Jimmie Kimmel Show gone !

[KB5252]

I apologize. You are only bothered when someone lies and gaslights about dead people. That's your line and I missed it

Not what I said, I said it's especially egregious when someone does, that shouldn't be such a difficult concept to rationalize.

I can't believe I'm having to do this. Gaslighting someone over their choice in restaurant for cheap talking points is infinitely less egregious than gaslighting an assassinated man's consumers for cheap talking points.

Anywhere in between there is a wide gulf.

There, that should clear it up.

 

[BowlBrother85]

ABC pulled Jimmy Kimmel. Not the FCC. The narrative should be that viewers have had enough and not that the head of the FCC made a comment about looking into potential consequences (but no actual initiative enforcing regulations) when broadcasters are failing to operate in the public’s interest.

There is no "narrative." That is such an overused word.

We have facts. Not narratives. You can't get around FCC Chairman, Brendan Carr's not-so-veiled threat.

"We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take actions on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC to do." - Brendan Carr, FCC Chairman

^^^^ How is that comment from Trump's hand-picked FCC Chairman anything other than a coercive threat to either fire an employee, who was exercising his right to free speech, or face repercussions from the federal government? Kimmel's comments may have been in poor taste, but they were not illegal. He didn't even use profanity. You have the right to say things that are in poor taste. This is government infringement on free speech. It's overreach. There was a time when government overreach bothered Republicans. Trump has really changed some core Republican Party principles.

 

[OHvol40]

Yes, butthurt begets butthurt. What Kimmel did, purposely was a punk move.

That said, what Trump did in return was a punk move. But like I said petty begets petty.

Although not always effective (especially in younger years), I was raised to be better than pettiness. Hbu?

 

[UT_Dutchman]

got to ask... was user name "volfan102454" taken?

It could be a birthday??

 

[OHvol40]

That must be why you joined the conversation.

Opened the thread, read through it, and that was the first thing that came to my mind. A bunch of (mostly) grown adults, really trying to cope with their own inner anger… aka, a lot of butthurt in here.

 

[n_huffhines]

the Daily Beast has an interesting definition of "explicitly"

However, the clip in question, which comes from Monday night’s monologue on Jimmy Kimmel Live!, does not feature Kimmel “explicitly” characterizing Robinson as MAGA or Republican.

Kimmel actually says, “We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.”


how do they think that's not explicit?

Because it's not explicit. Saying "he is maga" would be explicit. He said their desire was to prove he's not maga so they could use it as fodder.

Maybe he is saying he is maga and I don't have enough context, but it's certainly not "explicit."

 

[lawgator1]

There is no "narrative." That is such an overused word.

We have facts. Not narratives. You can't get around FCC Chairman, Brendan Carr's not-so-veiled threat.

"We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take actions on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC to do." - Brendan Carr, FCC Chairman

^^^^ How is that comment from Trump's hand-picked FCC Chairman anything other than a coercive threat to either fire an employee, who was exercising his right to free speech, or face repercussions from the federal government? Kimmel's comments may have been in poor taste, but they were not illegal. He didn't even use profanity. You have the right to say things that are in poor taste. This is government infringement on free speech. It's overreach. There was a time when government overreach bothered Republicans. Trump has really changed some core Republican Party principles.

Hope Kimmel sues them into oblivion. Carr should be sued in his individual capacity.

 

[Rickyvol77]

I just don't get it. The right jokes about murdering people all the time, as recent as like yesterday talking about blowing up the boats. When Paul Pelosi was nearly murdered the right turned it into a huge joke and made gay jokes about it. The Fox News host said we should just flat out kill all the homeless people last week and STILL HAS A JOB. Why are we treating Kirk like he was some war hero patriot? No one said a word about the school shooting that happened the day Kirk was shot. Don't see any thread about the black kid they found hanging from a tree in Mississippi a few days ago.


The first amendment is crumbling. Free Press is dead. It's turning into bend the knee or get cancelled. Never though I'd say it but Tucker is right.

The black kid was a clear suicide. Why would anyone post about that?

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

There is no "narrative." That is such an overused word.

We have facts. Not narratives. You can't get around FCC Chairman, Brendan Carr's not-so-veiled threat.

"We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take actions on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC to do." - Brendan Carr, FCC Chairman

^^^^ How is that comment from Trump's hand-picked FCC Chairman anything other than a coercive threat to either fire an employee, who was exercising his right to free speech, or face repercussions from the federal government? Kimmel's comments may have been in poor taste, but they were not illegal. He didn't even use profanity. You have the right to say things that are in poor taste. This is government infringement on free speech. It's overreach. There was a time when government overreach bothered Republicans. Trump has really changed some core Republican Party principles.

