ReportWire

Tag: FCC

  • 60 years ago, Ayn Rand denounced FCC censorship. Brendan Carr should listen.

    Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr has received much criticism after appearing to pressure broadcast channels to take Jimmy Kimmel off the air following the comedian’s misinformed monologue about the motivations of Charlie Kirk’s alleged killer. Republican Sens. Rand Paul (R–Ky.), Ted Cruz (R–Texas), and Dave McCormick (R–Pa.), all chastised Carr for seemingly using his position to steer the editorial decisions of private companies—a serious breach of free speech principles.

    Carr is not without his defenders, however. Nathan Leamer, tech policy expert and advisor to former FCC Chair Ajit Pai, asserts that Carr’s actions fall squarely within his duty to promote the “public interest” on television, as defined by the Communications Act of 1934. He also assails “libertarians” in particular for not caring about how the FCC works (his words), and suggests that such skeptics are incorrectly or selectively railing against the public interest standard in the Kimmel case.

    But of course, libertarians have been warning that broad interpretations of the public interest standard will empower the FCC to engage in censorship for decades. Just ask Ayn Rand.

    In 1962, Rand penned a prophetic warning about the public interest standard, which then FCC Chair Newton Minow was citing as justification for pressuring television companies to create more educational programming. Minow famously railed against a supposedly “vast wasteland” of shoddy television shows, and claimed that the FCC’s charter empowered him to push for editorial changes to the medium that would align with his view of the public interest.

    “You must provide a wider range of choices, more diversity, more alternatives,” said Minow in his well-remembered 1961 speech. “It is not enough to cater to the nation’s whims; you must also serve the nation’s needs.”

    Minow repeatedly claimed that he was not in favor of government censorship, and was not trying to tell broadcasters what they could and could not say. Rather, he charged them to make nebulous and ill-defined improvements to the product that he believed would be better appreciated by the American public—i.e., the public interest.

    And that’s precisely what Rand disliked about his approach. Her essay, “Have Gun, Will Nudge,” published in The Objectivist Newsletter in March 1962, makes clear her disdain not just for abject censorship, but also for a reality in which the FCC chair makes vague statements regarding the actions that private actors should or should not take.

    “It is true, as Mr. Minow assures us, that he does not propose to establish censorship; what he proposes is much worse,” she wrote. She continued:

    Censorship, in its old-fashioned meaning, is a government edict that forbids the discussion of some specific subjects or ideas—such, for instance, as sex, religion or criticism of government officials—an edict enforced by the government’s scrutiny of all forms of communication prior to their public release. But for stifling the freedom of men’s minds the modern method is much more potent; it rests on the power of non-objective law; it neither forbids nor permits anything; it never defines or specifies; it merely delivers men’s lives, fortunes, careers, ambitions into the arbitrary power of a bureaucrat who can reward or punish at whim. It spares the bureaucrat the troublesome necessity of committing himself to rigid rules—and it places upon the victims the burden of discovering how to please him, with a fluid unknowable as their only guide.

    No, a federal commissioner may never utter a single word for or against any program. But what do you suppose will happen if and when, with or without his knowledge, a third-assistant or a second cousin or just a nameless friend from Washington whispers to a television executive that the commissioner does not like producer X or does not approve of writer Y or takes a great interest in the career of starlet Z or is anxious to advance the cause of the United Nations?

    What makes it possible to bring a free country down to such a level? If you doubt the connection between altruism and statism, I suggest that you count how many times—in the current articles, speeches, debates and hearings—there appeared the magic formula which makes all such outrages possible: “The Public Interest.”

    The title of the essay was inspired by Rand’s contention that a man who holds a gun to your head and demands your wallet is surely deploying impermissible force rather than mere encouragement. When the FCC chair proclaims that a private company can “do this the easy way or the hard way,” he is providing a similar kind of nudge.

    Robby Soave

    Source link

  • Jimmy Kimmel’s show set to return on Tuesday

    (CNN) — “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” will return to air on ABC on Tuesday night, the network announced in a statement.

    “Last Wednesday, we made the decision to suspend production on the show to avoid further inflaming a tense situation at an emotional moment for our country,” a spokesperson for the Walt Disney Company, which owns ABC, said in a statement to CNN. “It is a decision we made because we felt some of the comments were ill-timed and thus insensitive. We have spent the last days having thoughtful conversations with Jimmy, and after those conversations, we reached the decision to return the show on Tuesday.”

    “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” was abruptly and indefinitely taken off the air last week after Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr and networks of affiliate stations owned by Sinclair and Nexstar threatened ABC over comments Kimmel made in a monologue about the MAGA movement’s response to Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

    The move sparked a national debate about government interference and freedom speech between supporters of President Donald Trump’s administration and Kimmel, who have been vocally critically of each other over the years.

    Before news of his pending return on Monday, more than 400 artists, including Tom Hanks, Meryl Streep and Jennifer Aniston, signed an open letter, organized by the ACLU, in support of Kimmel.

    There were organized protests against Disney outside of the company’s offices in New York and Burbank, California over the past week, as well as outside the theater where Kimmel’s show is recorded in Hollywood.

    Media analysts have watched as Disney CEO Bob Iger and Disney Entertainment co-chairman Dana Walden have navigated competing pressures. Disney needs government approval for pending deals like ESPN’s pact with the NFL, while many of its station partners are in the same boat. Additionally, Kimmel’s contract is expiring in May and late-night TV audiences and revenue have been on decline.

    Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Kolvet is keeping the pressure on station owners: “Disney and ABC caving and allowing Kimmel back on the air is not surprising, but it’s their mistake to make. Nextstar and Sinclair do not have to make the same choice.”

    Still, Kimmel’s sudden suspension sent shock waves through the entertainment industry, where the comedian and long-time host is well-regarded, both inside and outside ABC.

    His show employs between 200 and 250 people. During the WGA strike, which shut down Hollywood productions in 2023, Kimmel provided funds for his crew when production on his show was halted. When production was shut down again during wildfires in Los Angeles early this year, the show’s backlot was used as a donation center to collect and distribute resources to those impacted by the disaster.

    Kimmel has not yet publicly commented on the controversy, but presumably will on his show Tuesday night.

    CNN has reached out to representatives of the late-night host, Sinclair Broadcast Group and Nexstar for comment.

    Editor’s note: CNN’s David Goldman and Lisa Respers France contributed to this story.

    Elizabeth Wagmeister, Brian Stelter and CNN

    Source link

  • Opinion: Even Sen. Ted Cruz Thinks FCC Went Too Far with Kimmel

    On Friday, Houston’s own Sen. Ted Cruz took to his podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz, to denounce Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr’s overt call to push late night host Jimmy Kimmel off the air and his threats to pull ABC’s broadcast license.

    “I think it is unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in the position of saying we’re going to decide what speech we like and what we don’t, and we’re going to threaten to take you off the air if we don’t like what you’re saying,” Cruz said, noting, with a surprisingly fun movie mobster accent, that Carr was acting like he’d wandered out of Goodfellas.

    And just like that, Cruz, the vaunted Constitutional law expert best known these days for taking poorly politically timed vacations and sometimes staggeringly pragmatic and politically expedient stances that seem to fly in the face of all of that Constitutional expertise, found that there is, in fact, a line he’d rather not cross.

    It (possibly, maybe) had to happen eventually.

    So how did we get here? Well, in case you’ve been on a distant tropical island without any cell signal, this all started on Monday when Kimmel pointed out in his opening monologue for Jimmy Kimmel Live! that MAGA conservatives had spent the weekend “trying to score political points” off Kirk’s death by insisting Kirk’s alleged assassin Tyler Robinson was not one of their own. (Kimmel recorded his monologue before Utah officials issued more information about the suspect and his background.)

    Conservative media began whipping itself up into a frenzy over these comments. The late-night host reportedly planned to clarify his statement on his Wednesday night show, but he never got the chance.

    Earlier that day FCC Chairman Carr was asked about the FCC’s stance on Kimmel’s comments during an appearance on far-right podcaster Benny Johnson’s show. Carr decried the comments, calling Kimmel’s monologue “some of the sickest conduct possible” which does make one wonder what all of today’s modern media Carr has been exposed to. He then went further, criticizing ABC and its parent company Disney for not reprimanding Kimmel, noting that he “could certainly see a path forward for suspension on this” and that the FCC has “remedies we can look at.”

    And then he made himself clearer, Goodfellas-style, though without the use of a fun movie mobster accent.
    “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said. “These companies can find ways to take action on Kimmel or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

    After that two of ABC’s largest affiliates, Sinclair and Nexstar, both eyeing large mergers that will need FCC approval, announced they wouldn’t run Kimmel’s show and by Wednesday evening ABC had shelved Kimmel indefinitely.

