9 ms·

After getting Jimmy Kimmel suspended, FCC chair threatens ABC's The View

192 points by duxup 1y ago

buzzerbetrayed 1y ago
[flagged]
- gjsman-1000 1y ago
  We also found out that Kimmel was planning a second attack on MAGA when the executives at ABC were already on-edge about the timing causing a backlash; simultaneously when Kimmel's ratings have dropped 43% since January to under 1.1M, which is "advertisers bailing out" territory. That's a lot duller than the Brendan Carr theory.
  - camel_Snake 1y ago
    geeze we sure strayed far from "legalize comedy" pretty quickly. Here we are, discussing quips like they're a military operation.
- labrador 1y ago
  What lie was Kimmel doubling down on? I found his comedic observations pretty accurate, which is why they stung the MAGA faithful.
- sghiassy 1y ago
  Can you speak more intelligently to your point. What laws were violated? Why would the FCC care about profitability of a show and advertisers? HN threads are open to diverse opinions, but deserve more than vitriol
jmclnx 1y ago
Off to the USSR we go unless Congress gets brave. Sadly I told people who came here from the USSR where I use to work 40 years ago we were heading towards being the USSR, but a bit different. They said "no way", well here we are, well on our way. Just a different flavor of the same type of thing.
- zzzeek 1y ago
  it would help if the billionaire / centimillionaire classes decided they didn't like what was going on.
  - clipsy 1y ago
    It’d be hectomillionaire, unless you’re referring to people with $10k.
    - pfannkuchen 1y ago
      Picomillionaires rise up!
      - fragmede 1y ago
        hundredaires in the house!
    - zzzeek 1y ago
      Centimillionaire was chosen for a reason.
      - clipsy 1y ago
        This post could have actually been informative if you'd bothered to elaborate on what that reason is, precisely.
        zzzeek 1y ago
        no it's a puzzle. solvable too
  - zidad 1y ago
    who do you think is orchestrating this?
    - 1y ago
knicholes 1y ago
[flagged]
- KumaBear 1y ago
  Obviously caught your attention. So it’s made it front page for a reason
- ian-g 1y ago
  There’s a lot of politics happening to us in real life right now too
- Jtsummers 1y ago
  It's tangential, as most people here aren't involved in traditional media, but this is a government that is interested in suppressing speech it dislikes [1]. Not actively harmful speech, threats and the like, just things they dislike. If this continues it could have significant impact for companies in the US, working with the US, and people working in the US but from other countries. This is the same administration that wants to go through social media posts and comments of people visiting the country to screen them for bad thoughts. Members of the administration are calling on people to rat each other out to their employers for this thoughtcrime. [1] https://clayhiggins.house.gov/2025/09/15/higgins-calls-upon-social-media-ceos-to-condemn-the-celebration-of-charlie-kirks-assassination/ https://clayhiggins.house.gov/2025/09/15/higgins-calls-upon-... - a recent example, out of Congress. Calling on social media companies to ban users because they said something he dislikes.
  - zahlman 1y ago
    > a recent example, out of Congress. Calling on social media companies to ban users because they said something he dislikes. Social media commonly already has terms of service which forbid glorification of violence. Expecting TOS to be applied fairly (i.e. without consideration of who got shot and who did the shooting) seems entirely reasonable to me.
ajross 1y ago
This is the way shakedowns work. Disney backed down on Kimmel because he's "just a comedian" or it's "just one show" or he was "failing anyway". So now they're marks. It's always easy to squeeze a mark for a second time than to shake down a fresh one. The View is "soft news", it's a "minor talk show", it's "daytime TV". It's not like they're coming after This Week or World News Tonight. Right?
- mlinhares 1y ago
  Just shows that they want to cave, they’re not being forced, they can fight and win but they want to be threatened and cave. If we get out of this mess I hope these people are also made responsible for the outcomes as enablers.
cyberax 1y ago
2021: government asking Twitter to tell you that you're not a horse is an unconstitutional violation of free speech. 2025: it's doubleplusgood to threaten TV channels for wrongthink.
squigz 1y ago
I'm sure there's some Republicans on HN. I'm curious why/if you think that, if the public pressuring companies to fire people for some things (what some people call "cancelling") is wrong, it's somehow more appropriate for the government to do it? Or is this just a matter of, "well, they did it for years, now it's our turn" for you? (If you don't actually support this party, consider refraining from sharing your opinions of why Republicans support this. And for what it's worth, I don't think the downvotes for those actually sharing their opinions [in a productive way] are deserved, even if I disagree with them.) Y'all really need to read the guidelines https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Retinal7467 1y ago
  [flagged]
- christophilus 1y ago
  Most republicans I know despised Kimmel but think the government overstepped. I’m not a Republican, but I am conservative. I think these moves are inexcusable.
- gjsman-1000 1y ago
  Simple. The Republicans remember when they were cancelled for not wanting to take a vaccination that was just invented months earlier; when they were deplatformed from Twitter constantly; when Reddit rejoiced at the death of one of their heroes; when "right wing violence is more common" became a meme as Minneapolis was literally burning. They watched a kid who they believed had a legitimate self-defense case get thrown the book in Wisconsin by a prosecutor called out by even the judge for brazen unfairness; with unprecedented levels of online hate rather than openness to discussion. They watched CNN accuse right wingers of exaggerating "mostly peaceful" protests with a car literally burning in the background. They stopped caring about your feelings, because you didn't care about theirs.
  - Jtsummers 1y ago
    > They stopped caring about your feelings, because you didn't care about theirs. Free speech is not about feelings. It's a principle, one enshrined in the US Constitution. If you don't believe in free speech, just say it. Say you don't want free speech, free assembly, free religion, and the free press. Don't cry about hurt feelings, though. That's what children do.
jimbob45 1y ago
Pure kayfabe. ABC needed any excuse to get rid of a show that no longer made sense in the modern era of streaming. NBC and CBS must be furious that they didn’t think of this first. Edit: Ha I forgot that CBS actually did think of it first with Colbert’s show getting axed too.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
  Stupid take. These shows are cheap to produce and still get good ratings. They're profitable. What are they being replaced with?
  - jimbob45 1y ago
    You can’t resell old episodes. They only talk about news and celebrities relevant to each specific week. They’re instantly dated - no one is rewatching old episodes beyond a week. Even if there are some stragglers still watching them with their ancient cable TV subscriptions, they’ll be gone within five years and who wants to invest in a dying show with an expiration date?
hairofadog 1y ago
