On Sat 20-Sep-2025 9:11a, Mike Powell@1:2320/105.0 wrote:

[I am stuck between "Kimmel is unfunny and probably pushed the envelope too far this time" vs. the right to free speach and the dangerous
precident
that his suspension sets, and the fact that no one should be looking to late-night entertainers for "news."]

'Hit them where it hurts': Angry Disney+ and Hulu users are closing their accounts in their droves as Jimmy Kimmel cancellation saga rumbles on

ABC will rue the day the capitulated on this. Trump has now said that broadcast licenses should be pulled for saying anything against him.

Which is a direct threat to the 1st amendment.

While there is some fire to the "At will employment", that it came about due to pressure from the Chairman from the FCC is a civil rights violation. I do hope that Kimmel sues, so this can get pushed to SCOTUS. It won't stop here.

Rug Rat (Brent Hendricks)
Blog and Forums - www.catracing.org
IMAGE BBS! 3.0 - bbs.catracing.org 6400
C-Net Amiga BBS - bbs.catracing.org 6840
--- CNet/5
* Origin: The Rat's Den BBS (1:135/250)

Hello Rug Rat!

** On Saturday 20.09.25 - 20:28, Rug Rat wrote to Mike Powell:

..I do hope that Kimmel sues, so this can get pushed to SCOTUS.
It won't stop here.

Kimmel doesn't need to sue, yet. He's still getting paid
because his contract is still in force. Even the staff/crew
are still getting paid.
--
../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.64
* Origin: My Westcoast Point (1:153/757.21)

ABC will rue the day the capitulated on this. Trump has now said that broadcast licenses should be pulled for saying anything against him.

Which is a direct threat to the 1st amendment.

I do agree here, and it worries me. However...

While there is some fire to the "At will employment", that it came about due

pressure from the Chairman from the FCC is a civil rights violation. I do

op

that Kimmel sues, so this can get pushed to SCOTUS. It won't stop here.

When it comes to Kimmel, and Cobert, I am not 100% sure they would have a
case. The problem with both of them, and especially Cobert, is that they sometimes had problems expressing their views without using language that
is not supposed to be used on OTA TV. The FCC had apparently been looking
the other way for several years. I don't think the network would have much
of an issue building a case of Kimmel being an FCC liability if it comes to that.

That said, many of the complaints to ABC about Kimmel supposedly came from "citizens," so if another group of citizens complains about his suspension (especially with their pocketbooks) they have that right and, if they are
loud enough, it just may work.

Mike

* SLMR 2.1a * Yea, I'm a pacifist. Wanna make somethin' of it, bub?
--- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On Sun 21-Sep-2025 10:09a, Mike Powell@1:2320/105.0 said to Rug Rat:

When it comes to Kimmel, and Cobert, I am not 100% sure they would have a case. The problem with both of them, and especially Cobert, is that they sometimes had problems expressing their views without using language that is not supposed to be used on OTA TV. The FCC had apparently been looking the other way for several years. I don't think the network would have
much
of an issue building a case of Kimmel being an FCC liability if it comes
to
that.

Do you have an sources for that?

That said, many of the complaints to ABC about Kimmel supposedly came from "citizens," so if another group of citizens complains about his suspension (especially with their pocketbooks) they have that right and, if they are loud enough, it just may work.

"They" can say anything they want, doesn't make it true.

It probbably won't get that far, Kimmel, and Cobert are in a good position, where they can just go to other platforms not controlled by the FCC and take their audience with them, and have probbably gained a few out of all this. Simmilar to what Howard Stern did when he moved to Sirrus Radio.

This is still a hit to the 1st amendment, and fromt he looks of it, it won't stop here.

Rug Rat (Brent Hendricks)
Blog and Forums - www.catracing.org
IMAGE BBS! 3.0 - bbs.catracing.org 6400
C-Net Amiga BBS - bbs.catracing.org 6840
--- CNet/5
* Origin: The Rat's Den BBS (1:135/250)

ABC will rue the day the capitulated on this. Trump has now said that broa

>st licenses should be pulled for saying anything against him.

Which is a direct threat to the 1st amendment.

Yes, that's definitely a concern. It really looks like Trump doesn't
want to be President, he wants to be a Dictator..

I don't know what more was said but what I saw about Kimmels
'egregious' comments on Canadian TV was when he suggested the
killing was being used as a political tool, and anyone who
listened to Trumps speech today at the funeral can see that's
exactly what's happening..

The killing was bad and should be acknowledged but a President who
was assasinated would likely get less attenion than this 'advisor'.

Again, possibly working with limited information here..

---
* SLMR Rob * Cat: Furry keyboard cover
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

When it comes to Kimmel, and Cobert, I am not 100% sure they would have a case. The problem with both of them, and especially Cobert, is that they sometimes had problems expressing their views without using language that is not supposed to be used on OTA TV. The FCC had apparently been looking
the other way for several years. I don't think the network would have much
of an issue building a case of Kimmel being an FCC liability if it comes to
that.