    So, here’s where things get interesting.

    The Lone Star State’s junior senator isn’t the guy you think of these days when looking for an example of political bravery, a politician with the true courage of his convictions. He’s the guy who spoke out eloquently against then-candidate Donald Trump’s rise in at the 2016 GOP National Convention, before quickly changing his tune when his speech was meant with vehement boos from an irate Republican audience. And he hasn’t blinked since.

    Even as Trump has made fun of Cruz’s wife, accused his father of being involved in the JFK assassination. Even in the face of MAGA supporters storming the U.S. Capital Building and the stacks of criminal charges and convictions. Even as Trump has issued a slew of executive actions that essentially seem to divest Congress of Constitutionally mandated powers, the powers that Cruz and his coworkers are supposed to be wielding on behalf of the millions of constituents who sent them there.

    But on Friday, Cruz spoke out against the FCC chairman’s actions.

    “I hate what Jimmy Kimmel said. I am thrilled that he was fired,” Cruz said. (Note: Cruz isn’t quite accurate here. Kimmel’s show has been shelved but he has not reportedly been fired.) “But, let me tell you, if the government gets in the business of saying, ‘We don’t like what you, the media, have said. We’re going to ban you from the airwaves if you don’t say what we like’ that will end up bad for conservatives.”

    And he went further from there. “I hate what Jimmy Kimmel said. I am thrilled that he was fired,” Cruz said. But, let me tell you, if the government gets in the business of saying, ‘We don’t like what you, the media, have said. We’re going to ban you from the airwaves if you don’t say what we like’ that will end up bad for conservatives.”

    “Going down this road, there will come a time when a Democrat wins again, wins the White House,” he warned. “They will silence us. They will use this power and they will use it ruthlessly. And that is dangerous.”

    Even as President Donald Trump has been vocal in his praise and support of Carr’s actions, Cruz hasn’t – at least as of this moment – walked his statements back.

    And keep in mind, Cruz has not maintained his seat since 2012 because of his charisma and charm. (Former President George W. Bush told donors, “I just don’t like the guy.” U.S. Sen. Lindsay Graham once stated that if someone took Cruz out on the Senate floor the Senate wouldn’t convict. Former GOP House Speaker John Boehner called him “Lucifer incarnate.” Former Sen. Al Franken, a Democrat, wrote in his memoir, “I like Ted Cruz more than my other colleagues like Ted Cruz. And I hate Ted Cruz.”)

    Instead of being likable, Cruz has another set of skills. Specifically, his 2016 GOP Convention debacle aside, Cruz seems to have an almost unerring ability to put a finger to political winds, read political tea leaves and then to, well, thread a political needle that always has him exactly in line with his donors and his constituents.

    Thus, while it’s possible that all of this has hit some tripwire in his Constitutional scholar’s mind that requires him to take a stand, it’s potentially a much more interesting shift, carefully worded, and carefully framed, for Cruz.

    In fact, when NBC News asked Cruz, who is Republican chairman of the Commerce Committee, which oversees the FCC, if Cruz would do as Senate Democrats have requested and call Carr before the committee for a hearing on this incident, Cruz didn’t say hell, yes. But he also explicitly did not say no, telling NBC, “We will certainly engage in oversight of all of the agencies within the committee’s jurisdiction.”

    So far, Cruz has garnered a smattering of support from his fellow Republicans, with U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, of Texas and Pennsylvania Republican Sen. David McCormick speaking out in support. Cruz is also in line with a contingent of the conservative podcaster manosphere, many of whom have taken issue with Kimmel being pushed off the air, noting concerns about how this potentially violates First Amendment rights of free speech.

    Cruz cites the same concerns in his podcast episode, pointing out that this is the kind of thing that the GOP could bitterly regret someday.

    “Going down this road, there will come a time when a Democrat wins again, wins the White House,” he warned. “They will silence us. They will use this power and they will use it ruthlessly. And that is dangerous.”

    Meanwhile Trump has continued to celebrate Carr’s actions, noting that since, in his view, most TV broadcasters give him and his administration negative coverage “I would think maybe their license should be taken away.”

    Dianna Wray

    Source link

  • The FCC’s Involvement in Canceling Jimmy Kimmel Was ‘Unbelievably Dangerous,’ Ted Cruz Says

    Sen. Ted Cruz (R–Texas) is happy that ABC decided to indefinitely suspend Jimmy Kimmel’s talk show. But like Fox News political analyst Brit Hume, Cruz is not happy about the role that Brendan Carr, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), played in that decision. By threatening TV stations that carried Jimmy Kimmel Live! with fines and license revocation, Cruz warned in his podcast on Friday, Carr set a dangerous precedent that could invite similar treatment of conservative speech under a future administration.

    “I hate what Jimmy Kimmel said,” Cruz declared, referring to the September 15 monologue in which the late-night comedian erroneously suggested that Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old man accused of assassinating conservative activist Charlie Kirk at a college in Utah five days earlier, was part of the MAGA movement. “I am thrilled that he was fired. But let me tell you: If the government gets in the business of saying, ‘We don’t like what you, the media, have said; we’re going to ban you from the airwaves if you don’t say what we like,’ that will end up bad for conservatives.”

    In an interview with right-wing podcaster Benny Johnson on Wednesday, Carr warned that there are “actions we can take on licensed broadcasters” that dared to air Kimmel’s show, including “fines or license revocations.” He added that “we can do this the easy way or the hard way.” Either “these companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel,” he said, “or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

    Hours later, Nexstar, which owns 32 ABC affiliate stations, announced that it would preempt Jimmy Kimmel Live! “for the foreseeable future beginning with tonight’s show.” Sinclair, which owns 38 ABC affiliates, likewise said it would “indefinitely preempt” Jimmy Kimmel Live! beginning that night. ABC, which produces the programming aired by those affiliates and owns eight of the network’s stations, fell in line the same night, saying it would “indefinitely” suspend the show.

    Cruz likened Carr to a mafioso. “He says, ‘We can do this the easy way, or we can do this the hard way,’” the senator noted. “And I got to say, that’s right out of Goodfellas. That’s right out of a mafioso coming into a bar [and] going, ‘Nice bar you have here. It’d be a shame if something happened to it.’”

    In fact, Carr’s threat was more explicit than that. “This sort of status quo is obviously not acceptable,” he declared, saying it was “past time” for “these licensed broadcasters” to say, “Listen, we are going to preempt, we are not going to run, Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out, because we licensed broadcaster[s] are running the possibility of fines or license revocations from the FCC if we continue to run content that ends up being a pattern of news distortion.”

    That rationale for punishing stations that carried Kimmel’s show was absurd on its face. The policy to which Carr alluded applies to a “broadcast news report” that was “deliberately intended to mislead viewers or listeners” about “a significant event.” While Kimmel’s remarks were certainly misinformed, it is doubtful that he intended to “mislead viewers.” It seems more plausible that he committed to a partisan narrative without bothering to ask whether it was supported by the facts, an example of carelessness rather than deliberate deceit. But whatever you think of Kimmel’s intent, a comedian’s monologue is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a “broadcast news report.”

    By abusing his power to exert pressure on ABC and its affiliates, Cruz said, Carr was setting an example that Democrats are apt to copy. “Going down this road, there will come a time when a Democrat…wins the White House,” the senator said, and “they will silence us. They will use this power, and they will use it ruthlessly. And that is dangerous.”

    Although “it might feel good right now to threaten Jimmy Kimmel,” Cruz said, “when it is used to silence every conservative in America, we will regret it….It is unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in the position of saying, ‘We’re going to decide what speech we like and what we don’t, and we’re going to threaten to take you off air if we don’t like what you’re saying.’”

    Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) agreed that Carr’s involvement in kiboshing Kimmel was “absolutely inappropriate.” The FCC’s chairman “has got no business weighing in on this,” Paul said on Sunday’s edition of Meet the Press. “If you’re losing money, you can be fired. But the government’s got no business in it. And the FCC was wrong to weigh in. And I’ll fight any attempt by the government to get involved with speech.”

    Conservative podcaster Tucker Carlson perceives a similar danger in Attorney General Pam Bondi’s response to online commentary that celebrated Kirk’s murder or justified violence against conservatives more generally. “We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech,” Bondi said last week, erroneously asserting a constitutional distinction between “free speech” and “hate speech.” She later claimed she had in mind “threats of violence that individuals incite against others.” But the speech that offended Bondi generally would not meet the First Amendment test that the Supreme Court established in the 1969 case Brandenburg v. Ohio, which requires advocacy that is both “directed” at inciting “imminent lawless action” and “likely” to have that effect.