Back in 2022, when Musk was buying Twitter and the Biden administration was asking social media companies to moderate potentially harmful medical misinformation, it felt like every third comment here was someone hollering about free-speech absolutism. Where did all those people go?
- thrownawayohman 1y ago
  [flagged]
- HankStallone 1y ago
  It's different when they do it.
dralley 1y ago
While I don't much care for either Kimmel nor The View - this is ridiculously corrupt, authoritarian, thuggish, illegal and arrogant behavior and cannot be allowed to stand. And shame on Disney for caving. Cowards who kneel down to kiss the ring in the face of blatantly illegal threats are not worthy of a position of public trust. And over a merger no less. I can't think of a better moral justification to prevent a corporation from owning a bigger slice of the ecosystem than to know that said corporation will dispense of any and all integrity they may yet possess to do it.
- mensetmanusman 1y ago
  An issue was that the right was being canceled for views not even 5 years ago and the same people complaining about Kimmel are having their exact quotes replayed justifying those types of cancellations. From a game theoretic standpoint, tit for tat is exactly what’s supposed to happen to stabilize the situation. This has actually been proven by mathematicians that apply decision making theories to social structures.
  - sylens 1y ago
    You're conflating cancel culture, done voluntarily by private companies, with censorship, with the federal government through the FCC is dictating the outcomes of mergers and acquisitions based on compliance with speech restrictions.
    - danielvaughn 1y ago
      This isn't entirely true, as cancel culture was also prominent at public universities.
    - christophilus 1y ago
      The Biden administration had (and used) the ability to demote conservative news outlets on Facebook and Twitter. This cancel culture— both from the right and left— sucks and should be fought.
gtirloni 1y ago
I'm not a US citizen so take what I write below with a grain of salt. I always thought the US to be a stronghold of democracy and free speech. I know, it's a naive view and we know how huge companies and corrupt politicians can subvert the system. But still, I thought it had a decent law system that, although imperfect like any other system, kept things from going back to the dark ages. I don't believe that anymore after what I've seen this year. A few individuals can completely takeover the government, keep committing bigger and bigger crimes and nothing happens. All they get is outrage on social media, which they are happy to shrug off. I know democracy and free speech are fragile things and we have to be constantly watching but I didn't imagine it would be this ephemeral in the US.
- spicyusername 1y ago
  It's something that's been eroding for a long time, starting mostly with the Reagan administration in the 1980s and the political desire at the time to put an end to the New deal era style of big government from the 1930s and 40s. There have been periods of pause, and even reverse, but two terms of the Trump administration trailing on the heels of the tea party movement in the 2010s have really done a lot of damage at all levels of US government. By now, so many politicians, lawyers, and judges, are compromised it's going to take some pretty extreme changes to the way people are voting to make an impact. I don't see that happening in the near future, even if I do see it happening in the long term.
  - vmg12 1y ago
    This is twisting history and reality, big government is exactly what's happening right now. The FCC abusing its power to silence speech is big government. The government using its power over universities to control them is big government. This is the fruit of that tree.
    - spicyusername 1y ago
      big government is exactly what is happening now I never said it wasn't. Such is the paradox of the modern Republican party. For the last so many decades they have claimed to want a smaller government. Then went handed the keys to the kingdom they immediately increase its size and get right to abusing its power.
mallowdram 1y ago
Time to toss symbols and words. When everyone is the same thing that everyone's accusing one another of being, then signaling is done. We've reached the symbolic impasse that arbitrariness only enforces. There's nothing coherent statement-wise coming out of the political leadership of all parties. That explains everything. No one is communicating. The news says nothing. All that matters is actions. And without a system of explanation for those actions, the species is dead. Listen to the experts: “...by getting rid of the clumsy symbols ‘round which we are fighting, we might bring the fight to an end.” Henri Bergson Time and Free Will "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less," said Humpty-Dumpty. "The question is whether you can make the words mean so many different things," Alice says. "The question is which is to be master—that is all," he replies. Lewis Carroll “The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.” Philip K. Dick
vmg12 1y ago
It actually sickens me how many people that supposedly cared about liberty just completely switched their schtick overnight. I'm not surprised that some of these people were two faced liars, I'm just surprised by the sheer scale and the shamelessness of it. It's like I'm living in a world surrounded by aliens.
- blooalien 1y ago
  > "It's like I'm living in a world surrounded by aliens." ...
- etchalon 1y ago
  It's neat to learn who had actual principles and who was just borrowing some because they were upset they couldn't use the N word.
- hn1986 1y ago
  Libertarians in name only
- UmGuys 1y ago
  It should not surprise you. They hold no position. In fact the positions they do hold are mostly lies (as we can see small gov, debt reduction, law and order). The only policies that are real are the evil ones: deploying military against civilians, transforming ICE into brutal terrorists, bankrupting the country through tax cuts, etc ... The GOP strategy has been to break the government, claim it doesn't work so they can defund it, foment fear and hatred, and flat out reject Democracy. Why? Because their policies are abhorrent and hateful and only help by a few rich "Christian" natrionalists.
Sparkle-san 1y ago
ABC is owned by Disney, which owns many subsidiaries. The one thing they and their shareholders care about is cold, hard cash. If you don't agree with what they're doing, then consider speaking the loudest way you can, with your wallet. Disney owns: - Hulu - Disney+ - ESPN+ - National Geographic - Pixar - Marvel - A whole lot more https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_the_Walt_Disney_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_the_Wa...
- takeda 1y ago
  And the parks.
- NedF 1y ago
  [flagged]
- _DeadFred_ 1y ago
  The company Nexstar the helped put the pressure on so they could get their special exemption (exemption to rules in place so that companies like Nexstar don't get too much power) own the online politics site 'The Hill'. https://www.nexstar.tv/networks/ https://www.nexstar.tv/networks/
  - _DeadFred_ 1y ago
    And to add, if you want to give comment to the FCC on the merger waiver at the center of this the period is over but the FCC people's in charges numbers are up for direct comment: https://www.fcc.gov/transaction/nexstar-tribune https://www.fcc.gov/transaction/nexstar-tribune
jjangkke 1y ago
