7 ms·

What about what he said was so controversial? It seems entirely in line with everything else I’ve seen happen on these kinds of shows.

• rdtsc 1y ago
  [flagged]
• sixtyj 1y ago
  And the second wave of subscription cancellations will be from people who are upset with Disney+ decision… Smart move of executive :) /s
• slumpt_ 1y ago
  It criticized the potus, and threat of his ire is enough to scare corporations in 2025. A fairly concerning development
• c420 1y ago
  To those that are interpreting his comments in a certain way, the implication that Robinson is maga is highly offensive and textbook "misinformation". Edit: there's clearly several ways to interpret what he said. I'm not making any kind of argument here, just answering op's question.
  • rogerrogerr 1y ago
    Not so much offensive, as utterly puzzling given the information we had on him by Monday night. Not a fan of Trump or Jimmy, and I don’t think this is a proportional or good response. I’m pretty stunned that there was actually momentum enough to take him off the air. I also don’t understand why he left that little dig in his monologue.
    • Terr_ 1y ago
      Which information? The completely unverified stuff based on "a reconstruction" or "aggressive interview posture" from the same FBI led by the guy currently contradicting himself and telling lies in front of Congress? This Administration was basically founded on making strident claims on TV which turned out to be lies they couldn't back up in a court of law.
    • yibg 1y ago
      Doesn't seem that outlandish given the president of the united states said it was a extreme left lunatic before this.
    • deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    • RickJWagner 1y ago
      Kimmels show was expensive, Kimmel has baggage ( a history of racist comedy, including blackface ). This was a convenient opportunity to chop dead wood.
      • willmarch 1y ago
        After pressure from the federal government which is a clear violation of the Constitution of the United States.
    • vkou 1y ago
      > I’m pretty stunned that there was actually momentum enough to take him off the air. Have you not been paying attention to where rhetoric in this country has gone in the past 8 months? The first amendment is dead, the great leader is publically calling for his critics to lose their broadcast licenses, and the new SOP is for the government to squeeze the shit out of anyone who doesn't toe the line. (Which is an ever-shrinking group of people.) Be it with SLAPP suits, or by holding merger approvals, or by just threatening witch-hunts. This is what 48% of the electorate wanted, and, well, it's what they've delivered. --- Meanwhile, in Fox land, Brian Kilmeade was publically calling for mass-murder of the mentally ill the other day. For some strange reason, neither Trump nor the FCC, nor all the people outraged about political violence are making a peep about that.
      • deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      • deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
    • kashunstva 1y ago
      > I’m pretty stunned that there was actually momentum enough to take him off the air. Very little was needed. The U.S. president had already ominously threatened Kimmel and other late night hosts the day after Colbert was canceled, weeks before the shooting. I thought Kimmel was hilarious; but as they say, there’s no accounting for taste. The most ridiculous thing about this is that the world doesn’t cleave neatly into “radical left lunatics” and the righteous real Americans. I still can’t tell what the murderer was. Whatever that was, he acted on his own impulses - ones that are not broadly celebrated, irrespective of claims to the contrary.
      • defrost 1y ago
        Of all the takes on his motivations I've seen the most on point comes from an Australian of Robinson's generation .. Death by shitpost: Why modern media is so ill-equiped to diagnose Tyler Robinson https://www.crikey.com.au/2025/09/19/tyler-robinson-alleged-charlie-kirk-shooter-groyper-extremism/ https://www.crikey.com.au/2025/09/19/tyler-robinson-alleged-... https://archive.md/Lil0U#selection-941.0-941.80 https://archive.md/Lil0U#selection-941.0-941.80 Watching the US media struggling to cleave this into either left OR right as if the world is binary is, as you noted, ridiculous.
        • bitlax 1y ago
          There's just absolutely no doubt that Tyler Robinson is a deranged leftist. He was not apolitical. None of the evidence contradicts the fact that he is a leftist. Much of the evidence contradicts the protrayal of him as a right-winger.
    • bitlax 1y ago
      I mean, definitely offensive. Intended to offend.
      • bitlax 1y ago
        It's his shtick!
  • gruez 1y ago
    You don't exactly need to be MAGA to think that Kimmel's remarks were incorrect. From the economist: >After the assassination Jimmy Kimmel, a comedian on abc, suggested erroneously that Kirk had been killed by a maga fan. Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, which regulates broadcasters, threatened consequences: “We can do this the easy way or the hard way.” Within hours abc took Mr Kimmel off the air indefinitely. Mr Carr then said all broadcasters should ease up on the “progressive foie gras”. https://archive.is/ze4pD https://archive.is/ze4pD You can check the other articles in the same issue and see they're not exactly cheerleaders for the Trump administration. That said, the FTC shouldn't be in the business of strongarming critics, even if they're wrong.
