I believe one wouldn’t need to dig too far back in history to find that the Republican position differs from yours:
Now, AFAIK, you don’t formally represent the Republican party, but I do find the above rather interesting.
I would also argue that there’s a profound difference between:
He must be a psychic and knew Kimmel would stick his foot in his mouth.
Again, I ask: What did Kimmel say that caused this to happen?
Trump has had a hate on for Kimmel for years. He’s not psychic; he was just waiting for an opportune moment.
And apparently lying about what Kimmel said against Kirk gave him the excuse he needed.
What was said is easily found on the internet. I’m not going to engage your opinion on it. If you don’t understand that it pissed off Republicans that’s on you. You have no say in how other people feel.
Then why do you refuse to post it?
What part of “I’m not going to engage your opinion on it” don’t you understand?
Here is the entirety of what Kimmel said: “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 said during his monologue. “And 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 said nothing against Kirk.
The part where you apologize for saying that Kimmel said something that he actually didn’t say. I didn’t engage an opinion-I made a direct quote.
But there is a constitutional guarantee that the government can’t interfere with corporations funding it. In fact, there’s both the constitutional guarantee and an explicit Federal statute about it.
But don’t take my word for it, let’s see what the FCC itself says.
The First Amendment and the Communications Act expressly prohibit the Commission from censoring broadcast matter. Our role in overseeing program content is very limited. We license only individual broadcast stations. We do not license TV or radio networks (such as CBS, NBC, ABC or Fox) or other organizations that stations have relationships with, such as PBS or NPR, except if those entities are also station licensees.
Now watch FCC Chairman Brendan Carr interpret what “prohibiting censorship” does and doesn’t include.
With the wealth of other broadcast media opportunities, would it be possible for writers, actors, directors, etc. to strike against ABC? Just everyone refuses to work for them and go elsewhere?
Where would “elsewhere” be? It would have to be studios that not only have no affiliation with Disney/ABC, but have no plans to have any affiliation in the future.
Can I ask you to play this out for me?
If, arguendo, Kimmel did “stick his foot in his mouth,” under what law, or what part of the Constitution, does this entitle the White House to threaten license revocation or other regulatory retribution unless a media corporation terminates/suspends a comedian, a show, or a broadcast?
And would you please be specific? I’ve tried, and I can’t find the relevant law myself.
Also, since Trump went on to effectively put NBC on notice that Jimmy Fallon and Seth Meyers should be next, would this be more a First Amendment violation, or is it legally more an issue of prior restraint.
And does it matter, legally?
[We’ll set aside for the moment your apparent failure to understand what Kimmel did or did not actually say]
Remember: Fox News had to pay $787,500,000.00 to settle a lawsuit that inarguably proved that Fox lied – day after day, week after week, month after month – about the results of the 2020 election, but – other than the settlement – I’ve heard nary a peep about the Trump administration threatening legal or regulatory action against them.
Can you explain the apparent double-standard?
CBS (which is part of the company which also owns Paramount and BET, and is part-owner of the CW) has already caved; count on NBC to do so.
Disney owns ABC, as well as Fox Broadcasting, ESPN, Lucasfilm, Marvel, etc. Most of that “wealth of other broadcast media opportunities” are owned by a relative handful of extremely large corporations, which have either already bent their corporate knees to Trump, or almost undoubtedly will do so.
A little context (for others):
TL;DR:
Did we all see Trump’s comments on the Kimmel activity? At least Brendan Carr hid behind the thin veil of “public interest.”
Moderating:
This is a hijack from the OP, and your constant fanning of it, despite multiple posters trying to bring it back to the actual actions (who/what/why) taken you have continued to do so. To be clear, I am not moderating you on the content or factuality of your posts, but the effort to derail the conversation. In light of your multiple attempts to keep dragging the conversation off track, this will be an Official Warning for Hijacking.
While other posters responded to the hijack (and I suggest in the future you flag it) Magiver was the instigator and the primary respondent. Still, to all, other than for comparison purposes, let’s focus on NBC’s possible future actions regarding Fallon and Meyers.
I can’t find a link. There are two possibilities. 1) Kimmel pointed out that the right is trying to make the killer out to be left when his family is MAGA. 2) Kimmel played a clip of a reporter asking trump how is was dealing with Kirk’s death. “I’m doing fine. By the way, over there is where we are building a ball room they’ve wanted for 150 years.” Kimmel said, “That is not the way one mourns a friend. That is how a four year old mourns a dead goldfish.”
What age are “younger viewers”? Screen shots of the audience shows mostly people in their 20s.