Overton Window shift basically. One side used cancel culture relentlessly for even the smallest slights. Now the other side is using the very same tactic. Many people who have kept out of the extremes have now shifted towards the right and those who ignore the shift are finding out the hard way. I advise HN users who aren't aware of what's happening, read up on what Overton Window is and why its dangerous to continue posting the way you have without infosec. You think you are posting only on HN but your posts are actually being distributed on other platforms by people who are very angry. Users on Bluesky thought they were posting on Bluesky but they only found out too late, after they got fired because their political posts were being shared elsewhere. There have already been few HN users who have been targeted for their radical views and have paid the price. For your sake, please don't ignore this message.
- lupusreal 1y ago
  That's my take. Its worse this time because it's coming from the government, but in a sense that makes it actually an opportunity to fight it in court (and they absolutely should.) In any case, the rules of engagement have been clear for years: if we don't like you, then we're coming for your livelihood.
  - etchalon 1y ago
    It's not "worse because it's coming from the government". The fact it is coming from the government is what makes it terrifying.
    - lupusreal 1y ago
      You seem to contradict yourself. It's worse, yes? Your first sentence says no while your second sentence says yes.
      - willmarch 1y ago
        It's because you're comparing apples to oranges. Public shaming through social action vs the full weight of the federal government suppressing free speech; they are in two entirely different categories and shouldn't/can't be compared to each other without being misleading about the nature of the wrongs.
josefritzishere 1y ago
This is not normal.
- r0ckarong 1y ago
  [flagged]
- sghiassy 1y ago
  Historically speaking it might sadly be :/
aeon_ai 1y ago
We need a third party, because this is just the pendulum swinging away from one cancel culture to another.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- b0sk 1y ago
  Don't be naive. There was no jawboning from the previous administration to networks to cancel someone -- especially someone who always made fun of the President. However, this is a a classic example of violation of 1A. (I agree that the thing that was probably in the grey area was they asked Twitter to remove certain COVID-19 medical disinformation tweets -- But, come on, many people were consuming horse dewormers for COVID and dying. ) The right's cancel culture is a violation of constitution because it's the government that's doing the cancelling.
  - aeon_ai 1y ago
    Ignoring or at least dismissing the similar acts on the left highlights the reason that a third party is necessary. It’s clear Trump is attempting to capture the institution, and I’m not equivocating, but this has been an escalating ping pong back and forth over the last two decades. I’d rather live in a unified country. Unity comes from breaking out of the polarization
- luddit3 1y ago
  This is not cancel culture. It is a violation of the First Amendment.
thefourthchime 1y ago
The actual quote from the FCC chair: "When you look at these other TV shows, what's interesting is the FCC does have a rule called the Equal Opportunity Rule, which means, for instance, if you're in the run-up to an election and you have one partisan elected official on, you have to give equal time, equal opportunity, to the opposing partisan politician," This is classic Trump era politics. Bully people with a tangential connection to a obscure law. That way it has an air of legality. Well it meanders through the courts. In the end it doesn't matter if it gets ruled down or not. This gives you time to be rule as a de facto authoritarian.
xyzelement 1y ago
I love my liberal principles but this is totally expected. Ideally we live in a world where Kimmel isn't canceled but neither is someone like Roseanne Barr. But that world hasn't existed for a while. In a prisoners dilemma both sides win by cooperation. Once a side "defects" - the other side is a sucker not to. The ship on lamenting this stuff has sailed.
- pm90 1y ago
  Barr wasn’t cancelled by threats from the Government.
  - IncreasePosts 1y ago
    Neither was Kimmel - the real threats came from the ABC affiliates who threatened to not air his content.
    - etchalon 1y ago
      Kimmel was canceled explicitly because of a threat by the government. Carr has made that clear.
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
        Why are people playing dumb and ignoring this detail?
        hellotheretoday 1y ago
        Because the political playbook is to argue in bad faith and conservatives are much better convincing their base of that than democrats. Why are many of them convinced that left wing violence is a scourge when right wing violence outweighs it by an overwhelming majority [0] unless you do mental gymnastics after tons of mass shootings (as Kash Patel, who one would think would be aware of related trends to domestic terrorism, so eloquently put it: “I’m sorry. Dylann Roof?”[1]) [0]https://theconversation.com/right-wing-extremist-violence-is-more-frequent-and-more-deadly-than-left-wing-violence-what-the-data-shows-265367 https://theconversation.com/right-wing-extremist-violence-is... [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrkgM9_xOj4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrkgM9_xOj4
biophysboy 1y ago
Beyond the obvious state censorship issues here, its worth noting that Kimmel's monologue on Sep 15 appeared before add'l evidence (texts, discord chats) came out about Tyler Robinson's incoherent beliefs. This means that Kimmel's implied accusation (Tyler was MAGA) was a real possibility at the time, rather than willful misinformation.
- convolvatron 1y ago
  I took his statement to be deeper than MAGA vs liberal. Regardless of the spin, the view that political opponents are existential risks to the republic and thus demand to be killed for the good of all of is what he was suggesting that is shared.
  - biophysboy 1y ago
    Yes, this is more or less how I read the statement, but I can see why others had a less charitable reading. I don't want to nitpick it too much, because its a pretextual charge during a tense moment.
nielsbot 1y ago
The Kimmel case is a straightforward protection racket. Nexstar, the owner of 39% of the local TV stations in the country, wants the FCC to change their rules to allow them to merge with [other conglomerate name I forget] to increase their local market ownership share to 80%. (If you listen to what Kimmel said, he mainly mocked Trump.)
g42gregory 1y ago
People are discovering that cancel culture goes both ways. Neither one is good. But let's not pretend that cancel culture has not been going for many years now. Remember Fox News cancelling, their most popular at the time, Tucker Carlson Show?
- vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago
  I think the problem is that the FCC is getting involved here.
  - g42gregory 1y ago
    Yes, they could have spent time, first creating an informal "communication safety" group between some Government agency and Disney/ABC. But I feel like this is splitting hairs.
- hobs 1y ago