The FCC would have additional work to do if Kimmel were to carry on. His entire program has been a partisan political sounding board. That’s not consistent with the intent of the equal-time rule. There’s also the public interest rule that Kimmel and the networks are probably violating. So it’s a fair comment to suggest that the FCC has ‘additional work to do”. Broadcasters have FA for a long time and now they’re finding out.

 

[BowlBrother85]

The FCC would have additional work to do if Kimmel were to carry on. His entire program has been a partisan political sounding board. That’s not consistent with the intent of the equal-time rule. There’s also the public interest rule that Kimmel and the networks are probably violating. So it’s a fair comment to suggest that the FCC has ‘additional work to do”. Broadcasters have FA for a long time and now they’re finding out.

You are confusing the Equal Time Rule with the Fairness Doctrine.

The Equal Time Rule is a federal law that applies to broadcasts involving political candidates. It is still in effect, but it doesn't apply to this situation.

The Fairness Doctrine was an FCC policy that required broadcasters to cover controversial issues of public importance and to provide a reasonable opportunity for opposing viewpoints. This policy would have applied to this situation, but it is no longer in effect. Presidential Ronald Reagan repealed it in 1987. That opened the door for politically partisan cable news networks to exist.

You also mentioned the Public Interest Rule. It's irrelevant to this matter.

 

[CAPTAIN--VOL CAVALRY]

Free Speech doesn't include outright lies, (like the lies that spewed from Kimmel's mouth Monday evening), anymore than the first amendment protects your right to scream FIRE in a crowded public place.

He wasn't practicing his 1st Amendment rights, he was lying thru his teeth to soothe his chapped arse and to appease his far left dwindling fan base.

These are the facts and can hardly be argued, well except by fools Dont be a fool

Word

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

You are confusing the Equal Time Rule with the Fairness Doctrine.

The Equal Time Rule is a federal law that applies to broadcasts involving political candidates. It is still in effect, but it doesn't apply to this situation.

The Fairness Doctrine was an FCC policy that required broadcasters to cover controversial issues of public importance and to provide a reasonable opportunity for opposing viewpoints. This policy would apply to this situation, but it is no longer in effect.

You also mentioned the Public Interest Rule. This generally refers to law-related work performed on behalf of individuals, organizations, or causes that would otherwise lack effective representation within the legal system. It's irrelevant to this matter.

No on both points.

I understand what the difference is. The equal time rule is something for the FCC to examine when the late night programming has in effect become little more than endless infomercials pushing a one sided agenda.

The public interest standard requires broadcasters to provide balanced programming. When the broadcasters devote hours of programming every night pushing the left’s agenda it’s unbalanced use of the public airwaves disguised as comedy. It’s also not in the public’s best interest to stir **** up with the divisive rhetoric decrying nazism, fascism, racism, dictatorship and all of the other nonsense that is being spewed.

Both are suitable matters for the FCC to “do additional work” on.

It’s an easy observation. The liberals and the left have pushed it too far and now there’s a response that they’re crying about.

 

[midnight orange]

That’s exactly what happened.
Good excuse to cut a dead weight high salary

Small podcasts get better numbers for low to no cost.

 

[rekinhavoc]

I do find this interesting.

He is a grade A douche. Conservative media constantly give him relevance by posting the things he says in poor taste. Same with the View.
Very small audience that watches both shows. Conservative media reporting on their asinine takes is for clicks. Alex Jones (also a grade A douche) benefitted from the liberal media doing the same.
I'm guilty of posting crap they say. Some of it is terrible.

What is the answer? I believe in free speech and free consequences for what you say.

 

[BowlBrother85]

No on both points.

I understand what the difference is. The equal time rule is something for the FCC to examine when the late night programming has in effect become little more than endless infomercials pushing a one sided agenda.

The public interest standard requires broadcasters to provide balanced programming. When the broadcasters devote hours of programming every night pushing the left’s agenda it’s unbalanced use of the public airwaves disguised as comedy. It’s also not in the public’s best interest to stir **** up with the divisive rhetoric decrying nazism, fascism, racism, dictatorship and all of the other nonsense that is being spewed.

Both are suitable matters for the FCC to “do additional work” on.

It’s an easy observation. The liberals and the left have pushed it too far and now there’s a response that they’re crying about.

Equal Time Rule

The federal equal time rule requires broadcasters to treat political candidates equally in terms of air time. Some see the rule as a violation of First Amendment rights.

firstamendment.mtsu.edu

^^^^ This is the Equal Time Rule. ^^^^ You should look through it. It has NOTHING to do with what you are talking about. The Equal Time provision is a regulation in the United States that governs political broadcasting, administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). It mandates that broadcasters must offer equal opportunities for all political candidates to present their views.

