Technology

Correct, they refused to air it not out of fear of the FCC, but out of fear of that Texans might like what Talarico has to say.

That guy was super well spoken and had a good message. I'm surprised I hadn't heard of him before. Always nice to see the Streisand Effect in action!

If the link goes dark I've pulled copy, hit me up.

The joy of his Colbert Report is finally returning to him.

or you could donate to jasmine crockett. just sayin.

we need more black representation in dc.

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.

Banning something is a sure fire way to give it oxygen.

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.

Some Republicans know better than to mess with 1st amendment rights, maybe even most, but apparently none of those Republicans own or control our media outlets or operate our government.

I kinda feel like there are definitely poor Republicans, but all the supposed rich and powerful Republicans secretly belong to an entirely different clan.

Are you suggesting only agnostics should govern?

Talarico said in the interview he wants the separation of church and state to return as the current blend diminishes both.

Did you listen to his interview?

He states that his belief is that the separation of Church and State should 100% be protected. Not just to protect the government but to protect the religion, so it doesn't get taken advantage of by political movement like Christian Nationalists.

He mainly pushed love God and love your neighbor. If you loved your neighbor, then you wouldn't push your religion or any other belief on them.

I'm paraphrasing but that's what I got out of it. I think he's someone that could break through to some of the religious right.

I'm torn on this - Christianity (particularly evangelical christianity) has had an extremely negative effect on democracy in our country and has caused physical harm to others.

However, I think most people with a conscience subscribe to some form of philosophy or religion (even if atheists aren't "loyal" to any particular perspective and may not even use titles/categories to describe their value system) and I think it's fine for your morals/conscience to influence decision making. Even a purely scientific decision making process could be considered a form of philosophy.

That being said, most organized religion is about obedience to the tenets of said religion, not a method of asking questions about the world to try to find the most just way to proceed.

The US has been ChristoFascist for decades, banning stem cell research, stopping vaccines, every President has to attend some bullshit church, even the pedophiles.

Talerico. Brings his sincerity, faith, and working class background in in one of the poorest school districts in the country. He has integrity and and a way of invoking Christianity that I think resonates in Texas. He appeals to a broad swath of voters without compromising his progressive ideals.

I would vote for Crocket if she wasn't up against Talerico. But as is, I think he has a better shot at the general and I trust him more.

He's good at messaging from a Christian left perspective. Before I deleted social media, some of his more viral moments on the Texas House floor would make it to my feed. I liked what I heard, but I'm not a Texas resident or voter so Crockett vs Talarico is someone else's judgement call to make.

It's the Orson Wells playbook. "See the movie that the Hersts dont want you to see!!"

Still brilliant either way.

There is a conversation to be had here about how newer broadcast mediums like YouTube are not regulated the same way as older mediums like TV/Radio... And it is that old regulation and those differences that allowed Colbert to sidestep this censorship.

Both the censorship and the tech aspects of this story are worthy of discussion, and thus this 'event' most certainly does belong here.

But most people are more concerned about the censorship and the content of the video, and that will naturally influence the direction of most discussions about it.

Plus, people don't always even look at the forum a post was shared too before commenting. Naturally they just see a thing that interests them and they start talking about it.

I only know the forum cause I got far enough down the comments to see yours.

I believe that communications/media broadcasting are under the technology umbrella.