  I do remember that, and it turns out there's so many reasons to have fired TC that people had pages of listicles on why he could have been fired https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/why-was-tucker-carlson-fired-fox-news-b2354146.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic... and none of them were cancel culture it turns out. Fox already lied and paid out hundreds of millions on dominion, it couldn't handle paying for any more lies.
  - g42gregory 1y ago
    Yeah, I am sure soon we be given good reasons why "they couldn't handle" JK either. Just scroll down the comments. See, ABC affiliates wanted him gone... :-) TC has now an audience larger than the entire Fox News. Maybe JK will do the same.
    - hobs 1y ago
      Sure... except that's an appeal to authority that has nothing to do with being an incredibly toxic legal liability. The lies about Dominion voting machines were incredibly popular, denying science is incredibly popular, homeopathy is incredibly popular.
reaperducer 1y ago
Republicans are demanding "equal time." Cool. I look forward to hearing Whoopi Goldberg on AM talk radio.
- yndoendo 1y ago
  Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine created echo chambers. [0] Equal air time to different point of views of a topic turned into 100% or 99% network pushed point of view. This removed a standard person from having quality engagement to content designed an manipulated for personal gain by the networks. It was a good bridge to living together versus living divided. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_doctrine
reaperducer 1y ago
It's sad that the head of the FCC is ignorant of what the FCC does. The Fairness doctrine was eliminated in the late 80's by Republicans whose talk shows were taking over AM radio. Later, the FCC took the position that it does not have the authority to regulate content. Only technical things like frequency allocation. Now, suddenly the Republicans want to invoke the rules they killed because someone got their feelings hurt? Man up, GOP. Maybe turn off the TV and read a book, or go for a walk, or take up a hobby other than being angry at everything.
vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago
I think cancelling The View is overall a benefit to humanity. But the real question is: Are they going after Fox News, OANN now too? Plenty of biased shows there.
taurath 1y ago
I don't have any idea where this will go, but the idea that our collective future is determined by the restraint of the people currently in power does not bode well.
- giardini 1y ago
  The rioting, burning, shooting and killing is being done by the people out of power. Those people have no restraint apparently.
erulabs 1y ago
A lot of things can be true at the same time: - The FCC shouldn't be involved in content moderation, and the FCC Chair is obviously on an authoritarian power trip. - What Kimmel said was wrong (assuming you believe Utah state investigators) and deeply irresponsible and inflammatory. - Clearly the market was already deciding that Kimmel's show is irrelevant (Nielsen ratings quite clear on that). - The FCC is only involved in content because of how TV broadcasting worked ~50 years ago (large swaths of RF spectrum allocated to certain license holders, only a few channels -could- exist due to technical reasons, thus fairness rules). - ABC's distributors threatened to stop airing the network, which is what actually caused Disney/ABC to act, it's hard to say what impact the FCC Chairs comments actually had. - The idea that the FCC needs to act to protect the TV Broadcasting systems is ridiculous, just let it all die, we're very far past the "public square" era of media. - Had the FCC made no comment, and Disney pulled the show due to the distributors actions, it would have obviously just been "cancel culture but from the right", instead Brendan Carr wants to get in the headlines and so here we are. It's all a perfect Scissor Statement. You can absolutely not care about Kimmel, you can think the FCC's TV licensing scheme is pointless and outdated, you can be 0% surprised Disney only cares about money and Carr is an idiot, and still you can get into a heated argument about this stuff. My own mother texted me "Free speech is dead" and hurah, now I get to do 3 hours of reading to say "it never really existed in broadcast television and also yes, this is bad, but not nearly as bad as you think" and boom now I'm the fascist. "Sort by Controversial" is such a troubling timeline.
- ajross 1y ago
  > - What Kimmel said was wrong (assuming you believe Utah state investigators) and deeply irresponsible and inflammatory. Was it really though? Paraphrased, Kimmel said that the killer was a republican. He had a republican background, but it didn't motivate the killing which didn't seem to have any particular ideology beyond (maybe) trans identity politics and/or edgelord memery. So yeah, that was wrong. But if that's "irresponsible and inflammatory", then isn't it equally so to blame "democrats" or "the left", also groups with which Robinson has no documented affiliation? And we can all agree that this is happening pervasively on the right, at all levels. The double standard here seems troublesome to me, and likely deliberate. Which, I'll add, what actually the point Kimmel was trying to make. > now I get to do 3 hours of reading to say "it never really existed in broadcast television and also yes, this is bad, but not nearly as bad as you think" and boom now I'm the fascist You're not a fascist, but you do seem to be sort of an apologist. Doesn't the linked article directly refute the "not nearly as bad as you think" bit? It's happening again!
somethoughts 1y ago
It feels a better strategy for all parties involved to have transitioned these shows to ABC's streaming properties (i.e. Hulu) and made them "exclusive" content for these platforms. This would have put them out of the reach of the FCC (based on the FCC's initial spectrum is for public benefit for all claim) for now. There is probably significant IP in both of these shows that could still have been monetized given brand familiarity. It would have been less than before but still something is better than nothing. I don't have any data to back this up but I can't imagine a lot of people still use Over The Air TV. And the intersection of people who rely solely on OTA TV and are clamoring to watch Kimmel/View is probably even lower. This also would probably have benefitted the administration in that it wouldn't have trigger as many alarm bells from a free speech perspective.
kcplate 1y ago
I don’t watch any of these shows, but I have seen videos of the View hosts having to read “Legal Notes” on air, often after commercial breaks to “clarify” or correct things that were just said on the show. Even one video where after the “note” the host attempted to clarify off the cuff even further…only to get an another note again right away to clarify the clarification. My feeling is if I was a media company, and I had to employ lawyers to legal check conversations in real time on a talk show because my hosts were either so dumb to know when to avoid shooting their mouths off, or couldn’t control themselves…that show better be making a metric shit ton of profit otherwise I’d yank it and put up reruns of House on the Prairie.
eatithypocites 1y ago
[flagged]
notmyjob 1y ago
This saddens me. The view, despite its negative press, has helped countless housewives broaden their scope of concern from gossipy soap opera nonsense to current events and domestic politics. While they may not be good educators, they are moving the needle. It used to be unladylike to talk politics, at least for the uneducated class. Now we have daytime tv populism.