    “This is the attorney general of the United States, the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, telling you that there is this other category…called hate speech,” Carlson remarked on his show last Wednesday. “And of course, the implication is that’s a crime. There’s no sentence that Charlie Kirk would have objected to more than that.”

    With good reason, Carlson said: “You hope that a year from now, the turmoil we’re seeing in the aftermath of his murder won’t be leveraged to bring hate speech laws to this country. And trust me, if it is, if that does happen, there is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience than that, ever. And there never will be. Because if they can tell you what to say, they’re telling you what to think.”

    It is encouraging that at least some of President Donald Trump’s allies recognize that freedom of speech is unreliable unless it protects their political opponents. But Trump himself seems oblivious to that point. When asked about Cruz’s criticism of Carr on Friday, Trump described the FCC chairman as “a great American patriot,” adding, “I disagree with Ted Cruz on that.”

    Of course he does. For years, Trump has been eager to wield the FCC’s powers against broadcasters who air programming that offends him. During Trump’s first administration, he averred that “network news has become so partisan, distorted and fake that licenses must be challenged and, if appropriate, revoked.” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai rejected that suggestion in no uncertain terms. “I believe in the First Amendment,” he said. “The FCC under my leadership will stand for the First Amendment, and under the law the FCC does not have the authority to revoke a license of a broadcast station based on the content of a particular newscast.”

    Trump’s views on the subject have not changed. Last week, he cheered Kimmel’s suspension as “Great News for America” and urged NBC to fire Jimmy Fallon and Seth Meyers, two other late-night comedians who are often critical of him. “Do it NBC!!!” he demanded. In case there was any doubt that Trump was not merely offering advice as a businessman or TV critic, he signed that Truth Social missive “President DJT” and later clarified the underlying threat. “You have a network and you have evening shows, and all they do is hit Trump,” he complained to reporters. “It’s all they do….They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.” When network newscasts “take a great story” and “make it bad,” he averred, “that’s really illegal.”

    The difference this time around is that the FCC’s Trump-appointed chairman, an avowed free speech champion, has no constitutional compunction about using his powers to bully broadcasters into submission. “They give me only bad publicity or press,” Trump said on Thursday. “I mean, they’re getting a license. I would think maybe their license should be taken away. It will be up to Brendan Carr.”

    Jacob Sullum

    Source link

  • Video: Trump Escalates Attack on Free Speech

    new video loaded: Trump Escalates Attack on Free Speech

    By Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Christina Thornell and David Seekamp•

    Zolan Kanno-Youngs, a White House correspondent for The New York Times, describes how the Trump administration’s pressuring of ABC to take action against Jimmy Kimmel is part of a broader crackdown by the administration since the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

    Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Christina Thornell and David Seekamp

    Source link

  • Elon Musk resurfaces Harris’s old call to suspend Trump from Twitter platform amid Kimmel controversy

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Elon Musk resurfaced former Vice President and former Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’ years-old call for President Donald Trump’s ban from social media as she claims “free speech” concerns over Jimmy Kimmel being pulled off the air.

    Harris has weighed in on Disney’s decision to pull ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” off the air “indefinitely,” defending Kimmel and slamming what she calls an “outright abuse of power” by the Trump administration.

    “What we are witnessing is an outright abuse of power. This administration is attacking critics and using fear as a weapon to silence anyone who would speak out. Media corporations — from television networks to newspapers — are capitulating to these threats,” Harris wrote on X about Kimmel’s suspension. “We cannot dare to be silent or complacent in the face of this frontal assault on free speech. We, the people, deserve better.”

    Many X users, including Musk, the platform’s owner, were quick to point out Harris’ own past statements, some suggested they appeared to support censorship.

    Musk resurfaced a 2019 tweet by Harris when Trump was serving his first time. Harris, a U.S. senator representing California at the time, was running for vice president when she made the post on X, now Twitter. 

    “Look let’s be honest, @realDonaldTrump’s Twitter account should be suspended,” Harris wrote on Sept. 30, 2019. 

    DISNEY’S JIMMY KIMMEL BENCHING PROMPTS CELEBRATION, BUT ALSO CAUTION, FROM CONSERVATIVES

    Jimmy Kimmel, left, was pulled from ABC over his remarks on Charlie Kirk. (Melissa Majchrzak/AFP via Getty Images; Michael Le Brecht/Disney via Getty Images)

    Musk re-posted the message on Friday, adding a thinking face emoji. 

    Kimmel’s show was pulled after he accused conservatives of reaching “new lows” in trying to pin a left-wing ideology on Tyler Robinson, who is accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk, even though prosecutors reaffirmed those ties in an indictment.

    “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,” Kimmel said, sparking outrage.

    There have been several questions about the role the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) played in the suspension. Those questioning the move are on both sides of the aisle, with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, warning conservatives that they “will regret” setting the precedent.

    “What he is saying is Jimmy Kimmel was lying. That’s true, he was lying, and lying to the American people is not in the public interest,” Cruz said on an episode of his podcast. “He threatens explicitly — we’re going to cancel ABC News’ license. We’re going to take him off the air, so ABC cannot broadcast anymore … He threatens it.”

    CRUZ WARNS CONSERVATIVES ‘WILL REGRET’ FCC CENSORSHIP PUSH AGAINST ABC, OTHER MEDIA OUTLETS

    Protesters outside Walt Disney Studios

    Around 200 protesters lined up outside of Walt Disney Studios in Burbank, California to rail against Disney’s suspension of ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Thursday evening. (Christina House / Getty)

    FCC Chairman Brendan Carr joined Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Sept. 17, the day the suspension was announced, and defended the move.

    “Broadcasters are different than any other form of communication,” Carr said, pointing to affiliate groups like Nexstar and Sinclair that announced they would no longer carry “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” He argued that local stations acted appropriately, saying they were “standing up to serve the interests of their community.” 

    “Over the years, the FCC walked away from enforcing that public interest obligation,” Carr said. “I don’t think we’re better off as a country for it.”

    FCC CHAIR BRENDAN CARR DEFENDS ABC AFFILIATES PULLING JIMMY KIMMEL SHOW AFTER MONOLOGUE ABOUT CHARLIE KIRK

    Former VP Kamala Harris, Jimmy Kimmel, Elon Musk

    Elon Musk resurfaced a 2019 tweet in which then-Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., urged Twitter to take down President Donald Trump’s account. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images; Randy Holmes/ABC via Getty Images; Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

    White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News on Saturday that the decision to “fire Jimmy Kimmel and to cancel his show came from executives at ABC.”

    “That has now been reported,” Leavitt said. “And I can assure you it did not come from the White House and there was no pressure given from the president of the United States.” 

    The Biden-Harris administration has seen its share of censorship controversies, particularly in its interactions with social media companies during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

    During a 2021 press conference, then-White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that the administration was “flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.”

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    In August 2024, just ahead of the presidential election, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted in a letter that the Biden-Harris administration pressured Facebook to censor Americans.

    Zuckerberg made the admission in a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, more than a year after providing the committee with thousands of documents as part of its investigation into content moderation on online platforms.

    Fox News Digital’s Greg Wehner contributed to this report.

    Rachel Wolf is a breaking news writer for Fox News Digital and FOX Business.

    Source link

  • Jimmy Kimmel and Disney Begin Talks to Revive His Show

    A lot’s happened in the two days since Disney indefinitely paused Jimmy Kimmel Live, but the two parties may be on the path to reconciliation.

    According to a Friday report from Variety, Kimmel’s legal and business representatives are “deep in discussions” with ABC to bring the show back, or at the very least, find a compromise to allow the show’s return. Kimmel himself has been silent since his show was shelved after Nexstar, one of the biggest TV station owners in the U.S., vowed to pre-empt airings and Sinclair, another equally big station owner, threatened to take the late night series off its stations entirely.

    Both companies were spurred to halt Jimmy Kimmel Live after FCC chairman Brendan Carr threatened to take action against ABC for Kimmel’s comments on the death of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, where he said conservatives were using the death (and the subsequent capture of Kirk’s alleged killer, Tyler Robinson) to gain political points. Nexstar’s currently in a bid to acquire fellow TV station owner Tegna, which requires FCC approval, something Nexstar insists had no bearing on its decision. Sinclair, meanwhile, had a list of demands before allowing Kimmel back on its stations, including a public apology and personal donation to both Kirk’s family and Turning Point USA, his organization now run by his widow, Erika.

