- Joined
- Jul 4, 2013
- Messages
- 43,727
- Reaction score
- 67,309
Narrator : "He never made anyone look stupid, ever, except himself"
Social Jimmy Kimmel gets Canceled
- Thread starter Rhood
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 10,963
- Reaction score
- 8,216
No it isnt. Kimmel can go on Instagram live right now and repeat everything he just said . He just can't do it on his employers time or platform
The federal government had no reason to get involved in disneys programming.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2007
- Messages
- 37,171
- Reaction score
- 61,347
I generally agree. However, there is that “fine line” i mentioned earlier.
He didn’t get close to any line for fed gov involvement.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2007
- Messages
- 37,171
- Reaction score
- 61,347
As I mentioned, in today’s world, when speaking about news events, it’s possible — even likely — that his audience gets what they believe to be actual facts pertaining to current events. The law isn’t exclusive to news programming. It can be argued that when speaking about an event, in a manner which was verifiably false, there was a violation.
I don’t subscribe to that here. I don’t think the FCC should have pressured, even verbally since no action actually took place. However, if the sponsors went back to ABC and threatened to pull out — it would be completely legit. With the FCC making verbal threats, it’s unclear if the sponsors were acting out of their own will or if they were doing so to avoid potential trouble with the FCC.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2011
- Messages
- 62,203
- Reaction score
- 131,770
And the distributor network announced they were dropping Kimmel within the same hour, meaning they were already in the process of dropping him before the FCC made his comments of investigating Kimmel & Disney.
Your side is claiming it's all on Trump and the FCC, when in reality it was already in motion from the distributor network.
Your side, and it's propaganda, always goes with the 'We take the side that damages Trump's and that's why your side lacks credibility on anything related to Trump ... Even when you're right.
Oh no ... Trump accepted an plane from Katar? Is hiding the Epstein Files? Suddenly is in favor of Hate Speech against him?
Sometimes I wish your side had some crumb of credibility to criticize Trump when he should be criticized... too bad you ruined it many times over.
Go ahead, tell us all how we were wrong about Biden not being completely mentally healthy and how we're conspiracy theorists for saying he's stumbling and mumbling like an Alzheimer's Patient in a nursing home.
Go ahead, tell us all.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2025
- Messages
- 12,673
- Reaction score
- 19,774
You would make a pathetic lawyer. Learn the law.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2025
- Messages
- 12,673
- Reaction score
- 19,774
There is no "fine line" here. You either are in favor of free speech or you aren't.
It's real simple. When the government interjects to quell speech they don't like, it is a violation of the 1st Amendment.
You are smarter than these idiots. You can see the law, right?
Your problem is you have no principles. It’s all just tribal warfare and you will only take the position against your perceived enemies.
My side is supporting keeping the federal government out of things they have no reason to insert themselves in. You have no principled position here. Just fighting for your side.
I am not a democrat or a leftist. But look at this mess of a post you just posted. You are just in it for the fight. Not right or wrong.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2007
- Messages
- 37,171
- Reaction score
- 61,347
That’s the opposite of what this is.
I oppose what happened. The FCC has a right under the law to regulate news distortion. Kimmel isn’t “news”, but as I said, he may have some responsibility when commenting on a news story with blatantly flase information.
Reminder, I don’t support or believe the FCC should be getting involved here.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2025
- Messages
- 12,673
- Reaction score
- 19,774
As soon as the FCC got involved it was a violation of the 1st Amendment.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2007
- Messages
- 37,171
- Reaction score
- 61,347
That’s incorrect.
A. The FCC never officially got involved
B. Regulating news distortion is within their right as an organization.
Whether or not this qualified is what is being argued.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2013
- Messages
- 4,233
- Reaction score
- 4,869
Dang got thread banned by @Confucamus from the saint Kirk thread for feeze peaching...terrible day for Sherdog and America.
And you know this doesn’t come close to qualifying. One fuckin sentence that included truth.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2025
- Messages
- 12,673
- Reaction score
- 19,774
It has to be "official"? GTFO. FCC chair is on tape saying take Kimmel down. Don't twist yourself into a pretzel on this one. You are better than that.
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2007
- Messages
- 37,171
- Reaction score
- 61,347
I don’t believe that this qualifies.
What happened is more akin to jawboning but it wasn’t an official action taken by the FCC.
Once again, I condemn what was said and am against the FCC regulating the speech of late night talk hosts.
It’s still interesting to explore.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2025
- Messages
- 12,673
- Reaction score
- 19,774
So, is the "official" stance you are on?
I walk into a room. A guy on the couch shows his gun. Is that "official"?
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 64,294
- Reaction score
- 30,006
You should ask yourself why the single most important thing in all of this seems to be making sure everyone thinks the shooter was a leftist. Why is that? What difference does it make to you?
Also, how would you define leftist ideology and what do you think it had to do with this assassination? How does that square with extreme conservatism, which generates five times as many deaths?
Every single time there's a killing, conservatives focus almost exclusively on the identity of the shooter, who they always say must be black, or Muslim, or leftist, or trans. None of you ever guesses right wing, which is most often the case. And yes, progressives in most spaces assume the shooter will be a young, white male.
This shooter was raised conservative. Conservatives taught him how to use a gun. His life conditioned him to express his lunacy WITH than gun, no matter what pushed him over the edge. His MAGA family and friends say he had turned into a leftist because that's what MAGA wants people to hear, but what does that mean? Leftists in America don't consider murder an acceptable option. I know conservatives don't, either.
I've heard people talk about how this was an angry young man issue, not a political one. I don't like to speculate but it seems this was driven by internet pathology, not political leaning. Both parties agree that a lot of young people are losing their minds online, and combined with the economy young people lack purpose. But, this was a bright kid who looked to have a solid future, so I have no idea what he was thinking.