192 points by duxup 1y ago

buzzerbetrayed 1y ago

[flagged]

gjsman-1000 1y ago
We also found out that Kimmel was planning a second attack on MAGA when the executives at ABC were already on-edge about the timing causing a backlash; simultaneously when Kimmel's ratings have dropped 43% since January to under 1.1M, which is "advertisers bailing out" territory. That's a lot duller than the Brendan Carr theory.
- camel_Snake 1y ago
  geeze we sure strayed far from "legalize comedy" pretty quickly. Here we are, discussing quips like they're a military operation.
labrador 1y ago
What lie was Kimmel doubling down on? I found his comedic observations pretty accurate, which is why they stung the MAGA faithful.
sghiassy 1y ago
Can you speak more intelligently to your point. What laws were violated? Why would the FCC care about profitability of a show and advertisers? HN threads are open to diverse opinions, but deserve more than vitriol

jmclnx 1y ago

Off to the USSR we go unless Congress gets brave. Sadly I told people who came here from the USSR where I use to work 40 years ago we were heading towards being the USSR, but a bit different. They said "no way", well here we are, well on our way. Just a different flavor of the same type of thing.

zzzeek 1y ago
it would help if the billionaire / centimillionaire classes decided they didn't like what was going on.
- clipsy 1y ago
  It’d be hectomillionaire, unless you’re referring to people with $10k.
  - pfannkuchen 1y ago
    Picomillionaires rise up!
    - fragmede 1y ago
      hundredaires in the house!
  - zzzeek 1y ago
    Centimillionaire was chosen for a reason.
    - clipsy 1y ago
      This post could have actually been informative if you'd bothered to elaborate on what that reason is, precisely.
      - zzzeek 1y ago
        no it's a puzzle. solvable too
- zidad 1y ago
  who do you think is orchestrating this?
  - 1y ago

knicholes 1y ago

[flagged]

KumaBear 1y ago
Obviously caught your attention. So it’s made it front page for a reason
ian-g 1y ago
There’s a lot of politics happening to us in real life right now too
Jtsummers 1y ago
It's tangential, as most people here aren't involved in traditional media, but this is a government that is interested in suppressing speech it dislikes [1]. Not actively harmful speech, threats and the like, just things they dislike. If this continues it could have significant impact for companies in the US, working with the US, and people working in the US but from other countries. This is the same administration that wants to go through social media posts and comments of people visiting the country to screen them for bad thoughts. Members of the administration are calling on people to rat each other out to their employers for this thoughtcrime. [1] https://clayhiggins.house.gov/2025/09/15/higgins-calls-upon-social-media-ceos-to-condemn-the-celebration-of-charlie-kirks-assassination/ https://clayhiggins.house.gov/2025/09/15/higgins-calls-upon-... - a recent example, out of Congress. Calling on social media companies to ban users because they said something he dislikes.
- zahlman 1y ago
  > a recent example, out of Congress. Calling on social media companies to ban users because they said something he dislikes. Social media commonly already has terms of service which forbid glorification of violence. Expecting TOS to be applied fairly (i.e. without consideration of who got shot and who did the shooting) seems entirely reasonable to me.

ajross 1y ago

This is the way shakedowns work. Disney backed down on Kimmel because he's "just a comedian" or it's "just one show" or he was "failing anyway". So now they're marks. It's always easy to squeeze a mark for a second time than to shake down a fresh one. The View is "soft news", it's a "minor talk show", it's "daytime TV". It's not like they're coming after This Week or World News Tonight. Right?

mlinhares 1y ago
Just shows that they want to cave, they’re not being forced, they can fight and win but they want to be threatened and cave. If we get out of this mess I hope these people are also made responsible for the outcomes as enablers.

cyberax 1y ago

2021: government asking Twitter to tell you that you're not a horse is an unconstitutional violation of free speech. 2025: it's doubleplusgood to threaten TV channels for wrongthink.

squigz 1y ago

I'm sure there's some Republicans on HN. I'm curious why/if you think that, if the public pressuring companies to fire people for some things (what some people call "cancelling") is wrong, it's somehow more appropriate for the government to do it? Or is this just a matter of, "well, they did it for years, now it's our turn" for you? (If you don't actually support this party, consider refraining from sharing your opinions of why Republicans support this. And for what it's worth, I don't think the downvotes for those actually sharing their opinions [in a productive way] are deserved, even if I disagree with them.) Y'all really need to read the guidelines https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Retinal7467 1y ago
[flagged]
christophilus 1y ago
Most republicans I know despised Kimmel but think the government overstepped. I’m not a Republican, but I am conservative. I think these moves are inexcusable.
gjsman-1000 1y ago
Simple. The Republicans remember when they were cancelled for not wanting to take a vaccination that was just invented months earlier; when they were deplatformed from Twitter constantly; when Reddit rejoiced at the death of one of their heroes; when "right wing violence is more common" became a meme as Minneapolis was literally burning. They watched a kid who they believed had a legitimate self-defense case get thrown the book in Wisconsin by a prosecutor called out by even the judge for brazen unfairness; with unprecedented levels of online hate rather than openness to discussion. They watched CNN accuse right wingers of exaggerating "mostly peaceful" protests with a car literally burning in the background. They stopped caring about your feelings, because you didn't care about theirs.
- Jtsummers 1y ago
  > They stopped caring about your feelings, because you didn't care about theirs. Free speech is not about feelings. It's a principle, one enshrined in the US Constitution. If you don't believe in free speech, just say it. Say you don't want free speech, free assembly, free religion, and the free press. Don't cry about hurt feelings, though. That's what children do.

jimbob45 1y ago

Pure kayfabe. ABC needed any excuse to get rid of a show that no longer made sense in the modern era of streaming. NBC and CBS must be furious that they didn’t think of this first. Edit: Ha I forgot that CBS actually did think of it first with Colbert’s show getting axed too.

