Cancel Culture and the Airwaves: The Jimmy Kimmel Suspension Explained

The complex relationship between media, politics, and public discourse was thrust into the spotlight last week with the sudden suspension of Jimmy Kimmel. The event serves as a potent case study in modern cancel culture, corporate responsibility, and the often-overlooked power of federal regulators.

The Comment That Sparked the Fire

On the September 15th episode of his late-night show, Jimmy Kimmel addressed the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. Kimmel stated, “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“.

The remark ignited immediate controversy. Critics accused Kimmel of politicizing a violent act and broadly labeling a political group. In response, from September 17th to September 22nd, Disney and ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live!, a move interpreted by many as a direct reaction to the backlash.

The FCC’s Warning Shot

Adding a significant layer to the controversy were the remarks from FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. In the days leading up to the suspension, Carr was vocal in his criticism of Kimmel’s comments. His statement, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” was widely perceived as a veiled threat toward Disney and ABC’s parent company.

As the head of the Federal Communications Commission, Carr oversees the licensing of broadcast television stations. His “easy way or hard way” ultimatum suggested potential regulatory scrutiny during the license renewal process for ABC-owned stations, placing immense pressure on the network to take action.

The Bigger Picture: Media Mergers and FCC Approval

This incident occurs against a backdrop of massive proposed consolidation in the broadcast industry, putting the FCC’s regulatory power in sharp focus.

The Nexstar-Tegna Merger

Nexstar Media Group, already the largest television station owner in the U.S., is seeking FCC approval for a $6.2 billion acquisition of Tegna. This merger would create a media behemoth with an unprecedented reach into American households. For the deal to proceed, it must receive the green light from the FCC, which evaluates whether such mergers serve the public interest. The Chairman’s comments in the Kimmel case underscore the influence the FCC wields over media companies with pending business before the commission.

Sinclair Broadcasting’s Potential Move

Similarly, Sinclair Broadcasting, another conservative-leaning media giant, has a prospective merger that also requires FCC approval. Reports indicate that Sinclair may be refusing to air Jimmy Kimmel Live! in certain markets until Kimmel issues a public apology. This action represents a corporate form of cancel culture, where a network uses its distribution power to pressure content change based on ideological disagreement.

Free Speech, Cancel Culture, and Government Power

This situation presents a nuanced conflict. On one hand, cancel culture—the public pressure to hold individuals or entities accountable for controversial speech—is itself an expression of free speech. Viewers choosing to boycott a show, or a company like Sinclair deciding not to air it, are exercising their rights in the marketplace of ideas.

However, the involvement of a government regulator like the FCC Chairman changes the dynamic entirely. When a government official suggests that a broadcaster’s licensing could be jeopardized by the content of its programming, it ventures into dangerous territory. This can have a chilling effect on speech, pushing corporations to censor content not because of audience reaction, but out of fear of regulatory retaliation.

I firmly support free speech, which includes the right of the public to engage in cancel culture as a form of protest. But the government should not be involved as a conflict or use licensing as a cudgel to influence content. The line between public accountability and government coercion is critical, and the Kimmel suspension reminds us that it is a line we must vigilantly protect.

Just recently, my family and I canceled our subscriptions to anything Disney related (Disney+ and Hulu) as a form or protest. I am not saying that you should as well but if you value our freedom of speech, then take that for what it’s worth to you. We also listened the Start Here podcast by ABC, but have since unsubscribed because we can’t trust their journalistic independence.