Kimmel returns Tuesday

[tall_guy1]

One note...in his monologue Kimmel mentioned Rogan was "in the middle." If that's true these days, we're all in trouble.

 

[nomadcowatbk]

I did enjoy the call-out to St. Louis...but KDNL has always had poor ratings (El Señor Presidente's insult of choice).

at one point, it's highest rated syndicated show were Simpsons reruns

 

[Mark Roberts]

at one point, it's highest rated syndicated show were Simpsons reruns

I guess, at some point, if Sinclair is stubborn enough, they could try to use AI to reanimate Lee Coffee and bring back the TV30 Financial Observer, which used to fill up oodles of time on KDNL back when it was an independent.

 

[IM42A]

Why would a major network want to be on a sub channel.

Better that, than not to be on in a market at all, and if you can find a station that is highly-rated within its market, even better.

And in smaller markets, a subchannel may be the only way to have a full-power signal (either straight-up, or through simulcasting a co-owned LPTV) for your network.

 

[KilowattKat]

The Trump threats keep coming. As usual, a lot of huffing and puffing, that will amount to nothing. Verbal vomit.

Donald Trump Makes Another Threat To Go After ABC As He Blasts Jimmy Kimmel’s Return

Donald Trump finally weighed in on Jimmy Kimmel's return to the air with a not-so-veiled threat that his administration would still go after ABC.

deadline.com

 

[kevtronics]

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.

Just a reminder that Rush Limbaugh was not taken off the air, and even in his apology, he doubled down and attacked his critics, only conceding that he "chose the wrong words":

Rush Limbaugh–Sandra Fluke controversy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TheBigA]

The Trump threats keep coming

The president has a first amendment right to say what he wants. So does Kimmel. God bless America.

 

[K.M. Richards]

I am not nitpicking. Here is how the link you gave looks right now, at 11:07 PM PDT on September 23.

View attachment 10468

The latest episode listed there (September 17), even though it is now a week out of date, is locked.

That's what I was pointing out, and it's why I asked if your browser was perhaps logged in with MSO credentials -- to allow you to see the latest episode in spite of what I see. Because what I see is that they apparently lock whatever the latest episode is, so it can only be seen by cable/satellite subscribers.

I guess it is my fault, then, that when ABC puts up the entire show, they timestamp it with the next day's date? There was no "September 17" show on the network, remember? That was the day they suspended Kimmel and the show.

My remarks were based on the "latest clips" section, which do not have a lock. If you want to nitpick, how about criticizing ABC for their inconsistencies? Apparently their systems are programmed to lock the most recent new show that aired. Because of the suspension, there was a gap which their systems are not set up to make an exception for.

But nooooooo. It's easier to blame me than it is to blame them, isn't it?

 

[tall_guy1]

Did any nexstar or sinclair stations offer any on air explanation as to why Kimmel wasn't on air?

 

[nomadcowatbk]

Just a reminder that Rush Limbaugh was not taken off the air, and even in his apology, he doubled down and attacked his critics, only conceding that he "chose the wrong words":

Rush Limbaugh–Sandra Fluke controversy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

some stations did air disclaimers before his show

 

[KilowattKat]

some stations did air disclaimers before his show

Was it a...."The views expressed by the show and its host do not necessarily represent the views of (insert company name) and it's advertisers?"

 

[nomadcowatbk]

Was it a...."The views expressed by the show and its host do not necessarily represent the views of (insert company name) and it's advertisers?"

yep

 

[lanceventa]

Not "personal politics" but the sentiment of a large percentage of Americans. These threads are jam-packed with pro-Kimmel statements, and I simply differ with the ethics and focus of the original remarks as well as finding his lengthy statement last night totally devoid of any sense of responsibility over the inaccurate statement he made.

That still makes it YOUR PERSONAL POLITCAL OPINION. Which RadioDiscussions is not the place for. There's millions of other places to discuss politics.

Oh, and I am a registered Independent who is fairly liberal but not "progressive" on social issues and very conservative on fiscal policies, international relations and the like. I am not "MAGA" for a variety of reasons, but that has noting to do with radio and TV. But don't call me MAGA just because I find Kimmel's statement bad broadcasting.

I'm a registered independent as well. Doesn't mean anything

Just look at the inscriptions on the bullets. On is right out of Mussolini-era Italian anti-Facism.

Just another theory right now that you believe but doesn't mean its factually correct or wrong. Which makes it a personal political opinion. Take it elsewhere...

David, you're the one constantly instagating these threads. People do not come here for your political opinions. As I've said to you privately many times they come here to discuss with you your vast knowledge of radio.

 

[radiofan2023]

Could you maybe come back on as your sock puppet* "Desertaire" and tell it to us again? After, what?, fifty(?) times I might still be missing your point.

(And after fifty tries to gaslight us, you're still wrong!)

(* I don't know how many others spotted that when "Desertaire" shows up to post, David goes into radio silence. When David returns, "Desertaire" goes AWOL.
Also, one need not be a genius to get the meaning of "Desertaire" to someone living near Palm Springs. But then it might be me who's hallucinating.)

