The FCC may be going after Jimmy Kimmel for his claiming Charlie Kirk's killer was MAGA.

[TemplarKormac]

Speculation is now contrary?

No. The information was already available. He ignored it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

There is no grounds for the FCC to do anything about Kimmel. This is pure, unadulterated, censorious authoritarianism.

No modern president has abused the government like this.

The government took no action. It makes this statement baseless fear-mongering.

The network and its affiliates took the cue.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Think about it. Kimmel's comments are already being assimilated by potential jurors who may be summoned or selected for Robinson's trial.

 

[Marener]

The government took no action. It makes this statement baseless fear-mongering.

The network and its affiliates took the cue.

Yes, they understood that the government will punish them if they don’t do what the government wants.

This is happening all over the economy.

It is, dare I say it, kind of fascist. Fascist economies operate like this.

 

[Paleman]

He's a comedian? He mocks people and life situations for a living? That's not aloud anymore?

You clueless duffus, HE WAS NOT JOKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[scruffy]

Do we?

WE do.

You don't seem to know much about anything lately.

 

[drudge X]

Yes, they understood that the government will punish them if they don’t do what the government wants.

This is happening all over the economy.

It is, dare I say it, kind of fascist. Fascist economies operate like this.

Ahhhhh shaddap. Where was your outrage when Biden colluded with social media to get rid of posts that aren't favorable to the administration by using misinformation as an excuse?

 

[Marener]

Ahhhhh shaddap. Where was your outrage when Biden colluded with social media to get rid of posts that aren't favorable to the administration by using misinformation as an excuse?

They were opposed to disinformation about COVID because that shit get thousands of people killed.

It had nothing to do with being “favorable to the administration”. It was trying to save lives.

What a bunch of assholes, right?

Second, they didn’t threaten anyone. This administration does. This administration will use government force to attack anyone who doesn’t bend the knee.

 

[TimFitz]

Oh I thought the claims were they were threatened

Guess not


Guess they just fired him because they wanted to

They were publicly threatened.

The threat was a frontal assault on the First Amendment.

Never in the history has the FCC ever commented publicly on any individual.

It is censorship by intimidation.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Yes, they understood that the government will punish them if they don’t do what the government wants.

I had a debate with Grok, and it told me this:

"Public Interest Obligations Mentioned by FCC Chair Brendan Carr.

In the context of his criticism of Jimmy Kimmel's comments on the Charlie Kirk assassination and the subsequent pressure on ABC and its affiliates, Carr repeatedly emphasized broadcasters' statutory duties under the Communications Act of 1934. He framed these as "unique" or "special" obligations tied to their use of public airwaves, distinguishing them from cable or online media. Below is a list of the specific public interest obligations he highlighted in recent statements (primarily from September 17-18, 2025):

• Serving the Needs and Values of Local Communities: Broadcasters must operate programming that aligns with and responds to the interests, needs, and values of their local audiences. Carr praised affiliates like Nexstar and Sinclair for preempting Jimmy Kimmel Live! as an exercise of this duty, stating they were "standing up to serve the interests of their community" and ensuring content "meets the needs and the values of our community."
  
  
• Avoiding Misleading the Public: Networks have a responsibility not to deliberately distort or mislead viewers on significant facts, particularly in politically charged events. Carr described Kimmel's remarks as an "intentional effort to directly mislead the American public about a significant fact," linking this to the broader public interest standard and the FCC's news distortion policy.
  
  
• Accountability and Enforcement of Non-Discrimination: Broadcasters must adhere to prohibitions on invidious discrimination (e.g., in DEI practices) and face scrutiny during license renewals if they fail to operate in the public interest. Carr has tied this to holding companies like Disney/ABC accountable, noting licenses are "not sacred cows" and the FCC will enforce these duties.
  

Carr argued that ABC failed these obligations through Kimmel's "sickest conduct possible," urging self-correction (e.g., suspensions or apologies) to avoid FCC action like investigations or license revocations.

He contrasted this with the FCC's past "walk[ing] away from enforcing that public interest obligation," claiming renewed enforcement benefits the country. "

 

[Marener]

He contrasted this with the FCC's past "walk[ing] away from enforcing that public interest obligation," claiming renewed enforcement benefits the country. "

This is all very new since when he was in the minority, he thought that the FCC had no right to police speech.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, Who Threatened ABC Over Jimmy Kimmel Comments, Once Railed Against Policing Speech “In The Name Of The Public Interest”

Brendan Carr wrote in 2019 that the "FCC does not have a roving mandate to police speech in the name of the 'public interest.'"

deadline.com

You can’t use “public interest” to censor speech you don’t like.

You guys have strayed so far from any resemblance of constitutional principles.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This is all very new since when he was in the minority, he thought that the FCC had no right to police speech.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, Who Threatened ABC Over Jimmy Kimmel Comments, Once Railed Against Policing Speech “In The Name Of The Public Interest”

Brendan Carr wrote in 2019 that the "FCC does not have a roving mandate to police speech in the name of the 'public interest.'"

deadline.com

You can’t use “public interest” to censor speech you don’t like.

You guys have strayed so far from any resemblance of constitutional principles.

Regardless, those are terms of the license.

 

[drudge X]

They were opposed to disinformation about COVID because that shit get thousands of people killed.

It had nothing to do with being “favorable to the administration”. It was trying to save lives.

What a bunch of assholes, right?

Second, they didn’t threaten anyone. This administration does. This administration will use government force to attack anyone who doesn’t bend the knee.

So you believe the only truth is Democrat propaganda? You guys would make Goebvells proud. Social media savings lives? Bullshit. They were saving their own asses by carrying water for Biden. You must have missed the headline about this doctor who was suspended for posting opposing views about Covid. Twitter suspended him. What about when Biden was using the astronauts as pawns because he didn't like Musk for supporting Trump? Biden could have approved the rescue mission but instead delay after delay despite knowing SpaceX is the only company who can pull the rescue mission.

 

[scruffy]

They were threatened by the Trump administration.

Sure they were.

Who threatened them?

Quote?

 

[Rawley]

Jesus get your head out of the sand. The head of thd FCC THREATENED THEM.

In a comment on a podcast. You guys are making fools of yourself

 

[Marener]

Regardless, those are terms of the license.

So Carr is a one man ministry of truth.

******* wild.

 

[drudge X]

Sure they were.

Who threatened them?

Quote?

Leftists believe the network doesn't give a damn about viewers revolting for keeping a loser cheering for assassination on the air. Gotta be Trump.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So Carr is a one man ministry of truth.

******* wild.

Nope.

You are seeing what you wish to see. I can't make you do otherwise.

 

[Rawley]

Yes, they understood that the government will punish them if they don’t do what the government wants.

LOL "There is no grounds for the FCC to do anything about Kimmel."

 

[drudge X]

LOL "There is no grounds for the FCC to do anything about Kimmel."

Marener is too stupid to realize that Disney made the decision. If Disney won't pull Kimmel, the company would lose billions of dollars, boycott, and cancelled subscription.