Do you have an sources for that?

You can watch Kimmel's latest rant on the internet. He couldn't go
through a whole routine about Trump without calling him a d!ck. I am sure
you can also search and find Colbert using vulgarity while talking about
Trump and/or MAGA. In particular, he dropped the f-bomb multiple times
during a monologue after Trump dropped one during an interview.

There are a whole lot of things you can call political wackos that don't require "cable" language. The wackos are very low-hanging fruit!

It probbably won't get that far, Kimmel, and Cobert are in a good position, where they can just go to other platforms not controlled by the FCC and take their audience with them, and have probbably gained a few out of all this. Simmilar to what Howard Stern did when he moved to Sirrus Radio.

OT1H, I don't know why anyone would want to watch either of them because, without their Trump jokes, they are not very funny any more. OTOH, they
could go to Comedy Central where there apparently is no filter.

We need to remember this really isn't the first time this has happened, and
not even the first times recently. Trevor Noah was a big deal while Trump was President the first time. He was in a bunch of commercials (for things not
his show) and had other hosting engagements. As soon as Trump was out of office, and Noah switched to telling jokes about Biden instead, he disappeared quick. Comedy Central got rid of him before they even had a replacement
lined up... the Daily Show was hosted by several one-off hosts and, IIRC,
even went on hiatus for a while, after that. His commercials and host gigs went away fast, too.

Similar thing with Charlemagne the God. Colbert backed his new show and advertised him as another comedian who'd bad-mouth Trump. CTG then had an interview with Kamala Harris where he had the audacity to ask her *real* questions instead of softballing her. Pissed her off on live TV. His show
was quickly relegated to "specials" before disappearing all together.

I didn't see anyone crying near as much foul for Noah or CTG when their gigs/shows got cancelled. Wonder why?


* SLMR 2.1a * Justice is lost, Justice is raped, Justice is gone.
--- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

I don't know what more was said but what I saw about Kimmels
'egregious' comments on Canadian TV was when he suggested the
killing was being used as a political tool,

That he did. He also insinuated (too soon) that the shooter might have
been from the same side of the spectrum as Kirk and Trump. That turned out
to be false. He didn't come right out and say it, but that could be
thought of as trying to draw a connection between why Kirk was shot and
being able to use the shooting as a political tool. He also called Trump a d!ck.

IMHO, it was tame especially in comparison to some things other comics have done over the past ~10 years. With Kirk, you had a lot of folks who looked
to him as not just a political advisor but a "religious leader," too, which complicates matters when it comes to discussing his death in any form of negative light.

and anyone who
listened to Trumps speech today at the funeral can see that's
exactly what's happening..

Yes, Trump is using it as best he can... he is aware that Kirk had a lot of followers. I am surprised that some of his comments have not alienated a
few of them, though!

The killing was bad and should be acknowledged but a President who
was assasinated would likely get less attenion than this 'advisor'.

Depends on the President, I think, but I also disagree. Even today, if something were to happen to Obama, for example, Kirk would quickly fall out
of the news cycle. I also think Kirk would fall out of the news cycle
faster if he (1) wasn't still such a social media subject among both people
who liked and very much disliked him, and (2) if the fallout of the shooting wasn't what it is... his organization is doing a lot better with recruiting persons and chapters after his death than it ever was before.

Reinsert my religious leader/complicates matters statement here.

Instead of slowing the momentum of Kirk's message, the shooter really accelerated it. He'd have been a lot better off going to the function and trying to debate Kirk but, instead, he chose violence and has just
amplified the message.

Again, possibly working with limited information here..

Doesn't really sound like it... most of what you've heard is correct as
best as I can tell.


* SLMR 2.1a * A crucifix? Oy vey, have you got the wrong vampire!
--- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

I also think Kirk would fall out of the news cycle

>faster if he (1) wasn't still such a social media subject among both people
>who liked and very much disliked him, and (2) if the fallout of the shooting
>wasn't what it is... his organization is doing a lot better with recruiting
>persons and chapters after his death than it ever was before.

Reinsert my religious leader/complicates matters statement here.

I didn't really know much about Kirk. It sounded like he was just an
advisor who was popular with Trump and his followers because he was
backing up Trumps worst PC gaffs, going against people of colour and
LGBQ+ and immigrants such. I saw him as a popular Yes man rather than
a force in his own right, which is what I meant about how I might not
be as well informed about that situation from here in Canada.

Again, possibly working with limited information here..

Doesn't really sound like it... most of what you've heard is correct as

>best as I can tell.

On a basic level.. Limited info on that whole thing on our news and
I hadn't tried looking for more elsewhere.

---
* SLMR Rob * Stupid dead cat tricks - Don't speak!... Good kitty.
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)