Orientation summary — a fast, cited starting point, not a substitute for reading the filings. Generated from the public ECFS record.
Key issues — substantive positions from named filers. Public comments — general-public sentiment, analyzed separately.
Key issues (auto-discovered)
Whether 'The View' qualifies as a bona fide news interview program exempt from equal opportunities requirements.
Filers split on: “The Commission should recognize 'The View' as a bona fide news interview program.”
89 filers engaged this issue.
- Jim Reese PUBLIC COMMENT ON (oppose) — The commenter argues that ABC and Disney mislead viewers by labeling The View as a news program, as it fails to meet the criteria for actual news reporting, and insists that it should not be exempt from the statutory requirements applicable to news programs, especially concerning the equal treatment of political viewpoints.
- Media Research Center Addendum 1 MRC (oppose) — The commenter argues that The View has shifted from being a legitimate news program to a partisan political operation, thus disqualifying it from exemption under equal opportunity rules.
- Kymberleigh Richards DA 26 124 (support) — The commenter argues that The View qualifies as a bona fide news program due to its discussion of current events and knowledgeable guests presented without bias, and contends that the investigation is unfounded as it lacks a formal complaint and is not based on any actual violations of the equal time provisions.
- John Harvey (support) — The commenter believes that 'The View' qualifies as a bona fide news program and should be treated as such by the FCC.
- CHARLES JAY ISEMAN FCC.MM Docket No 26 124.Ise (oppose) — The commenter urges the FCC to reevaluate 'The View' and conclude that it does not meet the criteria for a bona fide news program, thus should not be exempt from equal opportunities requirements.
- Tony Jarrett comment fcc the view (oppose) — The commenter argues that The View operates as a partisan opinion and entertainment talk show rather than a structured news program, which disqualifies it from the exemption under Section 315.
The FCC's actions are alleged to infringe on First Amendment rights and free speech.
Filers split on: “The Commission should reject actions that infringe on First Amendment rights.”
50 filers engaged this issue.
- Cynthia Holloway FCC (support) — The commenter argues that the FCC is intimidating media organizations, posing a direct threat to the independence and survival of a free press in the U.S., and believes that these actions violate fundamental rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech and the press.
- Dee Russo The FCC should NOT interfere with th (support) — The commenter believes that the FCC's involvement would infringe upon fundamental rights of expression and press freedom.
- Lawrence Bush 26 124 (support) — The commenter argues that the FCC's actions against media voices violate free speech and threaten democracy, while also asserting that the FCC's current approach harms the U.S. and supports those who oppose democratic values globally.
- George Primavera FCC Public (support) — The commenter contends that the FCC's actions violate First Amendment rights by using regulatory threats to suppress speech and intimidate broadcasters, selectively enforcing regulations against ABC while ignoring similar content from others, and suggests that Chairman Carr's avoidance of judicial scrutiny implies that his actions are unlikely to withstand legal examination.
- Angela Rae Thompson FCC COMPLAINT (support) — The commenter believes that the FCC's actions would undermine democratic principles and interfere with media freedom.
- Joseph LaLumia ABC comment (support) — The commenter believes that the FCC's actions are politically motivated and infringe on free speech rights.
Concerns that the FCC is overstepping its regulatory authority by influencing network content.
Filers split on: “The Commission should deny actions that overstep its regulatory authority.”
42 filers engaged this issue.
- Nicole Quinn Blank 95 (support) — The commenter argues that the FCC's attempt to influence network content, particularly in favor of politically preferred programming, oversteps its regulatory authority and believes that pressuring networks to provide certain content constitutes a form of bullying that should not be permitted.
- Benjamin Schneider 2026 06 23 Public (support) — The commenter believes that a denial would be unjustified and politically motivated, undermining the integrity of the FCC, and argues that the action seems influenced by political pressure rather than regulatory concerns, which diminishes public confidence in the FCC. Additionally, the commenter expresses concern that the FCC is deviating from its established practices, potentially allowing government influence over acceptable viewpoints.
- Ivenette LaCount FCC (support) — The commenter asserts that the FCC's role should be limited and not involve influencing media content or operations based on political pressures.
- Olga Roig Oroig (support) — The commenter argues that the FCC should not engage in politically motivated harassment of broadcasting companies regarding their programming choices, as it exceeds their authority.
