code Section 315 (referred to > as 'equal opportunities' in the text). > > https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/315 > > There could be FCC regulations/rules associated with this, but I haven't > had time this morning to review the Code of Federal Regulations. The use > of rule in common discussions on this subject may be colloquial rather that > strictly regulatory. > > David > > On Wednesday, February 18, 2026 at 09:53:30 AM PST, M-D November < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Question, because this was a point of contention on CNN's > ShoutyTable...er, NewsNight last night - is Equal Time a *law*, or just > an FCC rule? One of the conservative panelists (who looked like he came > out of central casting for a mid-90s Scorsese gangster film) kept insisting > that it's a *law*, but is it? > > On Wednesday, February 18, 2026 at 1:06:52 AM UTC-5 Kevin M. wrote: > > The law and the precedent are both on the side of broadcasting the > interview. The only reason not to is because Federal law has been hobbled. > > https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cze0dk3yd5eo > > > Kevin M. (RPCV) > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/780571375.1221039.1771438082099%40mail.yahoo.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/780571375.1221039.1771438082099%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BN9CDsA0s9vJT5B-ej-7ES1BArXdFS%3DqwsgjTMD8EobQ%40mail.gmail.com.
