Slate's "explainer" has also taken up the question of whether Colbert's bid for the WH could violate election laws. With the help of real election lawyers, he identifies something beyond the "equal time rule" (though he reaches the same conclusion - thank you very much): "in kind campaign contributions."
A corporation, in this case Viacom, which owns CC and, thus, the Colbert Report, would be giving him the in kind contribution of air time, far in excess of the legal limit.
Consequence? The Explainer says he can run until someone files a complaint. My lawyerlicious instincts tell me that's too late. The complaint does not create the violation. It merely brings it to the attention of the FEC. The violation occurred before and could see Viacom incurring a stiff penalty. All the more reason for my theory that Viacom's lawyers have long since contacted even real-er election law experts to scope out the risks of this project.
[ thanks to RSC for cutest little link in the whole world. ]
No comments:
Post a Comment