- Mary Bolger FCC (support) — The commenter believes that the FCC's actions are politically motivated and infringe on the rights of Americans to access diverse programming.
- J Guidry 26 124 comments (support) — The commenter argues that the FCC should not assess the legitimacy of one type of news programming over another, as this could lead to inconsistent applications of the law.
The importance of maintaining editorial independence from government influence in media programming.
Filers split on: “The Commission should mandate editorial independence from government influence.”
24 filers engaged this issue.
- Colleen Loveless Public (support) — The commenter urges the FCC to maintain its historical support for programs that provide legitimate news interviews, emphasizes the importance of protecting editorial independence for broadcasters and public access to diverse ideas, and advocates for impartiality in regulatory actions to uphold public confidence in the FCC's independence.
- Competitive Enterprise Institute CEI TPA Young (support) — The commenter argues that maintaining this classification is essential for protecting freedom of speech and expression by preventing government interference in journalistic decisions, emphasizing the historical context of government power being used to silence opposing views, and asserting the importance of a clear boundary to prevent government officials from influencing which speakers receive coverage.
- Kathleen Coughlin (support) — The commenter argues that editorial decisions should be made independently by media organizations without government interference due to First Amendment concerns, the risk of political favoritism, and the threat to press independence, insisting that the FCC must remain neutral in political matters to prevent biased coverage.
- Independent Women Public (support) — The commenter stresses the necessity of fair and consistent rules for media institutions to maintain public confidence, advocating for the application of the same standards to all programs irrespective of their political leanings to uphold the distinction between journalism and political advocacy.
- Taylor Loveless Support for ABC and Disney (support) — The commenter believes that protecting editorial independence is crucial for a free press and democracy, and that government pressure on media organizations is unacceptable.
- J Guidry 26 124 comments (support) — The commenter argues that the government should not pressure broadcasters to conform to a politically neutral standard, as this would infringe on free speech.
The necessity of enforcing the equal opportunities rule to ensure fair access to broadcast media for all candidates.
Filers split on: “The Commission should enforce the equal opportunities rule for all broadcast media.”
21 filers engaged this issue.
- J Guidry 26 124 comments (oppose) — The commenter believes that imposing equal opportunity requirements would discourage broadcasters from engaging in political discussions, ultimately harming public access to political information.
- Information Technology and Innovation Foundati (oppose) — The commenter argues that the equal opportunities requirement for broadcasters is a content-based regulation that fails to meet constitutional standards, lacks a compelling government interest, is impractical, disincentivizes airtime for candidates, and is based on an outdated legal foundation regarding spectrum scarcity that should be overruled by the Supreme Court.
- Competitive Enterprise Institute CEI (oppose) — The commenter believes that the equal opportunities requirement is obsolete due to the proliferation of media platforms, as its original intent to ensure candidate access through broadcasting is no longer relevant. Additionally, they argue that the requirement creates an uneven playing field, disadvantaging broadcasters compared to unregulated media platforms and resulting in less political coverage on broadcast channels.
- Tony Jarrett comment fcc the view (support) — The commenter believes that allowing this exemption would violate the principles of equal opportunity in broadcasting.
- Media Action Center MAC Bonafide News and Equa (modify) — The commenter argues that current rules hinder broadcasters from interviewing multiple candidates in elections with many participants and calls for new FCC guidelines to ensure fair opportunities for all candidates. Additionally, they point out that exemptions for certain radio programs from Equal Opportunities rules have resulted in a biased media landscape, emphasizing the need for fairness in public airwaves.
- Wayne E. Vettleson FCC docket 26 124 (oppose) — The commenter argues that the equal opportunities rule for broadcast programming is outdated and lacks relevance in today's media landscape, where other forms of communication dominate.
The need for platforms like Hulu to include diverse and independent stations to ensure balanced media representation.
Filers split on: “The Commission should require platforms to include diverse and independent stations.”
8 filers engaged this issue.
- One Ministries (support) — OMI insists that the FCC must enforce the Communications Act to ensure platforms like Hulu Plus Live TV include independent stations like KQSL, arguing that this inclusion aligns with legislative goals for balanced media representation and that religious and independent television stations deserve equal opportunities as larger corporations. OMI highlights its attempts to have KQSL included on Hulu, which have been ignored by Disney, indicating a lack of fair treatment, and emphasizes the necessity of Christian television stations to provide diverse perspectives in the media landscape.