    Variety’s report notes Kimmel is aware of the effect this shutdown has on his staff, some of which remain impacted by the 2023-2024 Hollywood strikes. Deadline separately reported the show’s crew will be paid next week, a potential sign of where things are headed. Nothing is set in stone yet, though Kimmel remains employed by Disney as the host of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? and other projects, which will likely be impacted by the Live decision.

    Regardless of which way the wind blows, the pause of Kimmel’s show has spurred a wave of reactions. While conservatives have cheered the show’s currently indefinite hiatus, there’ve been protests in recent days in front of Disney’s New York and Burbank offices, and in front of the theater where the show is filmed. Several actors and creators who’ve previously worked with Disney have come out in support of Kimmel, and Andor writer Dan Gilroy penned a short Deadline column condemning Disney’s actions, while former CEO Michael Eisner called out current head Bob Iger for succumbing to the FCC’s “out of control intimidation.” There’s also been a wave of cancelled Disney+ subscriptions and those for other affiliated networks.

    io9 will continue covering the Jimmy Kimmel situation as it develops.

    Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

    Justin Carter

    Source link

  • Cruz warns conservatives ‘will regret’ FCC censorship push against ABC, other media outlets

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, in his podcast “Verdict with Ted Cruz” on Friday cautioned those advocating for Federal Communication Commission (FCC) action against adversaries, noting if a censorship precedent is set, “every conservative in America … will regret it.”

    ABC suspended late-night host Jimmy Kimmel “indefinitely” after he said the alleged assassin of Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk was a fellow MAGA supporter.

    Kimmel failed to set the record straight after the indictment against suspect Tyler Robinson was made public on Tuesday, prompting a response from Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr, who told Fox News’ Sean Hannity the agency plans to reinvigorate enforcement of the public interest obligation.

    DAVID MARCUS: FCC ISN’T ‘GOING AFTER’ ABC, IT’S PROTECTING PUBLIC AIRWAVES

    Sen. Ted Cruz said it would be a mistake for the FCC to ramp up action against television stations. (Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

    The FCC grants broadcast licenses on the condition that stations serve the “public interest, convenience, and necessity.” 

    Though the First Amendment protects free speech, the agency can revoke or deny license renewal if there is misrepresentation, fraud or lack of character or candor.

    In Cruz’s podcast on Friday, he questioned Carr’s decision to crack down on stations accused of misrepresentation or false statements, claiming “what he said there is dangerous as hell.”

    “What he is saying is Jimmy Kimmel was lying. That’s true, he was lying, and lying to the American people is not in the public interest,” Cruz said. “He threatens explicitly—we’re going to cancel ABC News’ license. We’re going to take him off the air, so ABC cannot broadcast anymore. … He threatens it.”

    Donald Trump on Jimmy Kimmel Live

    Jimmy Kimmel was pulled off-air after making comments about late Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk. (Randy Holmes/Disney General Entertainment Content via Getty Image)

    ABC INSIDER HOPES LIBERALS TAKE THIS LESSON AWAY FROM JIMMY KIMMEL SAGA

    Cruz compared Carr’s wording to something “right out of Goodfellas.”

    “Jimmy Kimmel has mocked me so many times,” he said. “The corporate media—they are dishonest. They are liars. I hate what Jimmy Kimmel said. I am thrilled that he was fired. But let me tell you, if the government gets in the business of saying ‘we don’t like what you, the media, have said, we’re going to ban you from the airwaves’ … that will end up bad for conservatives.”

    He added it may be “attractive” to conservatives to feel that they have the governmental power to ban the media, but going down that road, would hurt them when a Democrat takes back the White House.

    “The next Democrat FCC—they will silence us,” Cruz said. “They will use this power, and they will use it ruthlessly, and that is dangerous. … They’ve defined anything counter to the leftist narrative as misinformation.”

    Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz

    Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, noted he has faced media scrutiny of his own, but said issues can be resolved in civil court. (AP Photo/Michael Wyke)

    Cruz argued that if a station commits slander related to Kirk or his family, there is already a remedy.

    He suggested suing stations for defamation and “let[ting] the process play out.”

    “I think it is unbelievably dangerous for [the] government to put itself in the position of saying, ‘We’re going to decide what speech we like and what we don’t, and we’re going to threaten to take you off-air if we don’t like what you’re saying,” Cruz said. “It might feel good right now to threaten Jimmy Kimmel, but when it is used to silence every conservative in America, we will regret it. 

    “So again, I like Brendan Carr, but we should not be in this business. We should denounce it. It’s fine to say what Jimmy Kimmel said was deplorable. It was disgraceful, and he should be off-air, but we shouldn’t be threatening government power to force him off-air. That’s a real mistake.”

    FCC CHAIR BRENDAN CARR DEFENDS ABC AFFILIATES PULLING JIMMY KIMMEL SHOW AFTER MONOLOGUE MOCKING CHARLIE KIRK

    During a news conference in the White House Oval Office on Friday, President Donald Trump said he did not agree with Cruz’s assertion, describing Carr as “courageous.”

    “I think Brendan Carr is an incredible American patriot with courage,” Trump said. “I remember in the old days, networks would want to get re-licensed, it was always a big deal. They had to show honesty and integrity. … I think Brendan Carr doesn’t like to see the airwaves be used illegally and incorrectly—and purposely, horribly. [He] doesn’t like to see a person that won the election in a landslide get 97% bad publicity before the election. I mean, it’s amazing that I won the election … The people have given the networks no credibility.”

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    During the Biden administration, a nonprofit called the Media and Democracy Project filed a 2023 petition with the FCC asking that the license renewal of a Fox-owned local station in Philadelphia be denied, citing Fox’s election-related coverage.

    The FCC, under then-Chair Jessica Rosenworcel, rejected the petition on Jan. 16, four days before Trump assumed office for his second term, noting it would be “fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment” for the government to deny renewals based on protected speech and content, according to court documents.

    Cruz’s office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

    Fox News Digital’s Jasmine Baehr contributed to this report.

    Alexandra Koch is a Fox News Digital journalist who covers breaking news, with a focus on high-impact events that shape national conversation.

    She has covered major national crises, including the L.A. wildfires, Potomac and Hudson River aviation disasters, Boulder terror attack, and Texas Hill Country floods.

    Source link

  • Disney Faces Protests in Burbank After Jimmy Kimmel Suspension

    As the late-night TV host is indefinitely suspended, many are fighting back

    Jimmy Kimmel on August 7
    Credit: Los Angeles file photo

    After ABC indefinitely pulled Jimmy Kimmel Live! from the air, hundreds answered a last-minute call Thursday to gather outside of Disney’s office in Burbank to protest the decision. 

    Hours before filming the Jimmy Kimmel Live! episode for Wednesday night, Disney CEO Bob Iger and executive Dana Walden decided to “preempt” the show that night. In order to mitigate any damage thrown down on them, after facing threats from the FCC chairman, Brendan Carr. 

    On Monday night during Kimmel’s monologue, the host said, “We had 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 with everything they can to score political points from it.” 

    Two days later, Carr would go on Benny Johnson’s podcast, a right-wing commentator, to criticize the host’s remarks and give a warning to ABC. The company has a “a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest,” Carr said. 

    “But frankly, when you see stuff like this, I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way,” he said. 

    In response to the threat, ABC indefinitely pulled the late-night talk show. Nexstar, one of the largest station owners in the United States, announced it would drop the show on its 32 affiliate channels shortly before ABC did. 

    Many of the protestors in Burbank are not just showing up for Kimmel, but also looking out for other broadcast and free speech-related issues.

    Scroll to continue reading

     
    


     Globalnews Digital
    

    Source link

  • Abolish the FCC

    FCC

    The Trump Administration Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) recent efforts to intimidate broadcasters into taking anti-Trump comedians off the air are blatant violations of the First Amendment. They also lend weight to longstanding libertarian arguments for abolishing the FCC.

    FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatened to pull ABC’s broadcast license unless it stopped broadcasting comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s show (which ABC quickly did). Earlier, the FCC similarly threatened CBS, which then canceled Stephen Colbert’s show (Colbert is another anti-Trump comedian). Trump now threatens to use similar tactics against other broadcasters who air shows that attack him.

    Robert Corn-Revere, electronic media expert with FIRE, has a helpful analysis of the reasons why such attentions are unconstitutional. As he notes, just last year, in NRA v. Vullo, the Supreme Court unanimously reiterated the principle that “the First Amendment prohibits government officials from relying on the threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion . . . to achieve the suppression of disfavored speech.”[quotations omitted]. In Vullo, the Supreme Court struck New York officials efforts to coerce the NRA into curbing its pro-gun rights speech, at the behest of liberal Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo. That reasoning applies to Trump and Carr, as well. If anything, their unconstitutional motives are even more blatant than Cuomo’s were.

