Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from FCC chair

#221

Post by Sparkle-san »

chasing0entropy wrote: post #177
Sparkle-san wrote: post #124

> 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. Regardless of what Kimmel said and if you think it was appropriate or not, we are seeing this administration use this as an opportunity to trample on the…

[flagged]

Pretty sure it's supposed to prevent the FCC commissioner from threatening to pull your license though unless you fire a particular individual though.

Re: ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from FCC chair

#223

Post by theoreticalmal »

boznz wrote: post #191
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #173

I am largely neutral on this particular assassination, as I knew almost nothing about Mr. Kirk prior to his departure (just name recognition & basic political associations). But I do think, after decades of reflection, that comedians are correct when they point out that stereotypical humor shouldn't be off limits to any performer (of any background/color), but is... e.g. Owen Benjamin, Chappelle, Seinfeld .

[flagged]

Who paid Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, or Gavrillo Princip? Assassination is a subset of murder, with political motives. It seems very accurate in this situation

Re: ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from FCC chair

#224

Post by bediger4000 »

paxys wrote: post #8
bediger4000 wrote: post #3

[flagged]

It's only cancel culture when the left does it. And this one is infinitely worse than a bunch of internet commenters disagreeing with his comments or private advertisers pulling out. Trump and the FCC directly threatened to pull ABC's license unless they regulated his speech, and ABC caved. The first amendment is dead and people are celebrating on the streets because their favorite political party was the one to kill…

My word! With all due respect that seems like a legitimate 1st Amendment violation! I assume those freedom of speech absolutists, like the NYT Editorial Board, are all over this one!

Re: ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from FCC chair

#228

Post by panarchy »

XorNot wrote: post #24
paxys wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right is simply good at PR. People forget that they invented cancel culture. Dixie Chicks anyone?

Video games all through the 90s as well.

Satanic Panic before that.

Re: ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from FCC chair

#229

Post by dimator »

dismalaf wrote: post #205
davesque wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I agree. So let it be business then instead of explicitly making it ideological?

Firing someone for making a political statement is business. You never want to alienate half your consumer base. COVID is still fresh enough that people should remember. If you were pro or anti anything 5 years ago it probably hurt you since sentiment swung both ways and both positions look silly in hindsight.

Alienate half your audience? That doesn't compute. Kimmel was not watched by that half already.

Re: ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from FCC chair

#230

Post by mingus88 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #217

The left wing cancel culture era was stupid, annoying, and wrong, and this upcoming right wing era is bound to be much more stupid, annoying, and wrong.

Listen, we are allowed to not support businesses or personalities that we find odious. Everyone does it.

This collaboration between corporations and the government to silence political dissent is something else entirely so can we please not “both sides” this ?

Post reply on HN