The FCC opened a probe on The View[0] for hosting Talarico. They haven't made a rule change, but they're definitely acting as if the rules already say what they want it to say.

[0]: https://www.fox7austin.com/news/fcc-opening-probe-the-view-a...

Correct. CBS is now owned by Larry Ellison's son. They are big supporters of the current administration. This act, among others, shows that they are willing to silence dissenting voices on media properties they own.

This is exactly how effective censorship works. For example, what most people don't understand about Chinese censorship is that the foundation of their system is that everything is attributable to someone eventually. So they start by targeting anonymity. Then when something they don't like is published and gains traction, the originating party and the major distributors are punished -- sometimes very publicly. The chilling effect is that people will learn to self censor. Oh and they keep the rules really vague so you always err on the side of caution.

CBS self censoring is basically the same thing.

The Chinese government can then say "What censorship?" or "It's rare" and now the FCC can do the same.

Playing whack-a-mole is not a good strategy for censorship. The chilling effect of self censorship is the winning strategy.

Nah the fault lies with the American public for talking the freedom/exceptionalism talk, social projection of grit and ruggedness while the reality is learned helplessness and codependency

The chilling effect is the entire point. An FCC source literally told CNN, "the threat is the point." CBS isn't being randomly skittish. Paramount needs regulatory approval for its WBD acquisition, paid $16 million to settle a Trump lawsuit right before needing FCC approval for the Skydance merger, and canceled Colbert days after he criticized that deal. ABC suspended Kimmel after FCC threats. The FCC opened an investigation into The View just for having Talarico on.

And yes, Larry Ellison is a hardcore Trump supporter, but even if he weren't, this is how every network is behaving. Disney's Bob Iger is a Democrat and ABC still paid Trump and suspended Kimmel. When the government holds regulatory leverage over your business, "obeying in advance" isn't cowardice you can blame on the network, it's the intended mechanism of state pressure.

This is arguably worse, isn't it? The administration gets to say that it was the network's own decision and that they had no role in it. Taking over news and public media with the help of oligarch buddies is much more effect than a public spat with them.

> Normal authoritarian state behavior, no?

Yes.

And the most surprising thing about this particular story to me is that a lot of people (here in the comments) seem surprised about it.

I don't mean to normalize this, because it isn't normal, but anyone surprised by this hasn't been paying attention over the past year+, this didn't arrive out of the blue.

The worst case scenario now is not limited by process and law. Compliance with politics is taken into consideration for all government business. For examples, see the executive orders blacklisting specific law firms, the withholding of funds to states or areas that vote Democratic, and the threat of investigation into a network after a host said something the President didn't like.

Up until this month, talk show interviews were exempt from the equal time rule.

The shift from democracy to dictatorship isn't a cliff that a lot of people imagine it to be. It's a gradual slide with no abrupt changes in between. If you're waiting for a signal, you'll get it at the bottom of the ramp.

Free speech goes as far as the people who defend it.

CBS and its parent company are greedy cowards. If they won't defend free speech they're the ones causing its downfall.

Governments rule only with the consent of the people.

If you lay down and give away your freedoms you aren't the victim, you're the perpetrator.

So it didn't air because? What evidence do we have? Gosh maybe the sun won't rise tomorrow because w have evidence of it rising tomorrow we just can't know. Unbelievable how dark your soul is for posting that comment with all of the context available to you to estimate the probability of truth.

How does that matter?

That's fine context, but doesn't make any of this less insane.