- Christina Sierra The View (support) — The commenter argues that censorship contradicts the principles of free speech and that diverse opinions should be allowed on air.
- The View THE VIEW — The commenter believes that The View is essential for providing diverse perspectives and fostering democratic engagement in media.
- David Schendel ABC News — The commenter emphasizes that broadcast networks, like ABC, hold public licenses and are expected to provide balanced reporting, which they argue ABC fails to do.
- David Rand inbound8311177545385894256 (oppose) — The commenter advocates for viewer choice in programming, suggesting that the audience should determine the show's fate.
- Debbie DeVries ABC (oppose) — The commenter emphasizes that viewers can easily change the channel and decide what content they want to engage with, reinforcing the idea of personal choice in media consumption.
Most-cited authorities
- 47 U.S.C. § 315(a) — cited by 13 filer(s)
- NRA of Am. v. Vullo, 602 U.S. 175 — cited by 5 filer(s)
- Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58 — cited by 5 filer(s)
- FCC v. League of Women Voters of Cal., 468 U.S. 364 — cited by 4 filer(s)
- FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502 — cited by 4 filer(s)
- Red Lion Broad. Co. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367 — cited by 4 filer(s)
- 47 U.S.C. § 326. — cited by 4 filer(s)
- 47 U.S.C. § 312(a)(7) — cited by 4 filer(s)
- g Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241 — cited by 3 filer(s)
- Chisholm v. FCC, 538 F.2d 349 — cited by 3 filer(s)
- Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. v. FCC, 512 U.S. 622 — cited by 3 filer(s)
- W. Va. State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 — cited by 3 filer(s)
Who filed (122)
Adam Guess AG FCC TheView 6 22 26, Adrienne Drollinger The View and FCC MB 26 124, American Society of Journalists and Authors Bi, Andrea L Krueger Abc7 and The View Fcc comment, Angela Rae Thompson FCC COMPLAINT, Angela Stuart FCC, Anthony Joseph Constantini Constantini, Arlene Baginski The View, Article III Project The View FCC, BRIAN ROGERS Document 13.docx, Benjamin Schneider 2026 06 23 Public, Bill Jenkins FCC DISNEY ABC 26124 JUNE 2026, Bob Soper FCC26 124, Bonnie Baggesen FCC Petition on behalf of ABC , CHARLES JAY ISEMAN FCC.MM Docket No 26 124.Ise, Camille Lewis Letter to FCC The View, Cassandra Doyle To The FCC signed copy, Center for American Rights 26 124 Opening, Chowdhury F Rahim ABC The View FCC stay off th, Christina Sierra The View, Claude.AI the view news analysis, Colleen Loveless Public, Competitive Enterprise Institute CEI, Competitive Enterprise Institute CEI TPA Young, Cynthia Holloway FCC, D. SCOTT JONES THERESA L. JONES THE VIEW COMME, Daniel Evans The View comment, Daniela Paolone Daniela Paolone, David Rand inbound8311177545385894256, David Schendel ABC News, Debbie DeVries ABC, Dee Russo The FCC should NOT interfere with th, Disneys ABC DA 26 517A1, Douglas W Scott File Number 26 124 Public, Edward J. Rocksvold FCC Public, Ernest A MILLER Letter to FCC 05232026 pdf, F. commentMB26124, Free Press Free Press June 22 2026, GLAAD GLAAD LGBT Tech NLGJA, Gary M Brophy FCC Public, George Primavera FCC Public, Givon Zirkind The News FCC, Harriet DuBois 26 124 FCC vs The View PDF, Higher Heights Higher Heights MANA A National , Independent Women Public, Information Technology and Innovation Foundati, Ishanee DeVas FCC, Ivenette LaCount FCC, J Guidry 26 124 comments, James C Reddish inbound4204836589270707117, Janet Nelson FCC v ABC, Jason LaBrosse This is an extraordinary demons, Jeff Dodge The View 26 124 Public, Jim Reese PUBLIC COMMENT ON, Joe Butenhoff FCC Letter, John Harvey, Joseph LaLumia ABC comment, Julie Noble Letter to FCC, Karen Konczyk DA 26 517A1, Kathleen Coughlin, Kathy G Browning DECLARE THE VIEW AS A BONA FI, Kymberleigh Richards DA 26 124, Lauren Orr FCC complaint, Lawrence Bush 26 124, Lisa M Manns Untitled document, M Lipson FCC, M. Fay Foster FCC, Mark Smith FCC, Mary Bolger FCC, Mary Ness FCC 26 124, Maze John FCC The View 