4 ms·
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 th
by jjfoooo4 1y ago
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.
Terrible precedent aside, how could Disney think that capitulating here will result in anything other than more attempts to control their programming in the short term?
- Gee101 1y agoIs it possible that they wanted to pull the show and this was just the excuse they were looking for?
- thedougd 1y agoUnlikely they’d want to politicize the canceling of their show. Quiet and uncontroversial is better for ABC.
- ndsipa_pomu 1y agoWhy would a broadcaster want to pull a show and need an excuse to do so? Shows get cancelled all the time if the broadcaster decides that they're too expensive etc.
- davesque 1y agoHe didn't even assert that the shooter was MAGA, only that MAGA did their best to distance themselves from him.
- rattlesnakedave 1y ago“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.
- suzdude 1y ago> 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.
- rattlesnakedave 1y ago[flagged]
- suzdude 1y agoCorrect, 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?
- rattlesnakedave 1y agoYeah, when the president starts a television network, gets a broadcast license from the FCC (under which he must meet “public interest” requirements), spins up a late night program, and then begins deliberately spreading misinformation to score political points, then yes, threaten to revoke his license.
- suzdude 1y agoWhy are you are ignoring the question? You are creating a hypothetical to ignore it. Under your view, the networks, as they stand, should never have allowed him on the airwaves to begin with.
- FireBeyond 1y agoHow’s the state of Fox’s license look to you? Or have they never ever spread misinformation for political purposes?