Fine. Give Them Equal Time.

There is a fascinating argument unfolding right now between the Trump administration, the Federal Communications Commission, and some of America’s biggest television networks. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has been increasingly aggressive in scrutinizing broadcast networks, including ABC, while President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized ABC, Disney, and programs such as Jimmy Kimmel Live! and The View. The FCC has also questioned whether The View qualifies for the “bona fide news interview” exemption from federal equal time requirements. The controversy has now escalated to the point that Disney and ABC have sued the FCC, arguing that the agency’s actions amount to government retaliation for programming and commentary critical of the president. The FCC and Chairman Carr dispute that characterization and maintain that broadcasters have obligations under federal law because they operate using licensed public airwaves.

Whatever your politics, there is a legitimate question underneath all of this: What would actually happen if these networks simply embraced the idea of equal political representation?

Here’s my proposal. If The View wants to have a Democratic candidate, invite a Republican candidate too. If Jimmy Kimmel Live! wants to criticize a Republican candidate, invite a conservative counterpart to respond. If ABC, NBC, CBS, or any other broadcast network is accused of providing disproportionate access to one side, don’t let the government decide who gets invited. Invite them yourself.

Bring conservative media personalities onto traditionally liberal leaning programs, and liberal media personalities onto traditionally conservative programs. Give candidates and commentators an opportunity to make their case directly to an audience that may not normally hear from them. But there’s one additional condition: Put a genuinely nonpartisan fact checker at the table.

Not a Democrat. Not a Republican. Not somebody selected because they’re friendly to the host. A professional whose only job is to distinguish between verifiable facts, unsupported claims, opinions, and matters that genuinely remain disputed. Most importantly, that fact checker applies exactly the same standard to both sides.

A conservative guest makes a claim? Check it. A liberal guest makes a claim? Check it. If it’s accurate, say so. If it’s misleading, say so. If there’s no evidence for it, say so. No special treatment. No partisan referee. No government deciding which opinions Americans are allowed to hear. Just more speech, more perspectives, and better information.

That would be a far healthier answer to accusations of media bias than threatening broadcast licenses, and it would preserve something I think both sides should care deeply about: editorial independence.

The current federal equal time rule is much narrower than the way people often describe it. Under Section 315, when a broadcast station gives a legally qualified political candidate access to its facilities, it generally must provide equal opportunities to other legally qualified candidates for that same office, subject to important exemptions for bona fide newscasts, news interviews, news documentaries, and on the spot coverage of bona fide news events.

That means simply inviting “a conservative” onto The View would not necessarily satisfy the statutory requirement. The law is concerned primarily with political candidates, not with creating a mathematically balanced lineup of ideological commentators. But that’s precisely why I think networks could voluntarily go further than the law requires.

If the concern is that viewers are being exposed to only one side of a political argument, then give them both sides. If the concern is that a network is biased, let the network demonstrate that it isn’t. And if the concern is that politicians are making misleading claims on television, don’t silence the discussion. Fact check it.

I would much rather watch a liberal host interview a conservative candidate, a conservative host interview a liberal candidate, and an independent fact checker challenge both of them when necessary than watch politicians and regulators fight over who is allowed to appear on television. Networks would maintain control over their programming, conservatives would get opportunities to reach audiences that might not normally watch conservative media, liberals would get the same opportunity on conservative platforms, and viewers would get something increasingly difficult to find in American political discourse: a chance to hear competing arguments without having to decide which information source they trust before the conversation even begins.

If Chairman Carr believes the problem is unequal political access, there is an easy experiment available. Don’t threaten ABC’s licenses. Don’t tell The View who it has to invite. Don’t tell Jimmy Kimmel what he can joke about. Instead, challenge these networks to open their doors.

Invite the people who say they’re being excluded.

Let them make their case.

Then let somebody who doesn’t belong to either political camp check the facts.

If your side is right, let it prove it.

If your opponent is wrong, let them say it out loud and then let the evidence demonstrate why.

That’s what equal time should feel like.

Not government controlled speech.

More speech. More perspectives. Better fact checking.

And maybe, just maybe, a little less bullshit from everybody.

The post Fine. Give Them Equal Time. first appeared on Tristan Bills.