    If the Trump FCC targets more broadcasters, hopefully they will sue and win. But there is a deeper problem here: an agency that has broad power to grand or deny licenses to broadcasters is an inherent danger to freedom of speech. That’s especially true officials hides their unconstitutional motives more carefully hidden than Trump and Carr have done.

    This is not a new problem. Only a few years after the establishment of the FCC in 1934, Franklin D. Roosevelt used the agency to target conservative broadcasters opposed to the New Deal. Later John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson used the “Fairness Doctrine” – developed by the FCC as part of its regulatory authority – to target critics of their policies. The Fairness Doctrine continued to be used as a tool to restrict speech until the Reagan FCC got rid of it in 1987.

    Until now, recent presidents have not used the FCC as abusively as FDR, JFK, and LBJ did.  But the danger remained, and Trump is now exploiting it. Even if open attempts at censorship are struck down the courts, the FCC can still intimidate broadcasters by using its powers to deny and grant licenses, restrict mergers, and the like, citing seemingly neutral pretexts. Fear of such action may be why ABC and CBS have – so far – chosen not to go to court.

    In his classic 1959 article, “The Federal Communications Commission,” the great libertarian economist Ronald Coase warned of this danger, and advocated the abolition of the FCC (Coase later won the Nobel Prize in Economics in part for this work):

    The situation in the American broadcasting industry is not essentially different in character from that which would be found if a commission appointed by the federal government had the task of selecting those who were to be allowed to publish newspapers and periodicals in each city, town, and village of the United States. A proposal to do this would, of course, be rejected out of hand as inconsistent with the doctrine of freedom of the press. But the broadcasting industry is a source of news and opinion of comparable importance with newspapers or books and, in fact, nowadays is commonly included with the press, so far as the doctrine of freedom of the press is concerned.

    If newspapers and magazines had to be licensed by the government before being allowed to publish, there would be obvious opportunities for favoritism and abuse. The exact same danger exists with broadcast licensing.

    The standard rationale for broadcast licensing by the state is that broadcast frequencies are scarce resources that government must protect from “interference.” If two networks try to broadcast on the same frequency, chaos might ensue and neither would be effectively transmitted. But the same is true of traditional media. Printing presses, ink, and other production supplies are also valuable scarce goods. Two newspapers cannot use the same printing press at the same time, or print their publications on the same pieces of paper. Yet rightly rely on markets and private property rights, not government licensing and central planning, to allocate these resources.

    As Coase explained, the same system of property rights can work with broadcast frequencies. Let private broadcasters own individual frequencies, and let free exchange and market competition decide who uses which one.

    This solution is even better with the rise of cable television and then internet broadcasting. No longer is it plausible to argue that a fully private system would be dominated by just a handful of major networks, as was perhaps true in the pre-cable age. Owners of individual broadcast networks, radio stations, and websites can decide what viewpoints they want to platform. Market forces will incentivize new entrants to promote viewpoints that incumbents neglect, but audiences might like to see. We have seen how right-wing networks like Fox and Newsmax arose to challenge more liberal traditional media. More recently, there is no shortage of websites (including social media sites) espousing a range of different ideologies. Elon Musk’s generally right-wing Twitter/X site, for example, contrasts with more left-wing Bluesky (among others). I am one of many users who have accounts on both.

    I oppose Musk’s politics and disapprove of  many of his policies for managing X. I don’t always love everything that goes on at Bluesky either. But I support both sites’ rights to manage the speech on their property without government interference.

    This market system isn’t perfect. I myself have long argued that consumers do a poor job of acquiring and processing political information, in part because they have bad incentives. That applies to our consumption of both traditional broadcast media, and more recent internet and social media products. But market competition and private property are far preferable to allowing the FCC to decided who gets a license, and to intimidate critics of the incumbent president into submission or self-censorship.

    Elsewhere, I have assessed a number of possible approaches to dealing with the problems of misinformation and political ignorance. There is no easy answer, though some options are potentially promising. Letting the FCC intimidate and coerce broadcasters isn’t one of them. It’s long past time to recognize that Ronald Coase was right, and the FCC should be abolished.

     

    Ilya Somin

    Source link

  • Donald Trump’s already bored with Jimmy Kimmel and teases his next victim | The Mary Sue

    If comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s abrupt dismissal did not faze you enough, Donald Trump‘s latest statement listing his next targets should ring in your ears like a final alarm.

    Debates have begun everywhere about Trump’s misuse of federal power for personal gain after the news of ABC’s firing of Kimmel over an arguably distasteful comment about him. While the heat of his dismissal still hasn’t died down, the President already announced his next batch of victims—and it’s not just individual reporters this time.

    While flying back home on Air Force One after his two-day visit to the United Kingdom, Trump spoke to reporters and praised the FCC Chairman, Brendan Carr, for getting Jimmy Kimmel’s show suspended. “I think Brendan Carr is doing a great job,” he said, while calling the show’s cancellation “Great News for America” in a recent social media post:

    “The ratings challenged Jimmy Kimmel Show is CANCELLED. Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done. Kimmel has ZERO talent, and worse ratings than even Colbert, if that’s possible,” he wrote.

    However, Trump doesn’t plan on stopping here. He told reporters aboard Air Force One that he will cancel licenses for any media networks that air content against him. According to him, “97 percent” of the networks are against him, and “they’re not allowed to do that.

    “When you have a network and you have evening shows and all they do is hit Trump, that’s all they do—if you go back, I guess they haven’t had a conservative one in years, or something—when you go back and take a look, all they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.” (via The Daily Beast)

    This means that any non-Trump-compliant local station, whose network channels air content criticizing Trump and his administration, is directly threatened with cancellation of its FCC licence. Now, one might think that the networks that we watch, including ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, etc., are off the hook since they do not hold individual licenses, but all of them are affiliated with local FCC-licensed stations and thus stand in danger.

    Image via Truth Social/@realDonaldTrump

    In his earlier post celebrating his unconstitutional display of power over Kimmel, Trump also subtly warned NBC News to part ways with their late-night hosts, Seth Meyers and Jimmy Fallon, calling them “two total losers.” These open threats by the man holding the highest federal office are a direct war on the future of the free press in the country.

    It’s not about Kimmel, Fallon, or any other reporter anymore, but about whether the First Amendment can survive Trump’s authoritarianism.

    Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

    Image of Kopal

    Kopal

    Staff Writer

    Kopal primarily covers politics for The Mary Sue. Off the clock, she switches to DND mode and escapes to the mountains.

    Kopal

    Source link

  • ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from Trump’s FCC chair

    (CNN) — Disney’s ABC is taking Jimmy Kimmel’s late night talk show off the air indefinitely amid a controversy over his recent comments about Charlie Kirk’s suspected killer.

    “Jimmy Kimmel Live will be pre-empted indefinitely,” an ABC spokesperson said, declining to share any further details.

    A representative for Kimmel did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The stunning decision came just a few hours after the Trump administration official responsible for licensing ABC’s local stations publicly pressured the company to punish Kimmel.

    At least two major owners of ABC-affiliated stations subsequently said they would preempt Kimmel’s show, sparking speculation that the owners were trying to curry favor with the administration. The local media conglomerates are each seeking mergers that would require administration approval.

    As Kimmel prepared to tape Wednesday night’s episode in Hollywood, ABC decided to pull the plug, much to the astonishment of the entertainment industry.

    Free speech and free expression groups immediately condemned ABC, calling the suspension cowardly, while President Trump, who frequently sparred with Kimmel, celebrated all the way from the UK, where he is on a state visit.

    “Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform. “That leaves Jimmy (Fallon) and Seth, two total losers, on Fake News NBC. Their ratings are also horrible. Do it NBC!!!”

    The indefinite hiatus underscores how politicized opinions and comments around the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk have become, with high-profile campaigns urging employers to fire people who make comments perceived as unflattering about Kirk.

    And the president has also gone after media companies, specifically, when they displease him, as with a $15 billion defamation lawsuit he filed against the New York Times this week and lawsuits against other outlets.

    During his Monday evening monologue, Kimmel said the MAGA movement was trying to score political points by trying to prove that Kirk’s alleged killer, Tyler Robinson, was not one of its own.

    “The MAGA Gang (is) 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,” Kimmel said. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.”

    The ABC late-night host’s remarks constituted “the sickest conduct possible,” FCC chair Brendan Carr told right-wing podcaster Benny Johnson on Wednesday. Carr suggested his FCC could move to revoke ABC affiliate licenses as a way to force Disney to punish Kimmel.

