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

731–740 of 1001 posts

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

#731

Post by dakial1 »

NedF wrote: post #723
dada78641 wrote: post #667

It really is kind of incredible. I just saw the clip and there really is absolutely nothing there. This is not even 10% as poignant of what Jon Stewart would say in his day. He doesn't even say anything about Kirk himself, or even about the murder—he just talks about the reaction to it. I already thought it was very suspicious that Sinclair's official press release just talks about how the remarks were "inappropriate…

[flagged]

He didn't say nor implied that.

He implied that MAGA is trying to exploit the killing to create the image of the "terrorist left/antifa/BLM/immigrants/arab" conspiracy to their audience.

Which they are 100% trying to do, like they did with Trump's shooter, who was a lunatic just like Kirk's murderer (and all the others)

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

#732

Post by NoGravitas »

suzdude wrote: post #614

Mel Brooks had the right of it. Fascism and Authoritarianism is defeated by satire and mockery. The ideology is too outrageous to survive any such scrutiny. Why else would the administration be so afraid of a few jokes?

In the case of Fascism 1.0, it took satire, mockery, and thousands of Soviet tanks.

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

#733

Post by zeven7 »

happytoexplain wrote: post #492
enlightens wrote: post #172

The summary at the top of the page says > ABC said it was pulling the “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” show off the air “indefinitely” after controversial comments by its host about the slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk. but the article says the following, which is entirely different: > “The MAGA Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everyth…

I think everybody is (reasonably) confused by the use of the words "anything other than". It's usually used in phrases that express the speaker's opinion to the opposite ("as if this is anything other than performative" means "this is performative"). Based on the clip, it sounds like Kimmel unfortunately used it literally: "trying to portray [him] as anything other than...", as in, "they're jumping the gun on his por…

This is a good insight. I don't think Kimmel should be pulled for either meaning, but it does help explain why some people might be talking past each other.

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

#734

Post by themaninthedark »

UmGuys wrote: post #722
themaninthedark wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they were blocking links to the news story from the NY Post, including users from sending private messages... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24780798 >In April 2021, White House advisers met with Twitter content moderators. The moderators believed the meeting had gone well, but noted in a private Slack discussion that they had fielded "one really tough question about why Alex Berenson hasn't been kicked off…

I have no idea what you're referencing honestly. Private companies can make whatever business decisions they want. You second link is 404 and I have no idea what you're talking about. The subject is what used to be the United States. A concept that no longer exists because we're too shitty.

Thanks, URL was messed up due to copy paste error.

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

#735

Post by zeven7 »

jszymborski wrote: post #243
jihadjihad wrote: post #226

Coming soon: broadcast is pulled after host’s comments disparage the current administration.

That is unironically what happened here. The comments Kimmel made here did not disparage Kirk, but rather the administration's reaction to his shooting.

It's also what happened with Colbert.

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

#736

Post by NoGravitas »

troad wrote: post #379
RF_Enthusiast wrote: post #293

I’m at a loss of what to watch as far as television goes in the US, between the government threatening to intervene in content, corporations that own television networks with little regard for journalistic integrity, and PBS downsizing. I’m pretty much exclusively watching NHK from Japan through a Roku app.

So, hear me out, books are pretty great! Lots of people say things like "I know I should read, but it's this whole thing ..." and then you find out they've been stuck on page 3 of Wuthering Heights for forty years, because someone convinced them they ought to be reading that, and it's haunted them from their night-stand ever since. Don't let anyone tell you what to read, pick up something that sounds fun to you, and…

I'd like to strongly recommend the "Dungeon Crawler Carl" series as an alternative to television. If you like dark humor and don't hate the idea of a litrpg.

Ironically, I plan on reading Wuthering Heights this October.

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

#737

Post by happytoexplain »

zeven7 wrote: post #733
happytoexplain wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think everybody is (reasonably) confused by the use of the words "anything other than". It's usually used in phrases that express the speaker's opinion to the opposite ("as if this is anything other than performative" means "this is performative"). Based on the clip, it sounds like Kimmel unfortunately used it literally: "trying to portray [him] as anything other than...", as in, "they're jumping the gun on his por…

This is a good insight. I don't think Kimmel should be pulled for either meaning, but it does help explain why some people might be talking past each other.

To be fair, even if I'm right, I don't think I'm going to convince anybody who wants to interpret it the other way. The difference is large semantically, but subtle linguistically.

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

#738

Post by infermore »

NedF wrote: post #723
dada78641 wrote: post #667

It really is kind of incredible. I just saw the clip and there really is absolutely nothing there. This is not even 10% as poignant of what Jon Stewart would say in his day. He doesn't even say anything about Kirk himself, or even about the murder—he just talks about the reaction to it. I already thought it was very suspicious that Sinclair's official press release just talks about how the remarks were "inappropriate…

[flagged]

he didn't say the shooter is MAGA

he said the MAGA folks were desperately trying to characterize him as not MAGA

and I can't imagine how you'd argue that's not how they behaved

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

#739

Post by suzdude »

billfor wrote: post #561
daveguy wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first amendment of our Constitution explicitly protects against the government as the censor. The head of the FCC going on Fox to call for it, is an overreach. You do realize the FCC is part of the executive branch, right?

But it’s not just the government even assuming your comment about the first amendment is correct. Sinclair + Nexstar are about 80% of the stations and they both refused to carry it, so there’s a financial component. I believe their affiliates were the first to cancel even before the FCC comments. Why should ABC lose 80% of their income. https://x.com/WeAreSinclair/status/1968471160359645658

Sinclair did so _after_ the FCC comments. They did not take issue with the jokes prior to the FCC head.

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

#740

Post by bitlax »

tomhow wrote: post #309
bitlax wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Please don't call people names or attack people for comments in historical threads. The guidelines apply, no matter how right you are or think you are, and no matter how heated the topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html .

I'm sorry, I didn't know that this was a rule and I apologize for breaking it. I do occasionally overstep my bounds but I generally try to go with the flow of traffic around here.

In my defense, I linked to a very recent exchange that I had with that exact same person about nearly the same topic. In a normal conversation or debate that would be considered totally appropriate, and I imagine I was caught by an automated rule, since I was immediately throttled.

But I understand the reason for the rule and I will attempt not to break it again. Sorry to give you more work and thanks for the site.

Post reply on HN