I think you are referring to the Public Interest rule within the Communications Act of 1934. You threw me off when you called it the Public Interest Law ... but you are still wrong.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Free Speech doesn't include outright lies, (like the lies that spewed from Kimmel's mouth Monday evening), anymore than the first amendment protects your right to scream FIRE in a crowded public place.

He wasn't practicing his 1st Amendment rights, he was lying thru his teeth to soothe his chapped arse and to appease his far left dwindling fan base.

These are the facts and can hardly be argued, well except by fools Dont be a fool

Word

The Supreme Court has ruled that in many cases ... the 1st Amendment does cover deliberate lies. Basically, it depends on what was said.

 

[Sandman 423]

It is almost like they were looking for a reason to get rid oh his show. 1.1-1..8 million viewers for a show that cost over 100 million a year to produce losing Disney 60 million a year.

 

[appvol]

Just wondering what’s the difference from ABC letting Kimmel go and Fox letting Carlson go.

 

[FLVOL_79]

The reverse cancel culture all time backfires from the Kirk shooting on the lib's has been pretty amazing. Kind of reminds me of this:

 

[FLVOL_79]

It is almost like they were looking for a reason to get rid oh his show. 1.1-1..8 million viewers for a show that cost over 100 million a year to produce losing Disney 60 million a year.

Lots of people don't think of consequences of their actions and what type of climate they live/work in. For example I am a Fed. I have federal employees, right now, still demanding to telework or not work certain shifts because of a myriad of "medical conditions". When this happens we usually try to find them another job (often lower paying). We can't hire anyone right now so there are no available jobs. I've removed every one of these fools except the ones who "miraculously healed" once they got their notice of removal.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Just wondering what’s the difference from ABC letting Kimmel go and Fox letting Carlson go.

The FCC Chairman in 2023 (I have no idea who it was), didn't publicly threaten Fox News as Brendan Carr did to ABC.

 

[Tin Man]

I’ve never cared for Jimmy Kimmel’s acid-tongued humor and didn’t/don’t watch his show.

Previously, Kimmel had decried the murder of Charlie Kirk and expressed sympathy and prayers for his family.

Jimmy’s spiel about Trump administration members’ attempts to spin Kirk’s accused murderer as representative of a broader left-wing terror campaign included a “stinger” that the accused was more like the Trump administration members. This was weak and as off the mark as any attempt to spin the actions of the accused as representative of a broader left-wing terror campaign. There’s really no issue here other than poor taste.

There is an issue with Trump appointee, Brendan Carr threatening action by the FCC against the network and its affiliates if they did not cease broadcasting Jimmy Kimmel’s show for the sin of affronting members of the Trump administration. A bigger issue would be actions by the FCC to make good on that threat.

Feel free to make arguments about the threat of FCC action influencing the network choosing to suspend Kimmel’s show and some affiliate’s refusal to air any more episodes, but, bottom line, it is a business decision. Without any actual action by the FCC, it remains a business decision.

 

[hog88]

Hope Kimmel sues them into oblivion. Carr should be sued in his individual capacity.

I agree with you on this.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Equal Time Rule

The federal equal time rule requires broadcasters to treat political candidates equally in terms of air time. Some see the rule as a violation of First Amendment rights.

firstamendment.mtsu.edu

^^^^ This is the Equal Time Rule. ^^^^ You should look through it. It has NOTHING to do with what you are talking about. The Equal Time provision is a regulation in the United States that governs political broadcasting, administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). It mandates that broadcasters must offer equal opportunities for all political candidates to present their views.

I think you are referring to the Public Interest rule within the Communications Act of 1934. You threw me off when you called it the Public Interest Law ... but you are still wrong.

“The same stipulation applies to free air time. Although many argue that the equal time rule is a reasonable means to regulate the public airwaves and prevent broadcasters from using their media power to promote a particular candidate,”

So it’s reasonable for the FCC to “do additional work” on (my original point). Kimmel, Fallon, and Colbert have evolved into de facto infomercials for the DNC.

 

[LadyVolette]

“The same stipulation applies to free air time. Although many argue that the equal time rule is a reasonable means to regulate the public airwaves and prevent broadcasters from using their media power to promote a particular candidate,”

So it’s reasonable for the FCC to “do additional work” on (my original point). Kimmel, Fallon, and Colbert have evolved into de facto infomercials for the DNC.

Fallon didn’t start out being that way, to be fair, I’m not sure what happened.. he was the only late night I kind of watched here and there.. never watched Kimmel or Colbert because I couldn’t stand their smug little personalities.. politics aside