2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
Stupid take. These shows are cheap to produce and still get good ratings. They're profitable. What are they being replaced with?
- jimbob45 1y ago
  You can’t resell old episodes. They only talk about news and celebrities relevant to each specific week. They’re instantly dated - no one is rewatching old episodes beyond a week. Even if there are some stragglers still watching them with their ancient cable TV subscriptions, they’ll be gone within five years and who wants to invest in a dying show with an expiration date?

hairofadog 1y ago

Back in 2022, when Musk was buying Twitter and the Biden administration was asking social media companies to moderate potentially harmful medical misinformation, it felt like every third comment here was someone hollering about free-speech absolutism. Where did all those people go?

thrownawayohman 1y ago
[flagged]
HankStallone 1y ago
It's different when they do it.

dralley 1y ago

While I don't much care for either Kimmel nor The View - this is ridiculously corrupt, authoritarian, thuggish, illegal and arrogant behavior and cannot be allowed to stand. And shame on Disney for caving. Cowards who kneel down to kiss the ring in the face of blatantly illegal threats are not worthy of a position of public trust. And over a merger no less. I can't think of a better moral justification to prevent a corporation from owning a bigger slice of the ecosystem than to know that said corporation will dispense of any and all integrity they may yet possess to do it.

mensetmanusman 1y ago
An issue was that the right was being canceled for views not even 5 years ago and the same people complaining about Kimmel are having their exact quotes replayed justifying those types of cancellations. From a game theoretic standpoint, tit for tat is exactly what’s supposed to happen to stabilize the situation. This has actually been proven by mathematicians that apply decision making theories to social structures.
- sylens 1y ago
  You're conflating cancel culture, done voluntarily by private companies, with censorship, with the federal government through the FCC is dictating the outcomes of mergers and acquisitions based on compliance with speech restrictions.
  - danielvaughn 1y ago
    This isn't entirely true, as cancel culture was also prominent at public universities.
  - christophilus 1y ago
    The Biden administration had (and used) the ability to demote conservative news outlets on Facebook and Twitter. This cancel culture— both from the right and left— sucks and should be fought.

gtirloni 1y ago

I'm not a US citizen so take what I write below with a grain of salt. I always thought the US to be a stronghold of democracy and free speech. I know, it's a naive view and we know how huge companies and corrupt politicians can subvert the system. But still, I thought it had a decent law system that, although imperfect like any other system, kept things from going back to the dark ages. I don't believe that anymore after what I've seen this year. A few individuals can completely takeover the government, keep committing bigger and bigger crimes and nothing happens. All they get is outrage on social media, which they are happy to shrug off. I know democracy and free speech are fragile things and we have to be constantly watching but I didn't imagine it would be this ephemeral in the US.

spicyusername 1y ago
It's something that's been eroding for a long time, starting mostly with the Reagan administration in the 1980s and the political desire at the time to put an end to the New deal era style of big government from the 1930s and 40s. There have been periods of pause, and even reverse, but two terms of the Trump administration trailing on the heels of the tea party movement in the 2010s have really done a lot of damage at all levels of US government. By now, so many politicians, lawyers, and judges, are compromised it's going to take some pretty extreme changes to the way people are voting to make an impact. I don't see that happening in the near future, even if I do see it happening in the long term.
- vmg12 1y ago
  This is twisting history and reality, big government is exactly what's happening right now. The FCC abusing its power to silence speech is big government. The government using its power over universities to control them is big government. This is the fruit of that tree.
  - spicyusername 1y ago
    big government is exactly what is happening now I never said it wasn't. Such is the paradox of the modern Republican party. For the last so many decades they have claimed to want a smaller government. Then went handed the keys to the kingdom they immediately increase its size and get right to abusing its power.

mallowdram 1y ago

Time to toss symbols and words. When everyone is the same thing that everyone's accusing one another of being, then signaling is done. We've reached the symbolic impasse that arbitrariness only enforces. There's nothing coherent statement-wise coming out of the political leadership of all parties. That explains everything. No one is communicating. The news says nothing. All that matters is actions. And without a system of explanation for those actions, the species is dead. Listen to the experts: “...by getting rid of the clumsy symbols ‘round which we are fighting, we might bring the fight to an end.” Henri Bergson Time and Free Will "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less," said Humpty-Dumpty. "The question is whether you can make the words mean so many different things," Alice says. "The question is which is to be master—that is all," he replies. Lewis Carroll “The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.” Philip K. Dick

vmg12 1y ago

It actually sickens me how many people that supposedly cared about liberty just completely switched their schtick overnight. I'm not surprised that some of these people were two faced liars, I'm just surprised by the sheer scale and the shamelessness of it. It's like I'm living in a world surrounded by aliens.

blooalien 1y ago
> "It's like I'm living in a world surrounded by aliens." ...
etchalon 1y ago
It's neat to learn who had actual principles and who was just borrowing some because they were upset they couldn't use the N word.
hn1986 1y ago
Libertarians in name only
UmGuys 1y ago
It should not surprise you. They hold no position. In fact the positions they do hold are mostly lies (as we can see small gov, debt reduction, law and order). The only policies that are real are the evil ones: deploying military against civilians, transforming ICE into brutal terrorists, bankrupting the country through tax cuts, etc ... The GOP strategy has been to break the government, claim it doesn't work so they can defund it, foment fear and hatred, and flat out reject Democracy. Why? Because their policies are abhorrent and hateful and only help by a few rich "Christian" natrionalists.

