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

431–440 of 1001 posts

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

#431

Post by mythrwy »

pupppet wrote: post #260
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.

Remind us what canceled right wing celebrity figure that is in line with Jimmy Kimmel’s firing. Maybe Scott Baio? No wait, maybe that guy from Hercules?

They bankrupted Alex Jones and Rudy Giuliani, paraded Steve Bannon in handcuffs. Kicked people with even moderate right wing opinions off social media.

I fully disagree with cancelling Kimmel due to any governmental pressure (if that's what happened) and I'm absolutely horrified with the firings that are being gloated about at the moment but let's not pretend here. The left was very much out of bounds on the cancelling. Which doesn't make it any better when the right does it.

I really think this needs to stop. It's not the society we want to live in. People need to be able to express controversial or disagreeable opinions and I don't care what ideology they are.

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

#432

Post by suzdude »

throwmeaway222 wrote: post #144
jjfoooo4 wrote: post #137

I expected Kimmel to have somehow criticized Kirk, a dubious enough reason to pull the show. But this isn’t even that. Comments quoted in stories assert that the shooter was MAGA - maybe that’s somewhat controversial, but it’s ludicrous to suggest it’s offensive. That paired with comments criticizing the Dear Leader were enough. This is a new low in corporate cowardice toward Trump bullying.

It's extremely relevant. The person grew up "conservative" and was radicalized to the left in college. The reason this is important is that it's a trend. If the trend isn't acknowledged on the left, then it will just continue.

He was raised in a rightwing household with easy access to firearms.

Hating Kirk is nothing unusual. Maybe something in his conservative upbringing led him to believe violence was an acceptable action based on his hate.

That's not a belief shared by the Democratic Party.

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

#433

Post by kccoder »

rolph wrote: post #79
Computer0 wrote: post #52

Wow, I will have to check out his comments. All around me everyone is becoming more anonymous on social media, if not deleting it. It is fascinating to see the cultural reverberations of this motivated killing!

before attributing all to one event, consider the straw that broke the camels back.

Nope. They’re just not letting a tragedy go to waste. The environment is ripe for them to continue their authoritarian project.

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

#434

Post by bediger4000 »

refurb wrote: post #227
bediger4000 wrote: post #3

[flagged]

You were the one arguing “the first amendment doesn’t protect again consequences”. What changed?

You right-thinking guys convinced me: cancel culture is bad.

What I don't understand is why it's ok if the FCC commissioner pushed for it. That does seem like a first amendment deal.

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

#435

Post by rattlesnakedave »

suzdude wrote: post #430
rattlesnakedave wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Comments quoted in stories assert that the shooter was MAGA - maybe that’s somewhat controversial” It was counter to what was reported by federal investigators the day before the show. He was deliberately spreading misinformation.

> 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 did not assert Mr. Robinson was anything he wasn't. Kimmel noted how some people are doing everything possible to distance themselves from Mr. Robinson.

[flagged]

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

#436

Post by lojban »

suzdude wrote: post #397
fdschoeneman wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was well known before Kimmel made his comments that the shooter was in a romantic relationship with a trans woman. Having said that, even if he did not know about that relationship it was irresponsible of Kimmel to repeat rumors he could not have known were true that the shooter was maga.

Except your premise is incorrect. Kimmel did not repeat rumors, he asserted that the political affiliations were unknown. edit: He asserted the "MAGA gang" trying to distance themselves from Mr. Robinson, which is true. It does not mean Kimmel views Robinson as "MAGA".

Exactly, it wasn't even a joke; it's a fact.

MAGA is trying to distance themselves from the killer, and so is the left. No one wants to be associated with that guy, and for good reason.

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

#437

Post by kccoder »

mythrwy wrote: post #431
pupppet wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remind us what canceled right wing celebrity figure that is in line with Jimmy Kimmel’s firing. Maybe Scott Baio? No wait, maybe that guy from Hercules?

They bankrupted Alex Jones and Rudy Giuliani, paraded Steve Bannon in handcuffs. Kicked people with even moderate right wing opinions off social media. I fully disagree with cancelling Kimmel due to any governmental pressure (if that's what happened) and I'm absolutely horrified with the firings that are being gloated about at the moment but let's not pretend here. The left was very much out of bounds on the cancelli…

[flagged]

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

#438

Post by foogazi »

tptacek wrote: post #17

Keep in mind that Kimmel has been hinting about retiring for a couple years now, his contract was up in the air, the "late night television show" category is evaporating (if there's still even a Tonight Show in 10 years, it'll be purely for nostalgia), and this sends Kimmel out in a blaze of glory. I think it's too easy to sort of anthropomorphize these kinds of conflicts --- Kimmel's show has a large staff, and he's…

> Keep in mind that Kimmel has been hinting about retiring for a couple years now

Keep in mind also that Trump threatened getting Kimmel of the air a couple of months ago

Additionally, the FCC chief also threatened affiliates today

Is it all a coincidence ? Could be.

But absent a statement from Kimmel we can conclude that pressure was applied to ABC or it’s affiliates to censor speech

Kindly, your post reads like a variation of the “Broken window fallacy”

Hey, who needs late night comedy shows any more

You have way too much karma for this

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

#439

Post by suzdude »

rattlesnakedave wrote: post #435
suzdude wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 did not assert Mr. Robinson was anything he wasn't. Kimmel noted how some people are doing everything possible to distance themselves from Mr. Robinson.

[flagged]

Correct, you did. You omitted the quote. If you choose to add meaning, or put words in Mr. Kimmel's mouth, that is your decision.

In any case, if you think such a statement is objectionable, then you would conclude many statements made by the current president would prevent any network from putting him on air, correct?

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

#440

Post by Esophagus4 »

fdschoeneman wrote: post #358
rubyfan wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People can cancel and boycott all they want, that’s not what this is. This is government censorship of an individual they want to punish which is not okay.

It's unclear that was why he was fired.

I’m not sure you’re ever going to get the smoking gun you’re looking for to make a conclusive statement here.

In lending, there’s a legal concept of disparate impact, which means even if your policy didn’t explicitly intend to harm this group of people, you implicitly / indirectly impacted them, and that also counts as a bad thing just like explicit impact.

Basically, you don’t have to prove intent, you only have to prove outcome.

…It was a roundabout analogy, but I think the same thing applies here. I don’t need the administration to say, “we did that because we don’t like him.” There is enough impact for me to conclude culpability, regardless of whether I can prove intent.

(Edit: maybe a better concept here is circumstantial evidence)

Post reply on HN