Censoring Stephen Colbert’s interviews is bad regardless of your political party

On Tuesday morning, The Late Present with Stephen Colbert posted an interview on its YouTube web page with Texas state consultant James Talarico, who’s working for Senate in 2026. The section didn’t air on Monday evening’s Late Present with Stephen Colbert as a result of, as Colbert put it within the opening of the present, “we have been advised in no unsure phrases by our community’s legal professionals that we couldn’t have him on the published.”

In line with Colbert, CBS legal professionals feared retaliation from the Trump administration and FCC chairman Brendan Carr over what can be seen as partisanship content material the ultimate broadcast time slotted for Republican candidates. Reasonably than threat ire, CBS censored the interview. Colbert’s clarification of the choice, and the interview with Talarico, went instantly viral. The Streisand Effect gonna Streisand Impact.

Colbert interviewing a politician — or anybody for that matter — shouldn’t be repeatedly in Polygon’s purview, except it’s Magneto actor Ian McKellan delivering an absolute banger of a Shakespearean soliloquy on live TV. However 5 months after ABC and Disney yanked Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show off the air over political pressure (solely to reinstate the comic per week later), I’m struck that large networks would proceed to play this recreation, and that censorship as a type of punishment in america continues to be a viable choice to appease the TV-obsessed administration. It’s bizarre. It’s unacceptable! I really feel compelled to state this for the file as a result of it’s not a part of Polygon’s values and I don’t imagine our readers agree with the apply.

Let’s go a step additional: I don’t suppose Polygon’s haters approve of this both. Since our inception in 2012, Polygon has been on trial within the courtroom of opinion numerous occasions, with critics decrying our supposed partisan politics and questioning why we didn’t get round to reviewing X, Y, Z, and that it have to be for diabolical causes. There’s no defending in opposition to paranoia and the grumblings occurring in darkish corners of the web, however I’ll say, in my eight years at Polygon, we’ve by no means censored an opinion over outdoors strain or our personal unease over the way it is likely to be obtained. We focus on and debate what we have to cowl, how we cowl it with journalistic diligence and the sources we’ve at our disposal, and infrequently seek the advice of with legal professionals to make sure we’re navigating murky waters to the very best of our skills. I don’t completely blame CBS’ authorized crew for the spineless demand that Colbert censor himself — their job is to keep away from lawsuits. However like Colbert, we don’t have to sit down right here and take it. The truth is, we will yell about it.

I do know Polygon readers and people-who-have-sworn-to-never-read-Polygon-again alike like to yell as a result of I too exist on the web. So I hope there’s widespread floor on this subject. Whether or not you’re a religious reader of Polygon’s award-worthy guides (bless you) or a perpetually pissed-off “anti-woke” gamer who would fairly vibe code a AI-generated Kotaku knockoff than learn actual journalism, I think about the thought of a political occasion weaponizing a nationwide company to censor any voice rattles you to the core. Whether or not it’s an atomic act of blasting a TV showcase the air or sniping segments of a late-night present from nationwide broadcast or social media platforms bending the knee by limiting “political” content or brokers sacking journalists on the street in an effort to comprise reporting of their actions, it’s all censorship.

That’s unhealthy, proper? Can all of us agree on that? Let’s get on the identical web page.