    • siliconc0w 1y ago
      The subject of the sentence was "the MAGA gang" - and it's true that they (and the president himself) were the ones desperately declaring right after the assassination before we had any information that shooter was a radical leftist. So for me it's a fair statement and really only disinformation if you purposely distort the sentence. The second part of what he said is also a true statement, that they're using this tragic event to score political points and go after their political opponents.
      • gruez 1y ago
        You're ignoring the part of the quote where he implied the killer was MAGA or MAGA affiliated. For reference the full quote is: >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 didn't explicitly make the accusation that the killer was MAGA, but the use of the wording "desperately trying to imply ... as anything other than one of them" definitely gives that impression. I mean, why else would they be "desperately" trying to? If an attempt was made on Bernie or AOC I wouldn't characterize leftists prematurely blaming it on the right as "desperately". It's just the most logical inference. The "killer was right wing" narrative was also being pushed in some left leaning circles, so it's not exactly outlandish either.
  • tanduv 1y ago
    ummm First amendment? Its not the first time misinformation has been broadcasted on air, why does the FCC need to get involved in this one. Would they have gotten involved if the implication was that he was a liberal?
    • pitaj 1y ago
      They asked what was controversial about what he said, not whether the FCC's actions were constitutional.
      • nobody9999 1y ago
        >They asked what was controversial about what he said, not whether the FCC's actions were constitutional. The former is (for some at least) interesting. The latter is actually consequential. I'm concerned about the latter. The former, whether I agree or not, is about legal, protected political speech.
    • zoom6628 1y ago
      I don't see the FCC cancelling news shows on which Trump lies. Double standards driven by politics and why the govt orgs need career staff and not political players. Rule of Law anyone?
  • aisengard 1y ago
    As opposed to the implication that Robinson is somehow a leftwing activist, confidently claimed by every GOP politician from coast to coast? Also, even if it were, as you say, "misinformation", that is now somehow taboo on television? A sacred line none must dare cross?
  • thrance 1y ago
    So when a talk show host vaguely on the left implies something that might not be true it is ground enough to disregard the fucking first amendment and use the power of the state to censor him. But when the entire GOP, including the president, all fabricate obvious lies about the shooter being successively trans, then antifa and then a radical leftist, it's fine. The double standards are fucking crazy.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• djohnston 1y ago
  I suspect they were looking for an excuse to axe and found one. It was all milquetoast, and that entire format of television is dead and the networks know they need to pivot somewhere.
  • gruez 1y ago
    >It was all milquetoast, ??? It was a very obvious dig at the president. There's still not good justification for the government to step in, but claiming it's "milquetoast" is baffling.
    • djohnston 1y ago
      I guess it depends on the sort of media you consume. I’ve seen Destiny saying conservatives need to be afraid of getting shot, and it seems like he’s still alive. The other people who lost jobs seemed to have said much more direct and offensive remarks than Kimmel as well.
    • derefr 1y ago
      Digs directed at the President or the administration are and always have been well within the Overton window in American journalism, and previous Presidents and administrations have just seen them as a fact of life and brushed them off. Thus “milquetoast”: an implication that any reaction to this is, objectively, an overreaction. That the current President is a habitual over-reactor does not change that fact. It just means that you can paradoxically be taking a heterodox / outré stance by saying objectively milquetoast things.
    • add-sub-mul-div 1y ago
      Have you ever seen a late night show? Monologue jokes about the sitting president practically define the format. Every other president going back decades would just man up and take it.
      • wvenable 1y ago
        Except Nixon.
• autoexec 1y ago
  Honestly, I thought it was way more tame than I'd expect for comedy these days, but it's also been a long time since I watched a late night talk show and traditionally the ones on the old networks tended to have much more mild and lighthearted comedy compared to the more biting/edgy stuff you'd get on cable.
• nerdponx 1y ago
  It wasn't controversial, but this is literally the textbook Manufacturing Consent model. The small number of people in positions of power at the network are either overtly aligned with the president that he just talked bad about, or want to stay or get on the president's good side. He doesn't even need to pick up the phone or post anything on social media, they know what they need to do.
  • christophilus 1y ago
    Unless everyone at the top has been fired, ABC and Disney are not remotely aligned with the president. A short while ago, they were boycotted by the right for their slanted debate hosting and woke children’s programming.
    • nothrabannosir 1y ago
      Those two could be entirely compatible if it turns out they never gave a hoot about the actual politics, and only did all that stuff because they thought it would get them more favor with viewers, and thereby more money. I would personally not raise an eyebrow to learn this was the case.
  • kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
    It's more that ABC/Disney is beholden to two right-leaning broadcasters who are colluding with threats to assist in their prohibited merger that will be approved now because they just gave the felon a successful hand job. There is no indication that the ABC execs are anything more than spineless, unprincipled cowards who cave in a light breeze.
  • yieldcrv 1y ago
    I think most commenters are missing that a local broadcaster monopoly used their own freedom of association to drop the show The FCC and Trump merely dogpiled on this For Disney, they need to court the broadcaster monopoly as a key stakeholder to their revenue, this is all private sector and not a constitutional issue But when Disney is getting kicked and then an expensive fight with the government looms while their revenue is already threatened and would be expensive to resolve with the government , they buckled Thats the calculus here but because they buckled, now their customers are using their own freedom of association to disassociate, hampering Disney’s revenue more from that angle Press F to Pay Respects
• option 1y ago
  Nothing. But wannabe dictator got offended
• thepasswordis 1y ago
  [flagged]
  • jiggawatts 1y ago
    > was a claim that Charlie Kirk’s assassin was a “maga” supporter. I just watched the video. What he said was that MAGA supporters were too quick to blame anyone but the right, before there was any evidence about the shooter’s identity or political stance. That’s a fact.
    • thepasswordis 1y ago
      [flagged]
      • CamperBob2 1y ago
        [flagged]
      • autoexec 1y ago
        It's 100% true that MAGA people were being very vocal all over social media trying to characterize him as not being a trump supporter. What part of that do you think was a lie?
      • scheeseman486 1y ago
        How is it false? It isn't making the claim that the shooter was MAGA, but commenting on the right wing influencer sphere's recurring habit of accusing mass shooters of being associated with any group other than themselves.
      • gricardo99 1y ago
        he’s clearly commenting on how the “maga gang” is characterizing the murderer. There’s no statement directly about the murderer.
    • fakeBeerDrinker 1y ago
      [flagged]
• mingus88 1y ago
  This is their Horst Wessel moment. It doesn’t matter what actually happened, it’s just the minimal cover to do what they always planned on doing. Don’t believe me? Trump literally announced his plans months ago to take down these talk show hosts who were so mean to him Poor guy :(
  • pixxel 1y ago
    [dead]
• al_borland 1y ago
  He said the guy who shot Charlie Kirk was MAGA, which isn’t true, according to the information that has come out from those actually working on the case in the various press conferences, and from the evidence that’s been made public. It wasn’t meaningful to the joke he was looking to set up, it was just misinformation for misinformation’s sake. At least it came off that way. Add to that high emotions from people coping with a murder, and there you have it.
  • superultra 1y ago
    He did not say that the kid was MAGA, or at least not exactly. Here’s all he said about it: > 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. > In between the finger pointing there was grieving. On Friday, the White House flew the flags at half-staff, which got some criticism, but on a human level you can see how hard the President is taking this. He then played a clip where a reporter asked Trump how he was doing. Trump said good and immediately started talking about his new ballroom. What about any of that is misinformation? Given how they were certain the shooter was trans because he used arrows on the bullet - which were helldiver 2 codes - it did seem like people were trying to make it seem like the kid wasn’t MAGA. Turns out the kid is neither, or both, and was just terminally online, which none of us want to admit is the real problem because we’re all also terminally online.
    • stazz1 1y ago
      It was a political assassination done by someone who vehemently disagreed with certain viewpoints. The details about the shooter clearly indicate which end of the political spectrum he was on. Kimmel's comments were grossly inaccurate and wildly irresponsible.
      • dralley 1y ago
        Which is known now, but was absolutely not known at the time. There was so, so much complete BS being spread during those 24-48 hours.
• pacomerh 1y ago
  nothing of what he said was controversial, Im convinced they were just waiting for the next joke to do it anyways.
• gamblor956 1y ago
  The owner of the Sinclair Broadcasting group (the company that owns the ABC stations that started this) is a far-right ideologue that has been trying to drag ABC into News Nation territory for the past decade or so. Nothing Kimmel said was controversial. It was just being used as a false flag to justify other things.
• tempodox 1y ago
  He dared to ridicule uncle Donald and his gang. That’s more than enough.
• myvoiceismypass 1y ago
  It hurt the feelings of the "fuck your feelings" crowd, who started frothing at the mouth before even thinking about what was actually said.
• duxup 1y ago
  Honestly I think most of the actually angry people only heard "about it". It was a very mild commentary. The commentary about what Kimmel said was disconnected from what he said, hell the demand he give money seemed more like a criminal shakedown. I think Trump's statement about going after anyone who has anything negative to say about them, that's the real goal / point. Doesn't even have anything to do with Kirk.
• belter 1y ago
  https://youtu.be/7vRX-BQAjeE?t=16 https://youtu.be/7vRX-BQAjeE?t=16