This just in from ABC: "The View" is a news program.

Yes, that’s the same “View” that traffics in more conspiracy theories than a tinfoil salesman at an Alex Jones convention.

In 2022, Goldberg claimed without evidence that the GOP planned to take select Americans’ voting rights away as well as a woman’s right to vote.

Ridiculous? Of course it is.

The surprising part isn't that ABC is saying it. It's that, for decades, the FCC has effectively treated it that way by exempting programs like "The View" from the agency's equal-time rules.

Now that long-standing interpretation is under attack — and while it's hard to argue with mocking the gynocentric gabfest's journalistic standards, the government shouldn't be deciding which shows qualify as "real" journalism.

News flush

The dispute traces back to January, when FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced that late-night and daytime talk shows could no longer rely on a decades-old interpretation of the "bona fide news interview" exemption to the equal-time rule. Carr argued that broadcasters had stretched the exemption beyond recognition, saying legacy networks had treated their talk shows as news programs "even when motivated by purely partisan political purposes."

Congress created that exemption in 1959 after broadcasters warned that forcing equal time for every candidate interview would discourage political coverage altogether. Lawmakers ultimately concluded that preserving editorial discretion better served the public than having regulators second-guess programming decisions.

The first major test came a few weeks later. Texas Democrat Senate candidate James Talarico appeared on "The View" months before his expected primary against Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). Under Carr's new interpretation, ABC could no longer simply assume the interview qualified for the exemption, prompting the FCC to investigate whether the appearance should have triggered equal-time obligations.

The effects were almost immediate. Citing the same regulatory uncertainty, CBS lawyers advised Stephen Colbert not to air a scheduled interview with Talarico on "The Late Show." Rather than risk an FCC dispute, Colbert released the interview on YouTube instead, where the agency has no jurisdiction. Whether you sympathize with Colbert or not, the episode demonstrated how quickly regulatory uncertainty can begin shaping editorial decisions.

Narrow 'View'

Carr's criticism wasn't pulled from thin air. The show's guest lineup is notoriously one-sided. According to the Media Research Center, last year "The View" hosted 128 liberal-leaning guests compared with just two conservatives. One of those two, actress Cheryl Hines, is generally considered "conservative" only because her husband, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., serves in the Trump administration.

The guest tally merely scratches the surface. The Media Research Center has also cataloged nearly 2,500 examples of bias, misinformation and one-sided commentary on "The View." If Carr wanted evidence that the show resembles partisan advocacy more than journalism, he hardly had to look far.

The latest examples don't require a fact-checking degree to decipher — just functioning eyes and ears (a sense of humor doesn't hurt, either).

Whoopi world

Let’s start with Whoopi Goldberg. The Oscar winner has used her “View” pulpit to suggest President Donald Trump planned to separate interracial couples. Her proof? Zip … zero … nada. Nobody tell Usha Vance, an Indian-American woman and the second lady.

That kind of commentary is disqualifying on the surface. It’s doubly damning for a verifiable “news” outlet.

More recently, Goldberg and co-host Joy Behar railed against the GOP’s SAVE Act legislation, saying it’s deeply unpopular. Or as both Goldberg and Behar said into their live mics, “nobody wants it.”

Multiple recent polls show that more than 80% of the public want voters to show ID before voting, the thrust of the legislation.

Good luck finding more than 80% of Americans to agree on, well, anything (beyond a white-hot hatred for robocalls).

That’s not just a little bit off. It’s a major embarrassment, particularly for a “news” program.

RELATED: VEEP TV: JD slays in 'View' ratings coup

Andrew Harnik/Al Drago/Getty Images

Fact-chuckers

“The View” hosts also sit silently as guests utter the most unhinged comments without a fact-check or pushback. Earlier this year, Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) claimed the modern GOP was hell-bent on bringing back slavery.

The four “View” hosts couldn’t raise a single objection, nor ask the veteran Democrat to back up his outlandish claim. Would Walter Cronkite sit still while a guest uttered something so outrageous?

“And that’s the way it isn’t.”

The show’s coverage of Austin Metcalf’s shocking 2025 murder proved how dangerous — yes, dangerous — “The View’s” misinformation can be. Co-host Sunny Hostin lied about the weight disparity between Metcalf and his killer, Karmelo Anthony.

She also lied that Anthony was the only black person in the team’s tent area where the fatal stabbing occurred. Multiple black students were there at the time. Some even testified on behalf of the prosecution.

Some news program. Is it any wonder TikTok accounts repeat misinformation tied to the case?

Fake news fever

And this isn’t a recent problem. “The View” has been twisting the truth like a Bavarian pretzel for years. In 2022, Goldberg claimed without evidence that the GOP planned to take select Americans’ voting rights away as well as a woman’s right to vote.

Evidence? Proof? Hey, Goldberg starred in that adorable “Sister Act” series. That’s enough, apparently.

Two years ago, the same Goldberg said President Trump would throw Americans into camps, including gay Americans, and “disappear” them. Any update on that claim?

In other words, Carr has identified a real problem. His solution is the dangerous part.

Butt out

Treating "The View" as the equivalent of a bona fide news interview program stretches the term beyond recognition. But the government has no business deciding otherwise.

Those slopes can be mighty slippery.

The Twitter Files offered a preview of how quickly government officials can move from combatting misinformation to shaping public debate itself. The power to decide which outlets qualify as "real" journalism won't remain in the hands of today's regulators forever. Eventually it will belong to another administration with very different political priorities.

Conservatives, of all people, should understand that lesson. The power you give your friends today will eventually belong to your opponents.

More voices, not fewer. Even if some of those voices would make Cronkite spin like a top in his grave.