1027
Stephen Colbert says CBS didn't air Rep. James Talarico interview out of fear of FCC
(www.texastribune.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
1027 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
82070 readers
2854 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Banning something is a sure fire way to give it oxygen. Streisand effect
The problem Trump has in doing this type of suppression is that it gains more attention and riles people up more than if he had let the interview air. Sure the interview might have said things he didn't want to be said, but now he has made this a much bigger issue and he looks weak because he is scared at the mere prospect of some words being uttered.
i wouldn't have watched the interview if cbs hadn't cancelled it
Yep, and Colbert has no reason to pull any punches either. They already canceled his show to appease the administration. Why would Stephen hesitate to tell the world every time CBS bends the knee?
Good on him for calling out every time they act as state propaganda and not a news network.
If they cancel the show earlier they can't pretend to be impartial, and Colbert gets paid the rest of his contract without having to do any work.
Plus they'll be in the real news for a week lol
Depends. Stephen says he was told not to tell anyone on air that they couldn't air it. Assuming that's true, and he had decided to comply, no one really would have known. It's only through his (presumed) bravery that we've all seen it.
I'm sure there would have been articles asking why there was an interview uploaded to the YouTube channel and pinned right at the top that wasn't aired on the channel. It wouldn't have been under the radar either way, but it would have taken longer to be reported this widely.
But I do get your point.
Well not taking anything from him, but with so many people involved in a TV production I think it would have come out in some form that dissent was being suppressed.
It's a clever bit of marketing to queue this up and make a big stir and drum about being censored.
The allegations feel... thin? This is a primary race in a state that's been sandbagged for Republicans for decades. But as a piece of campaign material, it's par excellance. More people are going to see the clip passed around online than ever would watching it broadcast on a Monday night.
I doubt this was anyone's serious intent. Republicans pull this gag all the time. They deliberately try and trick the alarm for censorship and then scream ten times as loud "LOOK AT ME! I'VE BEEN CENSORED! CHECK OUT THE VIDEO THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE!"
Liberals (or, at least, this one guy fighting for his life in a deep red state) finally seem to have caught up to the game.
Either that or it's exactly what it says on the tin. I wonder which is more likely.