    “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said. “These companies can find ways to change conduct and take actions on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

    And speaking on Fox Wednesday night, Carr suggested broadcasters would see more of this kind of pressure in the future.

    “We at the FCC are going to force the public interest obligation. There are broadcasters out there that don’t like it, they can turn in their license in to the FCC,” Carr said. “But that’s our job. Again, we’re making some progress now.”

    But Anna Gomez, the lone Democratic commissioner at the FCC, wrote on X that while “an inexcusable act of political violence by one disturbed individual must never be exploited as justification for broader censorship and control,” the Trump administration “is increasingly using the weight of government power to suppress lawful expression.”

    Speaking with CNN’s Erin Burnett after Kimmel’s show was taken off the air, Gomez said “the First Amendment does not allow us, the FCC, to tell broadcasters what they can broadcast.”

    “I saw the clip. He did not make any unfounded claims, but he did make a joke, one that others may even find crude, but that is neither illegal nor grounds for companies to capitulate to this administration in ways that violate the First Amendment,” Gomez told CNN. “This sets a dangerous new precedent, and companies must stand firm against any efforts to trade away First Amendment freedom.”

    Pro-Trump websites and TV shows began to criticize Kimmel for his remarks on Tuesday, and as the story gained traction on Wednesday, some owners of ABC-affiliated stations felt compelled to speak out.

    Local broadcasters get involved

    Nexstar, which operates about two dozen ABC affiliates, issued a press release saying it “strongly objects” to Kimmel’s remarks and saying its stations would “replace the show with other programming in its ABC-affiliated markets.”

    Notably, Nexstar is seeking Trump administration approval to acquire another big US station group, Tegna. The deal requires the FCC to loosen the government’s limits on broadcast station ownership.

    Minutes after Nexstar criticized Kimmel publicly, ABC said the show was being yanked nationwide.

    Later in the evening, another big station group, Sinclair, said it had also told ABC that it was preempting Kimmel’s show on its ABC-affiliated stations before the network announced its nationwide decision.

    Sinclair, too, has business pending before the Trump administration, and it made a bid for Tegna a day before Nexstar stepped in with its bid. The company announced Wednesday night that it will air a one-hour special tribute to Kirk on Friday night in Kimmel’s usual time slot.

    Following ABC’s action to indefinitely pull Kimmel’s show off the air, Sinclair issued a statement saying the late-night host’s suspension “is not enough” and called on the network, the FCC and Kimmel to go further.

    “Sinclair will not lift the suspension of Jimmy Kimmel Live! on our stations until formal discussions are held with ABC regarding the network’s commitment to professionalism and accountability,” the company said in its statement. “Regardless of ABC’s plans for the future of the program, Sinclair intends not to return Jimmy Kimmel Live! to our air until we are confident that appropriate steps have been taken to uphold the standards expected of a national broadcast platform.”

    Sinclair said it demanded Kimmel directly apologize to the Kirk family and make a “meaningful” donation to Kirk’s family and his organization, Turning Point USA.

    The FCC’s role

    The FCC regulates the public airwaves, including broadcast signals and content. Before Trump appointed Carr to lead the agency, the FCC, for the most part, had taken a hands-off approach to broadcasters’ political content in recent years.

    But Carr has taken a broader view of the FCC’s remit to serve the public interest, and has served as a political attack dog for Trump, threatening his perceived enemies in the broadcast media.

    “I can’t imagine another time when we’ve had local broadcasters tell a national programmer like Disney that your content no longer meets the needs and the values of our community,” Carr told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Wednesday. “So this is an important turning point.”

    The Center for American Rights, which has previously lodged bias complaints against NBC, ABC and CBS, on Wednesday filed a complaint with the FCC over Kimmel’s comments, writing that “it is no defense to say that Kimmel was engaging in satire or late-night comedy rather than traditional news.”

    “ABC’s affiliates need to step up and hold ABC accountable as a network for passing through material that fails to respect the public-interest standard to which they are held,” Daniel Suhr, president of the Center for American Rights, wrote in the complaint. “Disney as ABC’s corporate owner needs to act directly to correct this problem.”

    SAG-AFTRA, the actors union, said Wednesday night that it “condemns” the suspension of Kimmel’s show.

    “Our society depends on freedom of expression. Suppression of free speech and retaliation for speaking out on significant issues of public concern run counter to the fundamental rights we all rely on,” the union said in its statement.

    “The decision to suspend airing Jimmy Kimmel Live! is the type of suppression and retaliation that endangers everyone’s freedoms.”

    Kimmel has also been a frequent target of President Trump’s ire. Shortly after CBS announced the cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s late-night talk show — a move Carr publicly celebrated — Trump suggested that “Next up will be an even less talented Jimmy Kimmel.”

    Elizabeth Wagmeister, Liam Reilly and CNN

    Source link

  • Can FCC restrict speech for the public interest?

    Did Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr overstep the bounds of government oversight when he called for action against late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel?

    Kimmel sparked conservative criticism when he spoke about the suspect in the Sept. 10 assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on his show, “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” 

    In his Sept. 15 monologue, Kimmel said, “We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them,” Kimmel said. 

    He also aired a clip showing Trump’s brief response to a question about how he was handling Kirk’s death. It showed Trump quickly pivoting to discussing the ballroom he’s building at the White House. But the bigger controversy stemmed from another comment about Kirk’s suspected shooter.

    Hours before ABC, which is owned by the Walt Disney Co., pulled Kimmel off the air, Carr appeared on conservative commentator Benny Johnson’s podcast, saying that broadcasters are “entirely different than people that use other forms of communication.”

    “They have a license granted by us at the FCC that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest,” Carr told Johnson. “I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct to take actions, frankly on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” Carr likened Kimmel’s comment to “news distortion,” which is against FCC’s rules for broadcasters. 

    Sign up for PolitiFact texts

    The commissioner’s comments were widely interpreted as being addressed to ABC, Kimmel’s employer, and the network’s independently-owned affiliates. The independent stations, as well as ABC — because it’s a network that also owns stations — fall under the FCC’s purview.

    Before ABC announced it was halting Kimmel’s show, two companies that own a range of ABC affiliates, Nexstar and Sinclair, said they would be preempting his show. Nexstar is seeking FCC approval for a merger with Tegna, while Nexstar and Sinclair are asking the FCC to repeal a rule that limits any broadcasting company from reaching more than 39% of U.S. households.

    In an interview after Kimmel’s show was pulled, Carr again cited his agency’s public interest obligation. Speaking with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, Carr said: “We at the FCC are going to enforce the public interest obligation. If there’s broadcasters out there that don’t like it, they can turn their license in to the FCC. But that’s our job, and again we’re making some progress now.”

    Publications and legal experts say Carr overstepped his mandate, using the threat of government action to police what should qualify as free speech. 

    “When a network drops high-profile talent hours after the FCC chairman makes a barely veiled threat, then it’s no longer just a business decision. It’s government coercion,” wrote the right-of-center publication The Free Press. “Is it now Trump administration policy to punish broadcasters for comedy that doesn’t conform to its politics? That is censorship.”

    At issue in the Kimmel case is how much influence the FCC can bring to bear under its statutory authority and First Amendment protections for free speech. First Amendment experts said the law allows the FCC to regulate certain aspects of broadcasters’ actions, but that leveraging its authority to persuade private media companies to punish speech by a comedian on public matters falls beyond those boundaries.

    Ronnie London, general counsel with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a free-speech advocacy group, called Carr’s actions “a classic case of unconstitutional jawboning,” meaning the improper use of threatened government action to pursue policy goals.

    London and other experts pointed to a 2024 U.S. Supreme Court decision, National Rifle Association v. Vullo, in which the justices unanimously ruled that a New York regulator’s attempts to discourage companies from doing business with the NRA amounted to coercion and violated the First Amendment.

    PolitiFact reached out to the FCC for comment but did not hear back by publication.

    What is the FCC’s public interest authority?

    In the Kimmel case, Carr acted on his own, without formal action by the five-member FCC board. Anna Gomez, the only Democrat on the FCC, spoke out against Carr’s actions on CNN. 

    London said that Carr’s words carried weight because of the implied force of the government agency he heads.

    So where does the agency’s authority begin and end?

    The Communications Act of 1934 that established the FCC authorized it to award broadcast licenses to broadcasters who abide by the “public interest, convenience, and necessity.” 

    “This basically means that a licensee has the duty to air programs that are responsive to its local community’s priorities and needs,” Olivier Sylvain, a Fordham University law professor and senior policy research fellow at Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute. 

    Nexstar preempted Kimmel’s show even before ABC announced it was pulled. (Preempting a show means not running it in an affiliate’s market.)