I think Desertaire is not David.

 

[yeoldeschool]

I guess it is my fault, then, that when ABC puts up the entire show, they timestamp it with the next day's date? There was no "September 17" show on the network, remember? That was the day they suspended Kimmel and the show.

My remarks were based on the "latest clips" section, which do not have a lock. If you want to nitpick, how about criticizing ABC for their inconsistencies? Apparently their systems are programmed to lock the most recent new show that aired. Because of the suspension, there was a gap which their systems are not set up to make an exception for.

But nooooooo. It's easier to blame me than it is to blame them, isn't it?

I honestly don't understand where all this is coming from. You and I have had nothing but countless friendly interactions on RD and you're suddenly addressing me like some adversary who takes calculated swipes at you. I never meant anything unkind or critical of you in either reply I wrote you here, or anywhere else. In post #128 you simply said ABC's site "requires no subscription (or even a login) to access," and for me it was requesting a login to see the latest show. So I became curious if your browser was logged into an MSO account at ABC, since that would've explained to me why the site was treating me differently. (I don't have any MSO logins to just try myself with.)

I never saw anything as your fault and wasn't trying to nitpick you (or even ABC for that matter). It was just a passing technical curiosity. I'm sorry if my tone or words somehow caused you to think so.

 

[yeoldeschool]

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.

I'll also bet they cave even sooner, well before running out those contractual bounds. News departments depend on the power to steamroll over network programming during breaking local events. Nothing worse than being the only station airing regular programming while the town's chlorine factory is going up in flames, right? So at some point there has to be pressure from all the news directors helplessly watching corporate draw down their "reserves" for no reasons other than posturing and virtue signalling.

 

[tall_guy1]

Could you maybe come back on as your sock puppet* "Desertaire" and tell it to us again? After, what?, fifty(?) times I might still be missing your point.

(And after fifty tries to gaslight us, you're still wrong!)

(* I don't know how many others spotted that when "Desertaire" shows up to post, David goes into radio silence. When David returns, "Desertaire" goes AWOL.
Also, one need not be a genius to get the meaning of "Desertaire" to someone living near Palm Springs. But then it might be me who's hallucinating.)

I think I have the same political leaning, but what are you talking about?

 

[K.M. Richards]

I honestly don't understand where all this is coming from. You and I have had nothing but countless friendly interactions on RD and you're suddenly addressing me like some adversary who takes calculated swipes at you.

It sounded like it. The language had a "challenging" feel to it.

In post #128 you simply said ABC's site "requires no subscription (or even a login) to access," and for me it was requesting a login to see the latest show. So I became curious if your browser was logged into an MSO account at ABC, since that would've explained to me why the site was treating me differently. (I don't have any MSO logins to just try myself with.)

Well, I have stated publicly that my current cable subscription with Spectrum is for internet access only, not video, and that I disconnected from DirecTV about a decade ago, so I think you can reasonably infer that the answer to your question is "no".

Why the site seems to require a login for you and not for me is a mystery. I doublechecked my own list of logins/passwords and I do not have am account there; I checked further by pulling down the "my account" section of the menu and it asks me to login, so obviously I don't have some previous login that persists between visits to the site.

I never saw anything as your fault and wasn't trying to nitpick you (or even ABC for that matter). It was just a passing technical curiosity. I'm sorry if my tone or words somehow caused you to think so.

Your use of that glitch at abc.com to make your point didn't help my estimation of your intent. It really did sound like "I am going to prove you wrong" and to be honest, I think you should have noticed the timestamp discrepancy even before I did.

Air clearer now?

 

[K.M. Richards]

I'll also bet they cave even sooner, well before running out those contractual bounds. News departments depend on the power to steamroll over network programming during breaking local events. Nothing worse than being the only station airing regular programming while the town's chlorine factory is going up in flames, right? So at some point there has to be pressure from all the news directors helplessly watching corporate draw down their "reserves" for no reasons other than posturing and virtue signalling.

Actually, I would presume an exemption exists for local breaking news coverage. Even ABC O&O KABC-TV pre-empted the entire network schedule for more than one day at the height of the Palisades and Eaton fire coverage. But I doubt that Nexstar and Sinclair could arrange for something like a chlorine factory fire every weeknight in every community where they own the ABC affilate.

 

[tall_guy1]

It sounded like it. The language had a "challenging" feel to it.



Well, I have stated publicly that my current cable subscription with Spectrum is for internet access only, not video, and that I disconnected from DirecTV about a decade ago, so I think you can reasonably infer that the answer to your question is "no".

Why the site seems to require a login for you and not for me is a mystery. I doublechecked my own list of logins/passwords and I do not have am account there; I checked further by pulling down the "my account" section of the menu and it asks me to login, so obviously I don't have some previous login that persists between visits to the site.



Your use of that glitch at abc.com to make your point didn't help my estimation of your intent. It really did sound like "I am going to prove you wrong" and to be honest, I think you should have noticed the timestamp discrepancy even before I did.

Air clearer now?

A lot of content from those sites has you login with a cable or similar service like YouTube TV to access such content. It must already know your service you are using.