The Sift: ‘Equal time’ rule debate

February 23, 2026

Health/wellness Journalism Misinformation Press freedoms/First Amendment

An educator's guide
to news literacy

Feb. 23, 2026

Hannah Covington, the News Literacy Project's Senior Director of Education Content.

Coming up: Don’t miss next week’s special issue about NLP’s new information ecosystem poster, written by NLP's Senior Director of Education Content Hannah Covington.

In this issue

‘Equal time’ rule debate | RumorGuard slides

Daily Do Now slides

Don’t miss this week’s classroom-ready resource.

Top picks

Here are the latest news literacy topics and tips on how to integrate them into your classroom.

A judge’s gavel over a copy of the U.S. Constitution. A sheet of paper says 1st Amendment.

Some say the “equal time” rule violates First Amendment rights.

1. First Amendment debates over ‘equal time’ rule

Tensions are mounting between talk show hosts, media companies and government regulators — and First Amendment proponents are worried about its effect.

What is the “equal time” rule? First established in 1927, the equal time rule requires that some TV and radio stations give comparable airtime for political candidates competing in the same race. It’s enforced by the Federal Communications Commission and only applies to FCC-licensed broadcast stations (those that use the public airwaves). It does not apply to cable, satellite or streaming stations.
What happened: Two talk shows, The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and The View, recently interviewed Texas senatorial candidate James Talarico without interviewing his political opponent in the primary race, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (both are Democrats). Colbert maintains CBS barred him from airing the interview, while the network contends it merely offered legal guidance. The show decided to instead stream the interview on YouTube.
FCC threatens shows: While talk shows were considered exempt from the equal time rule (following a 2006 FCC ruling), FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has said he is planning to enforce the equal time rule “across the board.” The FCC is pursuing “enforcement action” — likely a fine — against ABC’s The View. ”
First Amendment concerns: Critics of the FCC enforcement say it’s an effort to influence broadcasters’ content decisions. Carr has pointed out that the FCC did not prohibit CBS or Colbert from airing the interview and has denied accusations of censorship.

💬 Discuss:

Should all broadcasters who make use of public airwaves be forced to give all political candidates in an election equal time on air? Why or why not?
Should national talk show hosts be allowed to interview just one candidate involved in a political race?

🗒️Note: The equal time rule is sometimes confused with the Fairness Doctrine — another FCC regulation that required broadcast license holders to present balanced representations of viewpoints about controversial issues until it was struck down in 1987. Read about the history of the Fairness Doctrine here.

⭐ NLP Resources:

Poster: “The First Amendment”
“Press Freedoms Around the World” (Checkology® virtual classroom)

🔗 Related:

“After Colbert says CBS blocked interview, FCC commissioner weighs in on ‘equal time’” (PBS NewsHour)
- Note: This article contains borderline indecent language.

2. Science influencers vs. misinformation

Doctors, scientists and other researchers are combating misinformation about topics like health and climate change on social media by working to make credible information go viral.

Creators with credentials: These expert influencers include Doctor Mike (@doctormike), a family physician with 14.6 million YouTube followers, and Big Manny (@big.manny1), a scientist with 2 million TikTok followers (he’s also on YouTube). Big Manny uses his platform for science demonstrations, like showing a chicken breast bursting into flames to demonstrate the dangers of swallowing a lithium battery.
Why social media? These creators are meeting people where they are. About 65% of people worldwide watch videos on social media, according to a 2025 study. But other research shows that millions are regularly exposed to science misinformation online.

💬 Discuss:

How can you determine if user-generated posts about health or science-related topics are credible?
Why might some people see more science misinformation than others on social media?
Why does misinformation tend to get so much attention online? What role do social media algorithms play in this issue?

💡 Idea: Use the “Reflect” slide in Week 17 of the Daily Do Now resource to further explore this topic.

💡Another idea: Share one or more videos from a science influencer mentioned in the Nature article with students and ask them to look for signs of credibility (credentials, strong evidence, sound reasoning, etc.). Use the “Levels of scientific evidence” infographic to guide discussion.