    On its website, the FCC acknowledges that the First Amendment limits its power over speech, including in regard to the public interest.

    “The FCC has long held that ‘the public interest is best served by permitting free expression of views,’” the FCC says. “Rather than suppress speech, communications law and policy seeks to encourage responsive ‘counter-speech’ from others. Following this principle ensures that the most diverse and opposing opinions will be expressed, even though some views or expressions may be highly offensive.”

    What are the public interest rules for broadcasters?

    Over-the-air broadcasts by local TV and radio stations are subject to speech restraints in certain areas, but cable or satellite TV programs are generally not. The FCC does not regulate online content.

    FCC-imposed constraints on broadcasters involve topics typically identified by Congress or adopted by the FCC through rulemaking or formal proceedings. 

    They include indecency and obscenity, commercial content in children’s TV programming, sponsorship identification and the conduct of on-air contests,

    “When it comes to regulating content, the public interest standard is pretty circumscribed,” London said. The FCC’s regulatory powers “are not a blank check, and definitely not when it comes to regulating content on broadcast TV.”

    What is news distortion?

    Carr cited something else as Kimmel’s violation — broadcast news distortion. But Kimmel’s role as a late-night comedian and the content of his words may complicate that.

    The FCC says on its website that “news distortion must involve a significant event.” 

    There is a distinction between “deliberate distortion” and inaccuracies and differences of opinion. Broadcasters are only subject to enforcement if it can be proven that they deliberately distorted a factual news report, the FCC says. “Expressions of opinion or errors stemming from mistakes are not actionable.”

    On Johnson’s podcast, Carr said licensed stations that carry a nationally-distributed program like Kimmel’s have a public interest standard that is relevant to FCC oversight.

    “One thing that we’re trying to do is to empower those local stations to serve their own communities,” Carr said. “And the public interest means you can’t be running a narrow, partisan circus and still meeting your public interest obligations. That means you can’t be engaging in a pattern of news distortion, we have a rule on the book that interprets the public interest standard that says news distortion is something that is prohibited.”

    Legal experts said Carr’s commentary overlooks a few important factors with Kimmel’s show.

    “Jimmy Kimmel Live” runs out of ABC’s entertainment division, not its news division.

    In addition, it’s complicated to argue that Kimmel was knowingly sharing inaccurate information. At the time of his monologue, some news reports had discussed the relationship of the alleged shooter, Tyler Robinson, to a gender-transitioning roommate, but the charging documents had not yet been released.

    “I don’t receive Kimmel’s comments as a falsehood in the same way that a deceptive statement about a cryptocurrency or misdirection about a polling place is,” Sylvain said. “Nor can we say that Kimmel, an entertainer, was advancing anything other than an opinion.”

    Source link

  • Brendan Carr Isn’t Going to Stop Until Someone Makes Him

    To Genevieve Lakier, a professor of law at the University of Chicago whose research focuses on free speech, Carr’s threats against ABC appear to be “a pretty clear-cut case of jawboning.” Jawboning refers to a type of informal coercion where government officials try to pressure private entities into suppressing or changing speech without using any actual formal legal action. Since jawboning is typically done in letters and private meetings, it rarely leaves a paper trail, making it notoriously difficult to challenge in court.

    This Kimmel suspension is a little different, Lakier says. During the podcast appearance, Carr explicitly named his target, threatened regulatory action, and within a matter of hours the companies complied.

    “The Supreme Court has made clear that that’s unconstitutional in all circumstances,” says Lakier. “You’re just not allowed to do that. There’s no balancing. There’s no justification. Absolutely no, no way may the government do that.”

    Even if Carr’s threats amount to unconstitutional jawboning, though, stopping him could still prove difficult. If ABC sued, it would need to prove coercion—and however a suit went, filing one could risk additional regulatory retaliation down the line. If Kimmel were to sue, there’s no promise that he would get anything out of the suit even if he won, says Lakier, making it less likely for him to pursue legal action in the first place.

    “There’s not much there for him except to establish that his rights were violated. But there is a lot of benefit for everyone else,” says Lakier. “This has received so much attention that it would be good if there could be, from now on, some mechanism for more oversight from the courts over what Carr is doing.”

    Organizations like the the Freedom of the Press Foundation have sought novel means of limiting Carr’s power. In July, the FPF submitted a formal disciplinary complaint to the DC Bar’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel arguing that Carr violated its ethical rules, misrepresenting the law by suggesting the FCC has the ability to regulate editorial viewpoints. Without formal rulings, companies affected by Carr’s threats would be some of the only organizations with grounding to sue. At the same time, they have proven to be some of the least likely groups to pursue legal action over the last eight months.

    In a statement on Thursday, House Democratic leadership wrote that Carr had “disgraced the office he holds by bullying ABC” and called on him to resign. They said they plan to “make sure the American people learn the truth, even if that requires the relentless unleashing of congressional subpoena power,” but did not outline any tangible ways to rein in Carr’s power.

    “People need to get creative,” says Stern. “The old playbook is not built for this moment and the law only exists on paper when you’ve got someone like Brendan Carr in charge of enforcing it.”

    This vacuum has left Carr free to push as far as he likes, and it has spooked experts over how far this precedent will travel. Established in the 1930s, the FCC was designed to operate as a neutral referee, but years of media consolidation have dramatically limited the number of companies controlling programming over broadcast, cable, and now streaming networks. Spectrum is a limited resource the FCC controls, giving the agency more direct control over the broadcast companies that rely on it than it has over cable or streaming services. This concentration makes them infinitely easier to pressure, benefitting the Trump administration, Carr, but also whoever might come next.

    “If political tides turn, I don’t have confidence that the Democrats won’t also use them in an unconstitutional and improper matter,” says Stern. The Trump administration is “really setting up this world where every election cycle, assuming we still have elections in this country, the content of broadcast news might drastically shift depending on which political party controls the censorship office.”

    Makena Kelly

    Source link

  • Did you ask the FCC if you can make that joke?

    Jimmy Kimmel pulled off the air: Yesterday evening, ABC News (a subsidiary of Disney) announced it was suspending comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show “indefinitely” following factually inaccurate comments he made about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

    Of course, comedians have no obligation to be factually correct. Kimmel’s show is intended as a hybrid between comedy and news, though, so it’s fair to wonder whether he does. “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,” said Kimmel during his Monday night monologue. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.” A montage of President Donald Trump followed, making fun of how, though people have claimed Kirk was like a son to the president, he’s moved on rather quickly.

    It wasn’t especially good or funny. It also was somewhat anodyne. To overly psychologize for a moment, I wonder whether Trump pivoted to talking about construction at the White House when reporters asked him about Kirk’s death because he is, in fact, distraught about it but didn’t feel up to going there. We can’t know. Kimmel’s shot felt cheap. But Kimmel is allowed to be bad—he’s been bad for a while.

    The issue is that Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair Brendan Carr suggested the agency might punish ABC, pulling its broadcast license in retribution. On conservative Benny Johnson’s podcast, Carr suggested Kimmel’s comments were part of a “concerted effort to lie to the American people,” and that the FCC was “going to have remedies that we can look at.”

    “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” said Carr, ominously. “These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the F.C.C. ahead.”

    “Just before ABC’s announcement, Nexstar Media Group said that its stations that are affiliated with ABC would pre-empt Kimmel’s show ‘for the foreseeable future beginning with tonight’s show,'” reports CNBC. Nexstar, which owns 10 percent of ABC’s affiliate stations, is in the process of securing FCC approval for a $6.2 billion merger with Tegna, which owns roughly 5 percent of the affiliate stations.

    “Great News for America: The ratings challenged Jimmy Kimmel Show is CANCELLED,” wrote the president on Truth Social. “Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done. Kimmel has ZERO talent, and worse ratings than even Colbert, if that’s possible. That leaves Jimmy and Seth, two total losers, on Fake News NBC. Their ratings are also horrible. Do it NBC!!!”

    Courage sure is an interesting word choice, given that Trump’s own agency threatened them with consequences (though he’s not wrong if we’re solely judging him as a media critic).

    “I don’t think this is a legal issue,” said former federal prosecutor Joseph Moreno on CNN. “I don’t think this can be pointed to the FCC or the Trump administration and say, well, this is about them going after Kimmel because of what he said. Personally, I think it’s more of a cultural issue. And I got to tell you. I’m about as moderate a Republican as you can get. I’m from New York. I have not been comfortable watching late-night television for 15 years because when you have conservative leanings and you’re constantly mocked and you’re constantly feel like you’re doing something wrong, you shut it off. You don’t watch it anymore.”