260623 093216, Media Action Center MAC Bonafide News and Equa, Media Research Center Addendum 1 MRC, Media Research Center Addendum 2 MRC, Media Research Center Addendum 3 MRC, Media Research Center Addendum 4 MRC, Media Research Center Addendum 5 MRC, Media Research Center Addendum 6 MRC, Media Research Center MRC, Media Research Center the view pdfs part 7, Melanie Hernandez Untitled, Melissa Friske Untitled document, Michael Cusato The View is NOT a bona fide new, Michael Israel FCC, Michelle Takai Dear FCC, National Republican Senatorial Committee 2026 , Nicole Quinn Blank 95, Olga Roig Oroig, One Ministries, PRESSPAGE ENTERTAINMENT INC PRESSPAGE ENTERTAI, Pamela Pareti The View Opinion, Paul Pareti The View Opinion, Paul White, Paul Witte 2026 06 23, Protect the First Foundation DA 26 517, Public Knowledge 2026.06.22 Public Knowledge, Randy Woods The View, Renee Bryant ABC and stations, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press 6, Robert Watson The View Objective Commentary, Sarah Kate Ellis GLAAD FCC comment on The View, Stephen Rosnick FCC Disney, Summer Sedano The View, Tamara K Gross FCC 26 124 Oppose The View Exem, Tammy Lorenzen Historically news programs and , Taylor Loveless Support for ABC and Disney, TechFreedom TechFreedom, The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expre, The Future of Free Speech FCC Public, The View THE VIEW, Tony Jarrett comment fcc the view, United Church of Christ Media Justice Ministry, Veedor Viudadano 2026 06 16, W. Lee McVey PE Ret. FCC 26 124, Wayne E. Vettleson FCC docket 26 124, Weston P Terry theviewFCC, William Hannah FccView, William Malgieri ABC The View, Xavier Roper X Roper, Xuan Vu FCC, cece brooks FCC response, shaun savage FCCTheView
Public comments — 77,914 filings
Sentiment of the general public's web-form comments — separate from the industry positions. 77,914 comments, 18,996 distinct versions after grouping form letters.
Bottom line: Public comments lean opposed. This reflects the volume of public write-in comments — not the weight of legal argument, or the standard the FCC applies.
Estimated split: 41% support · 58% oppose · 1% other. Support = wants the FCC to adopt/keep the action; Oppose = wants it rejected; Unclear = neutral or off-topic.
How we know: 4% of comments are grouped form letters classified exactly; the rest are estimated from a random sample of 310 distinct comments.
Top themes
- Free speech — 1,683 (support)
- guest choice — 1,209 (oppose)
- propaganda claim — 604 (oppose)
- censorship — 604 (oppose)
- First Amendment — 534 (oppose)
- media freedom — 529 (support)
- Bona fide news — 403 (support)
- No control over guests — 387 (support)
What people wrote
- OPPOSE: “Dear Federal Communications Commission, ABC's The View is not a news show and should be recognized as such by the FCC. The hosts of The View routinely engage in political commentary, advocate for policy positions, and express opinions regarding political candidates and public” — 84 filed this
- SUPPORT: “Leave the View alone!!!!!” — 72 filed this
- SUPPORT: “Freedom of Speech!!!!” — 52 filed this
- SUPPORT: “Yes,"The View" airs news I rely on and journalists I trust. The program expresses different points of view that incorporate the news. Yes, "The View" constitutes bona fide news, and the exemption granted in 2002 should remain in place. "The View" provides bona fide news and persp” — 42 filed this
- OPPOSE: “The "View" is not a news program.” — 20 filed this
- OPPOSE: “The View is not Bona Fide News.” — 12 filed this
How this sentiment is measured
We read the public express comments from the FCC's ECFS record, group identical form letters and count them exactly, then classify a random sample of the distinct versions and extrapolate to all 77,914 comments. This is public sentiment only; it is not a measure of the legal merits or how the Commission will rule.
Go deeper
Track this proceeding — get alerted, with the summary, when new comments or orders land.
Summarize this for your position — pick your topics and client angle for a tailored, cited brief.