Sparkle-san 1y ago

ABC is owned by Disney, which owns many subsidiaries. The one thing they and their shareholders care about is cold, hard cash. If you don't agree with what they're doing, then consider speaking the loudest way you can, with your wallet. Disney owns: - Hulu - Disney+ - ESPN+ - National Geographic - Pixar - Marvel - A whole lot more https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_the_Walt_Disney_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_the_Wa...

takeda 1y ago
And the parks.
NedF 1y ago
[flagged]
_DeadFred_ 1y ago
The company Nexstar the helped put the pressure on so they could get their special exemption (exemption to rules in place so that companies like Nexstar don't get too much power) own the online politics site 'The Hill'. https://www.nexstar.tv/networks/ https://www.nexstar.tv/networks/
- _DeadFred_ 1y ago
  And to add, if you want to give comment to the FCC on the merger waiver at the center of this the period is over but the FCC people's in charges numbers are up for direct comment: https://www.fcc.gov/transaction/nexstar-tribune https://www.fcc.gov/transaction/nexstar-tribune

jjangkke 1y ago

Overton Window shift basically. One side used cancel culture relentlessly for even the smallest slights. Now the other side is using the very same tactic. Many people who have kept out of the extremes have now shifted towards the right and those who ignore the shift are finding out the hard way. I advise HN users who aren't aware of what's happening, read up on what Overton Window is and why its dangerous to continue posting the way you have without infosec. You think you are posting only on HN but your posts are actually being distributed on other platforms by people who are very angry. Users on Bluesky thought they were posting on Bluesky but they only found out too late, after they got fired because their political posts were being shared elsewhere. There have already been few HN users who have been targeted for their radical views and have paid the price. For your sake, please don't ignore this message.

lupusreal 1y ago
That's my take. Its worse this time because it's coming from the government, but in a sense that makes it actually an opportunity to fight it in court (and they absolutely should.) In any case, the rules of engagement have been clear for years: if we don't like you, then we're coming for your livelihood.
- etchalon 1y ago
  It's not "worse because it's coming from the government". The fact it is coming from the government is what makes it terrifying.
  - lupusreal 1y ago
    You seem to contradict yourself. It's worse, yes? Your first sentence says no while your second sentence says yes.
    - willmarch 1y ago
      It's because you're comparing apples to oranges. Public shaming through social action vs the full weight of the federal government suppressing free speech; they are in two entirely different categories and shouldn't/can't be compared to each other without being misleading about the nature of the wrongs.

josefritzishere 1y ago

This is not normal.

r0ckarong 1y ago
[flagged]
sghiassy 1y ago
Historically speaking it might sadly be :/

aeon_ai 1y ago

We need a third party, because this is just the pendulum swinging away from one cancel culture to another.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
b0sk 1y ago
Don't be naive. There was no jawboning from the previous administration to networks to cancel someone -- especially someone who always made fun of the President. However, this is a a classic example of violation of 1A. (I agree that the thing that was probably in the grey area was they asked Twitter to remove certain COVID-19 medical disinformation tweets -- But, come on, many people were consuming horse dewormers for COVID and dying. ) The right's cancel culture is a violation of constitution because it's the government that's doing the cancelling.
- aeon_ai 1y ago
  Ignoring or at least dismissing the similar acts on the left highlights the reason that a third party is necessary. It’s clear Trump is attempting to capture the institution, and I’m not equivocating, but this has been an escalating ping pong back and forth over the last two decades. I’d rather live in a unified country. Unity comes from breaking out of the polarization
luddit3 1y ago
This is not cancel culture. It is a violation of the First Amendment.

thefourthchime 1y ago

The actual quote from the FCC chair: "When you look at these other TV shows, what's interesting is the FCC does have a rule called the Equal Opportunity Rule, which means, for instance, if you're in the run-up to an election and you have one partisan elected official on, you have to give equal time, equal opportunity, to the opposing partisan politician," This is classic Trump era politics. Bully people with a tangential connection to a obscure law. That way it has an air of legality. Well it meanders through the courts. In the end it doesn't matter if it gets ruled down or not. This gives you time to be rule as a de facto authoritarian.

xyzelement 1y ago

I love my liberal principles but this is totally expected. Ideally we live in a world where Kimmel isn't canceled but neither is someone like Roseanne Barr. But that world hasn't existed for a while. In a prisoners dilemma both sides win by cooperation. Once a side "defects" - the other side is a sucker not to. The ship on lamenting this stuff has sailed.

pm90 1y ago
Barr wasn’t cancelled by threats from the Government.
- IncreasePosts 1y ago
  Neither was Kimmel - the real threats came from the ABC affiliates who threatened to not air his content.
  - etchalon 1y ago
    Kimmel was canceled explicitly because of a threat by the government. Carr has made that clear.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
      Why are people playing dumb and ignoring this detail?
      - hellotheretoday 1y ago
        Because the political playbook is to argue in bad faith and conservatives are much better convincing their base of that than democrats. Why are many of them convinced that left wing violence is a scourge when right wing violence outweighs it by an overwhelming majority [0] unless you do mental gymnastics after tons of mass shootings (as Kash Patel, who one would think would be aware of related trends to domestic terrorism, so eloquently put it: “I’m sorry. Dylann Roof?”[1]) [0]https://theconversation.com/right-wing-extremist-violence-is-more-frequent-and-more-deadly-than-left-wing-violence-what-the-data-shows-265367 https://theconversation.com/right-wing-extremist-violence-is... [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrkgM9_xOj4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrkgM9_xOj4

biophysboy 1y ago

Beyond the obvious state censorship issues here, its worth noting that Kimmel's monologue on Sep 15 appeared before add'l evidence (texts, discord chats) came out about Tyler Robinson's incoherent beliefs. This means that Kimmel's implied accusation (Tyler was MAGA) was a real possibility at the time, rather than willful misinformation.

convolvatron 1y ago
I took his statement to be deeper than MAGA vs liberal. Regardless of the spin, the view that political opponents are existential risks to the republic and thus demand to be killed for the good of all of is what he was suggesting that is shared.
- biophysboy 1y ago
  Yes, this is more or less how I read the statement, but I can see why others had a less charitable reading. I don't want to nitpick it too much, because its a pretextual charge during a tense moment.

nielsbot 1y ago

The Kimmel case is a straightforward protection racket. Nexstar, the owner of 39% of the local TV stations in the country, wants the FCC to change their rules to allow them to merge with [other conglomerate name I forget] to increase their local market ownership share to 80%. (If you listen to what Kimmel said, he mainly mocked Trump.)

g42gregory 1y ago

People are discovering that cancel culture goes both ways. Neither one is good. But let's not pretend that cancel culture has not been going for many years now. Remember Fox News cancelling, their most popular at the time, Tucker Carlson Show?

vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago
I think the problem is that the FCC is getting involved here.
- g42gregory 1y ago
  Yes, they could have spent time, first creating an informal "communication safety" group between some Government agency and Disney/ABC. But I feel like this is splitting hairs.
hobs 1y ago
I do remember that, and it turns out there's so many reasons to have fired TC that people had pages of listicles on why he could have been fired https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/why-was-tucker-carlson-fired-fox-news-b2354146.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic... and none of them were cancel culture it turns out. Fox already lied and paid out hundreds of millions on dominion, it couldn't handle paying for any more lies.
- g42gregory 1y ago
  Yeah, I am sure soon we be given good reasons why "they couldn't handle" JK either. Just scroll down the comments. See, ABC affiliates wanted him gone... :-) TC has now an audience larger than the entire Fox News. Maybe JK will do the same.
  - hobs 1y ago
    Sure... except that's an appeal to authority that has nothing to do with being an incredibly toxic legal liability. The lies about Dominion voting machines were incredibly popular, denying science is incredibly popular, homeopathy is incredibly popular.

reaperducer 1y ago

Republicans are demanding "equal time." Cool. I look forward to hearing Whoopi Goldberg on AM talk radio.

yndoendo 1y ago
Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine created echo chambers. [0] Equal air time to different point of views of a topic turned into 100% or 99% network pushed point of view. This removed a standard person from having quality engagement to content designed an manipulated for personal gain by the networks. It was a good bridge to living together versus living divided. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_doctrine

reaperducer 1y ago

It's sad that the head of the FCC is ignorant of what the FCC does. The Fairness doctrine was eliminated in the late 80's by Republicans whose talk shows were taking over AM radio. Later, the FCC took the position that it does not have the authority to regulate content. Only technical things like frequency allocation. Now, suddenly the Republicans want to invoke the rules they killed because someone got their feelings hurt? Man up, GOP. Maybe turn off the TV and read a book, or go for a walk, or take up a hobby other than being angry at everything.

vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago

I think cancelling The View is overall a benefit to humanity. But the real question is: Are they going after Fox News, OANN now too? Plenty of biased shows there.

taurath 1y ago

I don't have any idea where this will go, but the idea that our collective future is determined by the restraint of the people currently in power does not bode well.

giardini 1y ago
The rioting, burning, shooting and killing is being done by the people out of power. Those people have no restraint apparently.

erulabs 1y ago

A lot of things can be true at the same time: - The FCC shouldn't be involved in content moderation, and the FCC Chair is obviously on an authoritarian power trip. - What Kimmel said was wrong (assuming you believe Utah state investigators) and deeply irresponsible and inflammatory. - Clearly the market was already deciding that Kimmel's show is irrelevant (Nielsen ratings quite clear on that). - The FCC is only involved in content because of how TV broadcasting worked ~50 years ago (large swaths of RF spectrum allocated to certain license holders, only a few channels -could- exist due to technical reasons, thus fairness rules). - ABC's distributors threatened to stop airing the network, which is what actually caused Disney/ABC to act, it's hard to say what impact the FCC Chairs comments actually had. - The idea that the FCC needs to act to protect the TV Broadcasting systems is ridiculous, just let it all die, we're very far past the "public square" era of media. - Had the FCC made no comment, and Disney pulled the show due to the distributors actions, it would have obviously just been "cancel culture but from the right", instead Brendan Carr wants to get in the headlines and so here we are. It's all a perfect Scissor Statement. You can absolutely not care about Kimmel, you can think the FCC's TV licensing scheme is pointless and outdated, you can be 0% surprised Disney only cares about money and Carr is an idiot, and still you can get into a heated argument about this stuff. My own mother texted me "Free speech is dead" and hurah, now I get to do 3 hours of reading to say "it never really existed in broadcast television and also yes, this is bad, but not nearly as bad as you think" and boom now I'm the fascist. "Sort by Controversial" is such a troubling timeline.

ajross 1y ago
> - What Kimmel said was wrong (assuming you believe Utah state investigators) and deeply irresponsible and inflammatory. Was it really though? Paraphrased, Kimmel said that the killer was a republican. He had a republican background, but it didn't motivate the killing which didn't seem to have any particular ideology beyond (maybe) trans identity politics and/or edgelord memery. So yeah, that was wrong. But if that's "irresponsible and inflammatory", then isn't it equally so to blame "democrats" or "the left", also groups with which Robinson has no documented affiliation? And we can all agree that this is happening pervasively on the right, at all levels. The double standard here seems troublesome to me, and likely deliberate. Which, I'll add, what actually the point Kimmel was trying to make. > now I get to do 3 hours of reading to say "it never really existed in broadcast television and also yes, this is bad, but not nearly as bad as you think" and boom now I'm the fascist You're not a fascist, but you do seem to be sort of an apologist. Doesn't the linked article directly refute the "not nearly as bad as you think" bit? It's happening again!

somethoughts 1y ago

It feels a better strategy for all parties involved to have transitioned these shows to ABC's streaming properties (i.e. Hulu) and made them "exclusive" content for these platforms. This would have put them out of the reach of the FCC (based on the FCC's initial spectrum is for public benefit for all claim) for now. There is probably significant IP in both of these shows that could still have been monetized given brand familiarity. It would have been less than before but still something is better than nothing. I don't have any data to back this up but I can't imagine a lot of people still use Over The Air TV. And the intersection of people who rely solely on OTA TV and are clamoring to watch Kimmel/View is probably even lower. This also would probably have benefitted the administration in that it wouldn't have trigger as many alarm bells from a free speech perspective.

kcplate 1y ago

I don’t watch any of these shows, but I have seen videos of the View hosts having to read “Legal Notes” on air, often after commercial breaks to “clarify” or correct things that were just said on the show. Even one video where after the “note” the host attempted to clarify off the cuff even further…only to get an another note again right away to clarify the clarification. My feeling is if I was a media company, and I had to employ lawyers to legal check conversations in real time on a talk show because my hosts were either so dumb to know when to avoid shooting their mouths off, or couldn’t control themselves…that show better be making a metric shit ton of profit otherwise I’d yank it and put up reruns of House on the Prairie.

eatithypocites 1y ago

[flagged]

notmyjob 1y ago

This saddens me. The view, despite its negative press, has helped countless housewives broaden their scope of concern from gossipy soap opera nonsense to current events and domestic politics. While they may not be good educators, they are moving the needle. It used to be unladylike to talk politics, at least for the uneducated class. Now we have daytime tv populism.