• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Kimmel returns Tuesday

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just look at the inscriptions on the bullets. On is right out of Mussolini-era Italian anti-Facism.

Right out of a video game. Try to think like a 22 year old. It's already been explained.

 
Disney's market cap this morning is 201.8 billion. Nexstar's is 6.13 billion. Sinclair's is 1.02 billion.

My bet is Nexstar and Sinclair get Kimmel back on the air after milking the pre-emption as long as they can within the bounds of what the contract allows. They may even try to throw a smoke bomb by getting it back on in "bluer" markets quickly but holding off in "redder" ones and babbling something about "community standards", but if they let it get to court, they're idiots and they deserve what's coming to them.
This is an important point that I want to run with. Disney is a diversified conglomerate. Nexstar and Sinclair aren't diversified. Disney can take a financial hit with anything related to Kimmel and will be just fine. One part of the enterprise can take a hit but the enterprise as a whole will be OK. That's the value of diversification, as any competent investor knows.

It comes down to this: Nexstar and Sinclair need Disney worse than Disney needs them.

Disclaimer for completeness: I've only read about the latest Kimmel monologue; I haven't yet seen it. I wanted to get this in now, as this thread looks primed to become a "Clash of the Titans" and gawdonlyknows where the discussion will go.
 
Last edited:
Here's what the Utah governor said:



Was the governor lying? I've listed lots of examples of conservative media lying. The FCC hasn't done anything to them.
And that was rapidly clarified and corrected well before the KImmel incident.
 
At this point, we still don't know the full motive of the shooter or which groups he frequented with.
The anti-fascist Mussolini inscription on one of the bullets seems to be a rather relevant clue. And today you don't have to "frequent with groups" to be polarized rather specifically. All one has to do is start following online groups that have a particular focus that you find appealing.
 
At this point, we still don't know the full motive of the shooter or which groups he frequented with.
Also an important point. We won't know much of the story until the case goes to trial. So a lot of discussion about the alleged shooter and his motivations, regardless of anyone's political perspective, is resting on suppositions and scattered data points. It's important to not get carried away in the emotions of the moment.

It's relevant to the Kimmel discussion to the extent that Kimmel's statements have been mischaracterized for the purpose of sustaining emotional hysteria. A trial, properly conducted, will look only to establish facts and examine consequences. Even then, certitude may be difficult to accomplish.
 
No, the U.S. President *does not* have the right to go after the attorneys who represented Dominion Voting Systems in that case. Foreign dictators such as Vladamir Putin and Viktor Orban have the right to take actions against their perceived enemies, but not the President of the United States.
Yes, he has the "right" to make an attempt, to try. But what he does is subject to all government laws and regulations.

Google AI says that any such effort is very unlikely to proceed:

The recent attempts to target law firms demonstrate that such actions are not legally sustainable. Law firms that challenged the executive orders in court have prevailed, but some firms have also felt coerced into making settlements to avoid being targeted. As judges have noted, this kind of government pressure on private firms poses a significant threat to a fair and independent legal system.

I can say I want to plant a 400 foot tall sequoia in my HOA regulated front yard. But when I file a request, that HOA will turn me down. But I have the right to try, as futile as it may be.
 
Right out of a video game. Try to think like a 22 year old. It's already been explained.
And that is your interpretation. In any case, the quotation in question is from an anti-fascist movement or sentiment in Italy 80-some years ago.
 
The anti-fascist Mussolini inscription on one of the bullets seems to be a rather relevant clue. And today you don't have to "frequent with groups" to be polarized rather specifically. All one has to do is start following online groups that have a particular focus that you find appealing.
Again, incel, slacker, 20-something gamers use that "inscription" in game play. I realize that "culture" is far different from yours (as it is mine), and you have shown little ability to understand irony or sarcasm or slang, especially when it comes from non-hispanic whites in the United States. But I try to understand, and I get it. Why can't you?
 
Here's what the Utah governor said:



Was the governor lying? I've listed lots of examples of conservative media lying. The FCC hasn't done anything to them.
I believe the Utah Governor was referring to the shooter being, or not being, a U.S. citizen. The comment was not about the murderer being in support of MAGA. How could the murderer be a supporter of MAGA when he killed one of MAGA's most impactful supporters?
 
Again, incel, slacker, 20-something gamers use that "inscription" in game play. I realize that "culture" is far different from yours (as it is mine), and you have shown little ability to understand irony or sarcasm or slang, especially when it comes from non-hispanic whites in the United States. But I try to understand, and I get it. Why can't you?
Emoticons were created to convey emotions like irony and sarcasm ( :cool: ). Slang can be "interpreted" by right-clicking on any word in just about every browser, even ones like Yandex (I check my own site pages in about 10 browsers). The fact that I get along in 5 or so languages means that I am very attuned to nuances; add to that at least a half-dozen or so very different dialects of Spanish I use in work in Latin America.

I have no problem with non-Hispanic whites, except for those that speak in very different dialects or have a very different cultural based vocabulary. My birth family, on my mother's side, reached the Massachusetts colony around 1650 and my father's family arrived in eastern Long Island when we were still a British colony.

