what is the FCC going to do though? they'd be in blatant violation of law and anything they did would get reversed in court. ABC would rather drop kimmel than pay legal fees. it's still ultimately a business decision.
This is hardly shocking. Trump has blatantly violated the law with a number of his presidential proclamations and executive orders.
100% and in the vast majority of those cases, they were struck down by a federal judge.
you would think. but if ABC were to have to defend against that in court, they would only have to simply say they were exercising THEIR first amendment rights, because we give corporations constitutional and human rights in this country.
which doesn't hold up in litigation. "all but proving" isn't "proving" and cheering on the demise of network TV hosts on twitter isn't a smoking gun.
well i don't believe he'd have any leg to stand on regarding the first amendment. this country values corporations over actual people 99% of the time.
You're correct that "all but proving" =/= proving. However, lawsuits are almost always settled based on perceived risk. A successful verdict for a 1st Amendment lawsuit of this nature would award Kimmel $100M+ when you include punitive damages. While Carr's comments are not absolute proof, they are more than enough to get a lawsuit past pre-trial motions to dismiss. That means any such lawsuit would proceed to Discovery.
Yeah, I agree his and Colbert's show have a political leaning, and if their network got rid of them because of ratings that's fine. The problem here is that it seems the FCC threatened the network in this case and there was a big merger Paramount needed approved when they canceled Colbert. We can't have the President abusing his powe to attack his critics and these aren't the only cases. He just wrote and deleted a post criticizing his AG because the DoJ isn't prosecuting his critics quickly enough. It's something we all need to be wary about when the Separation of Powers are at risk because one branch wants to consolidate power.
kimmel doesn't have money like the people who own hundred-billion dollar revenue corporations have money. reminds me of the chris rock bit about rich vs wealthy. "shaq is rich, the motherfucker who signs shaq's checks is wealthy"
I don't think Kimmel is powerless at all. He's being paid while he's suspended. This is costing ABC almost $1 million per week, every week the show remains off the air. Despite Kimmel's ratings being low, the profit margins for ABC are merely smaller, not non-existent.
You are cool with quelling free speech. We get it.
Pot meet Kettle
mental illness is when you think others are the problem when you clearly are
Nothing as far as I can tell. I just meant, if people were so offended by his remarks, would an apology have fixed things and saved his job? Because that seemed to be enough for Kilmeade. And his remarks were objectively more problematic.
That's basically career suicide. If he apologizes then he basically also has to scale back his criticism of Trump & MAGA in general. Otherwise, he's just going to tell another joke a couple weeks later and be back in the same position.
you took me seriously enough to respond
The entire issue is the chair of the fcc threatening Disney for protected speech violating no terms. End stop.