⭐ NLP Resources:

“Evaluating Science-based Claims” (Checkology® virtual classroom)
“Be Health Informed” (Checkology)
“Sift quiz: Wellness & science claims”

3. Amateur sleuths spread misinfo about Guthrie case

Armchair detectives on social media love to dig into true crime cases – but sometimes their theorizing spreads confusion, falsehoods and harm.

Guthrie case: Nancy Guthrie, the 84-year-old mother of Today show host Savannah Guthrie, went missing from her Tuscon, Arizona, home on Feb. 1. Since then, true crime fanatics have flooded online spaces with speculation about the case — implicating innocent people and compromising the investigation, officials said.
Not so simple: Amateur sleuths lack training and don’t have all the facts of the investigation, but that hasn’t stopped them from trying to solve this case in real time. Some are also profiting from it, racking up engagement and followers online as they spread misinformation and inspire baseless tips that waste investigators’ time.
Real impact: After some online commenters accused members of the Guthrie family of the abduction, the local sheriff’s office released a statement clearing them as suspects.

💬 Discuss:

How might people with good intentions cause confusion and harm with their online sleuthing?
What are some other examples of true crime “investigations” in which online communities have caused harm? Aside from naming or doxing innocent people, what are some other ways that online true crime communities can cause harm?
In what ways do online investigations like these resemble activity in conspiracy theory communities?

⭐ NLP Resource:

“Conspiratorial Thinking” (Checkology)

🔗 Related:

“Amateur detectives and a new kind of journalist descend on Nancy Guthrie case” (Arizona Republic)

These interactive slide decks help students think carefully and critically about viral claims in the digital age.

No, video of flight crew trying to avoid catastrophic accident isn’t real

A post reads, “If a part of the plane goes into the engine even before takeoff, what will happen? Should such a flight be immediately stopped?” and features a video that appears to show an airport crew trying to stop a large piece of metal from getting sucked into a plane engine. The News Literacy Project has added a label that says “AI VIDEO.”

❌ NO: This is not a genuine video of an airport crew trying to stop a piece of metal from getting sucked into a jet engine.

✅ YES: This is an AI-generated video.

❌ NO: This video does not depict a genuine current event.

⭐ NewsLit takeaway:

AI-generated content is widespread on social media and can be difficult to spot at first glance. Check out these Google Slides for tips on identifying these deceptive videos.

AI slop trend recycles firefighter puppy rescues

A collage of three social media posts that all feature images appearing to show firefighters rescuing puppies from a burning building. One post reads, “Rescuing a mother dog and her puppies from a burning home.” The News Literacy Project has added a label that says “AI SLOP.”

❌ NO: These are not genuine videos of firefighters rescuing a dog and her puppies from burning buildings.

✅ YES: These videos are AI-generated.

✅ YES: These videos are an example of AI slop, or low quality and quickly produced fabrications that are typically created by putting basic and sometimes repetitive instructions into a text-to-video AI generator.

⭐ NewsLit takeaway:

AI-generated content is prevalent on social media. While these videos can look genuine at first glance, there are several ways to determine they are inauthentic. Check out these Google Slides for tips on spotting these fabrications.

➕ Many readers were confused by a story published in The Atlantic about a child’s death from measles complications — which turned out to be a fictional, hypothetical account. Media experts say the composite characterization breached journalism ethics, despite an editor’s note at the bottom of the story.

➕ A Russian disinformation campaign used the Winter Olympics to undermine support for Ukraine by spreading fake stories that make Ukrainian athletes and fans appear aggressive and corrupt.

➕ Demogorgons from Stranger Things and the lady in silver from Bridgerton have two things in common: both are copyrighted characters from Netflix, and both have been used in Seedance 2.0 AI-generated videos without permission.

➡️ See NLP’s YouTube video about Seedance 2.0.

➕ AI slop depicting fake courtroom drama scenarios is spreading online. An Indicator report (note: paywalled link) found 24 YouTube channels with 1.7 billion views producing AI-generated or manipulated engagement-bait videos featuring fabricated legal or bodycam content — often perpetuating stereotypes of people of color and law enforcement.

➕ “Ça y est!” (Or “That’s it!”) That’s the catchphrase of Ali Akbar, Paris’ last newspaper hawker, who was recently knighted in France. Akbar has spent over 50 years selling newspapers in the streets of the 6th arrondissement.