However, the shooter apparently selected purposely his inscriptions for personal or social reasons. It seems obvious that an anti-Fascist slogan on a bullet that was part of the "armory" used to kill a MAGA leader perceived to be Fascist is likely, probable and maybe definitely intentional.
 
Emoticons were created to convey emotions like irony and sarcasm ( :cool: ). Slang can be "interpreted" by right-clicking on any word in just about every browser, even ones like Yandex (I check my own site pages in about 10 browsers). The fact that I get along in 5 or so languages means that I am very attuned to nuances; add to that at least a half-dozen or so very different dialects of Spanish I use in work in Latin America.

I have no problem with non-Hispanic whites, except for those that speak in very different dialects or have a very different cultural based vocabulary. My birth family, on my mother's side, reached the Massachusetts colony around 1650 and my father's family arrived in eastern Long Island when we were still a British colony.

However, the shooter apparently selected purposely his inscriptions for personal or social reasons. It seems obvious that an anti-Fascist slogan on a bullet that was part of the "armory" used to kill a MAGA leader perceived to be Fascist is likely, probable and maybe definitely intentional.
I have high regard for people who can speak multiple languages. I find it amazing. I tried to learn another language during high school, but never mastered it.
 
Disclaimer for completeness: I've only read about the latest Kimmel monologue; I haven't yet seen it. I wanted to get this in now, as this thread looks primed to become a "Clash of the Titans" and gawdonlyknows where the discussion will go.
OK, I saw it. It kind of went all over the place, and I think it could have been shorter, but the theme was consistent: if you can't make fun of elected leaders, you don't have a free country. Kimmel made it clear that he did not countenance political murder, so no one should be accusing him otherwise. The blown-out-of-proportion "controversy" over Kimmel's remarks about MAGA was just a pretext to try to shut him down. It's also notable that Kimmel called out the situation with Stephen Colbert multiple times. An interesting side effect of this popcorn controversy is that CBS's credibility is taking more of a hit while ABC comes out looking good. The Robert DeNiro bit had its moments but I think it belabored the points that Kimmel had already made very well.

I did enjoy the call-out to St. Louis...but KDNL has always had poor ratings (El Señor Presidente's insult of choice).
 
One more link then I'll stop being irritating with the links...starting with a quote:

In early March, I asked a lawyer, a naturalized citizen living in Texas, whether he shared the unease among Chinese immigrants that American politics under President Trump was beginning to echo the China we left behind: fawning officials, intimidation of the press and business leaders currying favor with leadership.

He shrugged. As long as late-night talk show hosts can still make fun of the president, he said, American democracy is safe.

For those of us who grew up under strict censorship, late-night comedy always felt like an emblem of American freedom. The idea that millions of Americans could go to bed each night having watched their presidents mocked felt almost magical, something unimaginable where we came from.


This is an excerpt from "The New New World" column in the New York Times by Li Yuan. Another gift link (tested, should work): https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/22/...e_code=1.oU8.LTtE.o1G9cGvqwk8y&smid=url-share
 
One more link then I'll stop being irritating with the links...starting with a quote:

In early March, I asked a lawyer, a naturalized citizen living in Texas, whether he shared the unease among Chinese immigrants that American politics under President Trump was beginning to echo the China we left behind: fawning officials, intimidation of the press and business leaders currying favor with leadership.

He shrugged. As long as late-night talk show hosts can still make fun of the president, he said, American democracy is safe.

For those of us who grew up under strict censorship, late-night comedy always felt like an emblem of American freedom. The idea that millions of Americans could go to bed each night having watched their presidents mocked felt almost magical, something unimaginable where we came from.


This is an excerpt from "The New New World" column in the New York Times by Li Yuan. Another gift link (tested, should work): https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/22/...e_code=1.oU8.LTtE.o1G9cGvqwk8y&smid=url-share


Yes Ana Navarro and Whoopi Goldberg on the View said something similar but it came as both Jimmy Kimmel and The View are targets of an "FCC Investigation" by Chairman Carr. The Op-ed on the New York Times showed the Xi Jinping and Trump comparisons and how they happend to be unwittingly mirror images of each other when it came to cracking down on the media.


"No, it’s not up to Brendan Carr," Goldberg said. "It’s not up to him. I don’t understand how you are the man in charge of the nation and you still don’t understand how the First Amendment works."

Trump's going to love that.

As strong as Goldberg's comments were, co-host Ana Navarro was the most forceful and powerful. She thanked viewers for "demanding truth and courage from us," and said she was dismayed that the government is using Charlie Kirk's murder to try to silence people. "The government itself is using its weight and power to bully and scare people into silence," she said. Navarro said she lived through both a right-wing and left-wing dictatorship in Nicaragua. "This is what dictators and authoritarians do," she said. "It does not matter the ideology. At first, they come for the people with the big platforms. At first, they silence the press. But then they come for all of us, because their intent is to scare us into silence and self-censorship."
 
I believe the Utah Governor was referring to the shooter being, or not being, a U.S. citizen. The comment was not about the murderer being in support of MAGA. How could the murderer be a supporter of MAGA when he killed one of MAGA's most impactful supporters?

What he said is unimportant. He can say whatever he wants. It's a free country. The FCC can't take away ABC licenses for something a comedian said.

If that's the reason, then that same FCC should take away all the conservative radio licenses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom