Forum

Why the FCC Must Treat ABC’s Hit Show as a Democrat Propaganda Operation. A conservative media watchdog has delivered a powerful wake-up call to regulators. The Media Research Center (MRC) recently petitioned the Federal Communications Commission, presenting compelling evidence that ABC’s

“The View” operates as a partisan political tool for the Democrat Party rather than a legitimate news or public affairs program.

This matters because “The View” wields enormous influence over public opinion from its perch on broadcast television. By using publicly owned airwaves, ABC and its parent company benefit from a valuable government-granted privilege. With that privilege comes responsibility—and scrutiny when a program abandons journalistic pretense for overt political advocacy.

The MRC’s detailed complaint documents years of one-sided coverage. Through eight separate studies and a staggering 2,473 individual examples, the group illustrates how the show consistently promotes Democrat candidates, policies, and talking points while attacking Republicans and conservative principles.

Co-hosts have openly encouraged viewers to vote in ways that align with left-wing priorities, such as one memorable on-air prompt telling the audience they “know what to do on Election Day.”

ABC claims the program qualifies for an exemption under FCC equal time rules because it is a “bona fide news interview program.” The MRC counters that this is a convenient fiction. The content is driven by partisan goals, not newsworthiness. Guest bookings favor those who bolster Democrat chances, with rare exceptions like a recent appearance by Vice President JD Vance.

If the FCC agrees and subjects “The View” to full regulatory authority as political programming, the implications would be profound and long overdue.

Broadcasters airing such content would face stricter application of equal opportunities requirements, ensuring opposing voices get airtime rather than token pushback.

Even more importantly, FCC oversight would trigger mandatory financial transparency.

• all production expenses
• talent salaries
• advertising revenues
• sponsorship arrangements
• all financial flows including potential kickbacks
• undisclosed political influence spending—would be subject to public disclosure.

Viewers could finally examine the books. Is the show propped up by favorable ad deals from the Democrat Party?

Are there hidden funding streams or in-kind contributions from partisan interests? The public has a right to know whether a program that functions as Democrat messaging is operating with clean hands or benefiting from opaque financial incentives. Regulation would end the ability to hide behind entertainment labels while engaging in electioneering.

Bringing “The View” under proper FCC authority would not silence its hosts. It would simply require honesty about what the program truly is: a highly produced, influential vehicle for left-wing political advocacy.

The FCC has an opportunity—and a duty—to act. Regulating “The View” as the partisan operation it has become would restore fairness to political broadcasting and give Americans the transparency they deserve regarding the true costs and influences behind the content they consume.