991–1000 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The FCC came for Glenn Beck? When?
The FFC should not have power over broadcasters. I totally agree we should weaken or even get rid of the FCC if needed to preserve absolute freedom of speech. I also think advertisers and big corporations should not dictate what cannot be said, hence my comment. So we agree after all?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly, which was the point Kimmel was making. Apparently that suggestion was too much for the current administration, and the official narrative must not be questioned.
> which was the point Kimmel was making. This is a really bad misunderstanding of what he said. It’s clear as day, and yet you’re unable to comprehend
Yet, you're insulting those who can read the words on a page.
Why?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Now, why would someone take out a prominent spokesperson for their own party? They wouldn't, because that's not something that people do to other people they agree with. This is why I think the American government is doomed in its current construction. First past the post voting has conditioned people like you to believe that everything is binary. You describe a world with only two parties that can have no dissentio…
The US isn't designed to ensure a two party system. FPTP can allow many parties. The UK is an example of that. America has two parties because both parties are very internally open. Democrats have given up on that in the last few primaries but that's still very new, and Republicans are still open. You can enter as an outsider and take over the parties. That's how the Republicans ended up with Trump. If the two partie…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The F.C.C. Threatened to Punish Kimmel ‘the Hard Way.’ ABC Made It Easy." - https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/18/arts/television/jimmy-kim...
Something I wasn't aware of before this event is that broadcast licensees, such as ABC, are required to 'serve the public interest' as a component of receiving and retaining their broadcast license, probably because there's a limited number of such licenses available and they are publicly broadcast for free. It's a significant aspect of their operational obligations including each renewal requiring a further descript…
-----
The decision to preempt ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ was made unilaterally by the senior executive team at Nexstar, and they had no communication with the FCC or any government agency prior to making that decision,” a Nexstar spokesman said.
-----
Immediately following his monologues there advertisers and affiliates contacted and were complaining to Disney. The FCC was, if anything, just the final nail in the coffin.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Something I wasn't aware of before this event is that broadcast licensees, such as ABC, are required to 'serve the public interest' as a component of receiving and retaining their broadcast license, probably because there's a limited number of such licenses available and they are publicly broadcast for free. It's a significant aspect of their operational obligations including each renewal requiring a further descript…
Huge update on this: https://www.wsj.com/business/media/jimmy-kimmel-decision-beh... ----- The decision to preempt ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ was made unilaterally by the senior executive team at Nexstar, and they had no communication with the FCC or any government agency prior to making that decision,” a Nexstar spokesman said. ----- Immediately following his monologues there advertisers and affiliates contacted and were…
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…
Both Jon Stewart and Jimmy Kimmel do funny anti-governmental shows, but the difference is the former is kind of silly, superficial, low-impact, short-sighted while the latter is more influential, serious and capable to generate opposition.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The quote cited in TFA claims that the murderer was "one of them". Now, why would someone take out a prominent spokesperson for their own party? They wouldn't, because that's not something that people do to other people they agree with. But somehow, people interpret that remark to make sense? The remark only makes sense if "one of them" refers to the fact the shooter was a white male, and the reader believes all whit…
> Now, why would someone take out a prominent spokesperson for their own party? That's a question that actually has some easy examples if you'd care to study parties like Sinn Fein or Fatah or the CCCP or... you get the point. American politics has largely been free of this sort of in-fighting (and other kinds of political violence), but a political movement's leaders or followers can be targeted because they're deem…
Of course not.
The walls of our echo chamber are made out of titanium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now, why would someone take out a prominent spokesperson for their own party? That's a question that actually has some easy examples if you'd care to study parties like Sinn Fein or Fatah or the CCCP or... you get the point. American politics has largely been free of this sort of in-fighting (and other kinds of political violence), but a political movement's leaders or followers can be targeted because they're deem…
It's not even that recent. This is the plot to Julius Ceaser