    Some people have made the point that the FCC might have given Disney/ABC cover to do something they already wanted to do, and do it in a way that makes the Trump administration look like the bad guys:

    I also think this point is very fair, which is that this didn’t start yesterday. If you haven’t noticed the extraordinary media jawboning—indirect censorial pressure directed at private companies from the federal government—over the last few years, you haven’t been paying much attention:

    “The government pressured ABC—and ABC caved,” wrote Ari Cohn of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. “The timing of ABC’s decision, on the heels of the FCC chairman’s pledge to the network to ‘do this the easy way or the hard way,’ tells the whole story. Another media outlet withered under government pressure, ensuring that the administration will continue to extort and exact retribution on broadcasters and publishers who criticize it. We cannot be a country where late night talk show hosts serve at the pleasure of the president. But until institutions grow a backbone and learn to resist government pressure, that is the country we are.”

    Cohn makes a good point, both that this is the direct result of government coercion that is wrong and disturbing, and that these institutions should not be in the business of caving. It’s disturbing to see massive law firms, media outlets, and organizations that should have some amount of fuck-you money choose the path of cowardice. But given that Disney has been interested in fighting the government before (albeit in a different context), the fact that they weren’t willing to do so this time makes me think maybe Kimmel was already a goner.

    Jawboning done so explicitly, so publicly, serves to intimidate other networks and generate compliance. But jawboning done by the Biden administration, during the COVID-19 pandemic (both to suppress public health information and to promote Democratic candidates and bury scandals), possibly disturbs me more, because it was covert, hard to uncover and to see the full extent of. I can’t decide; both are horrible. No matter which party’s in power, you get government coercion—you just get the privilege of deciding which flavor.

    Scenes from New York: “A Long Island cop swindled a sick fellow officer out of $200,000 with claims of business investment—but instead blew the cash on OnlyFans, gambling and luxury living like a new car, prosecutors said,” reports The New York Post. “Nassau County police officer Leonard Cagno, 39, allegedly duped his colleague out of the cash as he recovered from an unnamed serious illness then blew it all within two months, cops said Wednesday as he was slapped with a grand larceny charge.”

    QUICK HITS

    • For a contrast in how comedy can be dealt with, consider Charlie Kirk’s reaction to being parodied on South Park.
    • The right-wing take on all this, from Lomez, which I don’t agree is aspirational but I think identifies the problem and describes the MAGA mindset quite well:

    “We are finally seeing the first real consequences of major institutions having spent the last decade undermining the facade of liberal neutrality they at least used to claim as an ideal. This facade actually mattered quite a lot, and even though it was obviously never entirely sincere and even though conservatives were always out numbered and often poorly represented, they at least felt like participants and stakeholders in these institutions. During the Trump years this all went away. Conservatives were aggressively ousted, even as token voices, and the facade came down to reveal a perverse and illiberal set of political and cultural directives underneath it that were explicitly antagonistic to more than half of the country and denied them as legitimate participants in public life. Despite this, MAGA won (again), and, surprise, surprise, do not intend on preserving the institutions that declared them illegitimate political actors. This is, in fact, MAGA’s core promise.”

    • “An immigration judge in Louisiana has ordered pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., deported to Syria or Algeria for failing to disclose certain information on his green card application, according to documents filed in federal court Wednesday by his lawyers,” reports Politico. “Khalil’s lawyers suggested in a filing that they intend to appeal the deportation order, but expressed concern that the appeal process will likely be swift and unfavorable.”
    • “America loves cocaine again,” by The Wall Street Journal. “Cocaine sold in the U.S. is cheaper and as pure as ever for retail buyers. Consumption in the western U.S. has increased 154% since 2019 and is up 19% during the same period in the eastern part of the country, according to the drug-testing company Millennium Health. In contrast, fentanyl use in the U.S. began to drop in mid-2023 and has been declining since, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

    Liz Wolfe

    Source link

  • Kimmel “cancelled” for Kirk comments: Trump celebrates, Hollywood fury—live

    ABC News and Disney are facing boycott calls on the heels of Jimmy Kimmel Live! being pulled from the air indefinitely over remarks made by the host after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

    The controversy centers on remarks Kimmel made in a monologue after Kirk’s death in which he floated that the suspect in the killing, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, could be aligned with “the MAGA gang” or possibly “one of them.”

    But the evidence made public by investigators strongly suggests Robinson held a leftist ideology and a related hatred of Kirk, and he had a trans partner, though prosecutors have yet to definitively confirm a motive.

    The suspension followed comments by Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr, whose agency regulates the networks, urging licensed stations to “step up” against “this garbage”.

    President Donald Trump praised the decision, saying on Truth Social: “Great News for America: The ratings challenged Jimmy Kimmel Show is CANCELLED. Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done.”

    • ABC said Jimmy Kimmel Live! will be “pre‑empted indefinitely.”
    • Followed the decision to pull by ABC affiliate owners Nextar, Sinclair.
    • Kimmel’s pulling raises questions about free expression, First Amendment rights, and political censorship.
    • Nextar and Tegna’s need of FCC approval for a multi-billion dollar merger seen as driver of the Kimmel decision.
    • Hollywood unions the Writers Guild of America and SAG-AFTRA condemned the move as a violation of constitutional speech rights.
    • Democrats and liberal activists called for a boycott of ABC, Disney.

    Stay with Newsweek for live updates.




    Jimmy Kimmel attends the 28th Annual UCLA Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation’s “Taste For A Cure” event at Beverly Wilshire, A Four Seasons Hotel on May 02, 2025 in Beverly Hills, California.

    Tommaso Boddi/Getty Images for UCLA Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation



    Source link

  • Jimmy Kimmel Taken Off Air as ABC Responds to Backlash

    ABC announced Kimmel was off the air Wednesday after he accused Kirk’s assassin Tyler Robinson – whose own family said he was left leaning – of being ‘MAGA’

    Jimmy Kimmel accused the gunman who cut down Charlie Kirk, a 31-year-old father of two, of being ‘MAGA’ despite evidence from his own family that he was embracing liberal and pro transgender politics during Monday’s broadcast. ABC pulled him from the air ‘indefinitely’ the network confirmed in a statement
    Credit: Los Angeles file photo

    ABC announced the network is pulling the “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” late-night show off the air “indefinitely” after the talk show host said in a monologue the man who cut down Charlie Kirk was ‘MAGA’ despite court records that show his own family told investigators after the shooting that he had “started to lean more to the left.”

    The announcement was made on Wednesday, two days after Kimmel’s Monday night monologue, in which he called the gunman a Trump supporter. “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,” Kimmel said on the air. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.”

    His remarks stand in direct contrast with court records detailing the charges against 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, whose parents told authorities that their son had “had become more political and had started to lean more to the left – becoming more pro-gay and trans-rights oriented,” which took place, his mother told police, after her son “began to date his roommate, a biological male who was transitioning genders.”

    Prosecutors say Robinson targeted Kirk, co-founder of Turning Point USA, last week while the 31-year-old Republican activist, a married father of two young children, was hosting an event at Utah Valley University. Robinson allegedly shot Kirk with a rifle that had belonged to his grandfather, which had been gifted to him by his father.

    New details have emerged in the killing of Charlie Kirk
    Credit: Utah County Government

    ABC, which is owned by Disney, made the announcement that rocked the media world hours after the Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr told conservative podcaster Benny Johnson that Kimmel’s comments were “truly sick” and that there was a “strong case” for action against ABC and Disney.

    “This is a very, very serious issue right now for Disney. We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said. “These companies can find ways to take action on Kimmel or there is going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” Carr said on the podcast that the network’s license is granted by the FCC, which means the company has “an obligation to operate in the public interest.”

    Scroll to continue reading

    In addition, Nexstar, an owner of many local stations throughout the United States, said shortly before ABC’s announcement that it was axing episodes of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” for the “foreseeable future.”

    “Nexstar strongly objects to recent comments made by Mr. Kimmel concerning the killing of Charlie Kirk and will replace the show with other programming in its ABC-affiliated markets,” the company said.

    Kimmel had posted support for Kirk’s family and urged “love” for victims of gun violence in an Instagram post in the aftermath of last week’s execution.

    Still, ABC heeded the warning from the FCC and removed Kimmel – a move that mirrors the cancellation of The Late Show With Stephen Colbert. In July, after Stephen Colbert was told his show was canceled by NBC, Kimmel had a message for that network on behalf of his fellow late-night talk show host: “Fuck You.” NBC axed Colbert three days after he publicly riffed on his own network after its parent company settled a case filed by President Trump for $16 million, a move Kimmel and many others say was political.

    Michele McPhee

    Source link