is it true that the FCC still operates under some kind of legal fiction that the stations that broadcast over the air are subject to content restrictions and regulation in the public interest?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5777545&forum_id=2)#49283683)

but Carr was relying on this, as i understand it:

https://x.com/verbalriotshow/status/1968701682495156226/photo/1

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5777545&forum_id=2)#49283693)

lol, just saw the link above, guess i was right! brendan knows these laws better than anyone, he's in that role because he's qualified. libs won't win this fight

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5777545&forum_id=2)#49283711)

gas all lawyers, btw

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5777545&forum_id=2)#49283727)

There was a huge lawsuit in the early 00s where fcc got sued for trying to deregulate and make the laws more applicable to different forms of media.

Those people barely understood the internet at all at that time and certainly things like twitter werent even a concept

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5777545&forum_id=2)#49283738)

and why does media need regulations like what is it i remmeber TT posted a pic of a cute desi girl who led FCC but what does FCC do fine ppl for porn?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5777545&forum_id=2)#49283762)

The NYT wouldnt be permitted to buy the New York Post because the FCC would consider that to be too much market influence in new york, even though no one reads either of these things anymore and arent limited to just print newspapers. NYT could buy twitter though because the law doesnt know what the fuck its doing.

similarly CBS is treated very differently than fox news or disney because its an over the air broadcaster which is a distinction without any differnece at this stage of life and unending porn streams.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5777545&forum_id=2)#49283804)

https://archive.ph/qvB9k

How Jimmy Kimmel’s Suspension Went Down: Sponsor Panic, a Defiant Host and a Painful Call

Disney’s Bob Iger and Dana Walden wanted to know how Kimmel was going to address the situation. Sources say he planned to defend what he said rather than "kowtowing” to the outrage. Disney thought that would fan the flames.

By Tony Maglio

Plus Icon

September 18, 2025 1:31pm

On Wednesday, Disney caved to pressure from various partners and benched Jimmy Kimmel Live! Ultimately, the decision was Bob Iger’s and Dana Walden’s — but there was more leading up to it than previously reported.

On Monday’s episode of his long-running ABC late night talk show, Jimmy Kimmel implied that Charlie Kirk’s alleged murderer, Tyler Robinson, is “one of them,” referring to MAGA Republicans.

“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,” Kimmel said during the monologue.

The implication kicked off a “social-media shitstorm,” a source with information tells The Hollywood Reporter. It died down — temporarily.

But almost immediately after FCC chair Brendan Carr’s appearance on Benny Johnson’s podcast, the storm of shit “became a bigger swirl.”

Within hours, multiple ABC station owners held calls with senior Disney leadership expressing their concern with the comments, a second source tells THR.

Inside of ABC, “multiple conversations” with Kimmel were had at the “executive level,” the first person says, though the talks had not yet reached Bob Iger or TV head Dana Walden. The execs wanted to know: How was Kimmel going to address the situation on Wednesday night’s show?

The answer was not satisfactory to management, sources say. Meanwhile, the advertiser calls began to roll in and then the big affiliate conglomerates, Nexstar and Sinclair, threatened to preempt the show. The second source says that the blowback was snowballing enough that had ABC not acted, Kimmel’s show would have been dark in a large swath of the country, even beyond the Sinclair and Nexstar territories (including in the Washington, D.C., metro area).

The situation became a safety issue as Disney employees saw their emails doxxed, per the first source — some even received death threats. Disney wanted Kimmel to address the situation in a way that “would take down the temperature,” but what he had planned was “going to fan the flames with the MAGA fan base,” the source says.

ADVERTISEMENT

A source at Jimmy Kimmel Live! counters to THR that Kimmel’s planned on-air address was not “making it worse,” but that he simply “wasn’t kowtowing” to the outrage.

Kimmel was “defending what he said [as] being grossly mischaracterized by a certain group of people,” the show source says.

THR reported on Wednesday that Kimmel did not plan to apologize for his comments, but did plan to address the situation on-air.

Talks between Kimmel and Disney/ABC hit enough of a stalemate that executives there decided Wednesday’s episode of Jimmy Kimmel Live! had run out of time to be salvaged. The show’s live-to-tape time was not far off — the studio audience was lined up outside but had not yet been brought in. (Jimmy Kimmel Live! tapes live at 4 p.m. PT.)

By this point, 66 of the roughly 200 affiliate stations had said they would not carry the episode — that’s when ABC announced it was suspending the program — a Bob Iger and Dana Walden joint decision that was a “last resort,” the first person says. Walden delivered the news to Kimmel but did not ask him to apologize, says the source, who described Wednesday as “a very heavy, very hard day” inside the walls of Disney and ABC.

Disney and Kimmel declined to comment on the situation.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5777545&forum_id=2)#49283812)