Jimmy Kimmel is returning to ABC. This is troubling because what Kimmel said that prompted Disney ABC to suspend The Jimmy Kimmel Show was more than vile. It was a signal to those on the left who are considering perpetrating more acts of violence against conservative personalities that corporate propagandists will obscure the source of political violence in America. Kimmel’s reinstatement is tacit acknowledgment by Disney ABC that its company endorses this propaganda strategy.
Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Kolvet put his finger on this in recent comments about the scandal when he said Kimmel was effectively saying to those who commit political violence, “We have your back.” Take a careful look at what Kimmel said: “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.”
This part is a signal: “the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them.” Kimmel knew that the assassin was sympathetic to Antifa and its violent transactivist wing. He knew MAGA did not kill one of its own. Even if Kimmel didn’t, he had no reason to claim that the assassin was a member of “the MAGA gang.” In putting the matter this way, Kimmel is conveying the following: If you assault or kill a prominent conservative, we, the spokesmen for progressive ideology, will obscure your role in targeted political violence by blaming it on the targets of it.
I have heard many outrageous things in my life, but what Kimmel says here is truly one of the most outrageous things I have ever heard. Before learning of Kimmel’s return I pictured in my mind executives at Disney turning to one another and agreeing that Kimmel had to go—not just because he was losing the company money (which he clearly is), not just because they perceived that he had delegitimized himself as an effective propagandist, but because he implicated Disney in rhetoric encouraging political violence by conveying an intent that influencers like Kimmel will cover for it. I said this on my Facebook feed. I have to walk back these assumptions now.
As I stated in previous essays on this platform, many on the left are defending Kimmel by wrapping what he said in an appeal to the First Amendment. It bears repeating that the First Amendment has nothing to do with Kimmel’s cancellation. FCC chairman Brendan Carr doesn’t have the power to fire a Disney employee. Disney has that power. Disney can fire employees based on their speech. Even if one has an expansive view of the First Amendment, in this case, Kimmel said what he said not as a private citizen on a social media platform, but as an employee standing on a Disney platform. What does Kimmel’s return tell us about Disney? It is an endorsement of Kimmel’s speech.
For those arguing that Carr pressured Disney to cancel Jimmy Kimmel, in answering a question put to him on The Benny Show, Carr did assert the power of the FCC in making sure that holders of licenses granted use of the publicly-owned communications spectrum honor the lawful demand to serve the public interest. Regulating media corporations is an entirely legitimate power delegated to the FCC by the republic that created the agency. However, for the record, Carr had not even moved to draft a complaint or directive to Disney concerning this matter. Moreover, Trump was out of the country at the time and did not know that any of this had transpired. The left’s attempt to pin this on Trump, to continue the propaganda narrative that Trump is an autocrat, is entirely fallacious.
But even if Trump had pressured Disney, even if Carr had issued a complaint or directive on this matter, it would not have contradicted the First Amendment, since the foundational law gives the FCC power to regulate a public resource for the public interest. Those who argue that the government has no power over corporate media firms are effectively arguing for corporate rule over the people. Had the FCC acted, this would have helped Disney ABC. They could then have distanced themselves from Kimmel’s speech under the cover of a claim, as fallacious as it is, to government suppression. Since progressives have convinced themselves that this is in fact what happened, Disney is acting in a provocative manner, challenging the FCC’s power to regulate media corporations. Moreover, they are presenting Kimmel as a free speech martyr—one that Disney saved from government oppression.
On the persistence of late-night programming, it’s not just Kimmel’s show that’s in freefall. So are Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Fallon’s shows in sharp decline. Rationally, since these are for-profit corporations, such precipitous drops in viewership should signal a change in programming. Yet these shows have persisted for years. The evidence suggests that the reason for the decline in viewers and the persistence of late-night programming stems from the same source—a dynamic that may seem counterintuitive at first, but understandable upon closer examination.
The drop in viewership is largely attributed to shifts in political sensibilities in America. Over the past several years, American culture and politics have been moving rightward. As a result, many Americans are increasingly turned off by progressive politics and by the phenomenon of “clapter,” in which cruel mocking of ordinary Americans replaces sophisticated humor. They are taking their business elsewhere. This creates a process in which the audience becomes increasingly winnowed ideologically. What remains is a hardcore left-progressive segment—zealots who hang on every word of the late-night host, seeing them as wise and representative of their politics. These programs are thus cultivating a crowd by weeding out those with different sensibilities.
This situation has a corrupting effect on the sense of humor of this audience. The late-night audience finds cruel and mean-spirited rhetoric funny, primarily because they loathe the targets of the host’s jokes. It reinforces their belief that they belong to a superior, “in-the-know” group, while everyone outside that group is dismissed as backwards, mouthbreathers, neanderthals, and rubes, unworthy of attention. It polarizes the in-group/out-group dynamic. The persistence of these late-night programs, despite the drastic decline in overall viewership, can therefore be explained by their propaganda value. They maintain a loyal core audience that aligns with progressive political agendas. The Democratic Party and the broader progressive movement depend on this dedicated nucleus of supporters as a key part of their voter base. Late-night programming provides this nucleus with a clear target of opposition: the rest of America.
Because media elites are largely aligned with progressive political interests, they are willing to continue funding shows that serve as effective vehicles for pro-Democrat messaging. In other words, Kimmel, Colbert, and Fallon effectively operate as a political messaging arm of the Democratic Party and the corporate elites that party represents. This is significant, since ABC, CBS, and NBC are the traditional media networks that have shaped mass consciousness—culture, ideology, morality, politics—for decades. Late night has thus been weaponized against the American majorityfor the sake of the political party that represents corporate statism. This weaponization is contrary to the public interest clause of the Communications Act of 1934 and the FCC. What we are witnessing is broadside against the American Republic.
Democrats know that corporations have too much power. They know the government has the power to regulate corporations. They’ve said so countless times. Their rhetoric in the aftermath of Kimmel’s cancellation is duplicitous in the extreme. The reality is that, while they know corporations have too much power, Democrats want corporations to have too much power. And they will want that as long as corporations shill for them. Disney is defying the public interests to continue serving in its capacity (alongside CBS and NBC) as the broadcast propaganda arm of the Democratic Party.
freedom and reason 