日本語
한국어
Tiếng Việt
简体中文
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr recently stated he never threatened to revoke television licenses from ABC affiliates if Disney declined to suspend Jimmy Kimmel’s show. This assertion comes despite numerous individuals, including prominent senators and legal experts, having heard him do just that the previous week.
During an on-stage interview at the Concordia Summit, Carr remarked, “There’s a lot of Democrats out there that are engaged in a campaign of projection and distortion… I saw there’s a letter from some Senate Democrats that said the FCC threatened to revoke the license of Disney and ABC if they didn’t fire Jimmy Kimmel, and that did not happen in any way, shape, or form.”
While Carr pointed to Democrats for misinterpreting his comments as a threat to Disney, he notably omitted that several influential Senate Republicans also perceived his statements as coercive. Following Carr’s initial remarks about potential license revocations for “news distortion,” Disney briefly suspended Kimmel’s show. However, it was reinstated yesterday after significant public backlash. While Jimmy Kimmel Live! will return to air on most ABC-affiliated stations, those operated by Nexstar and Sinclair have opted to replace the program with news and alternative content.
According to Carr’s current narrative, his actions amounted to nothing more than describing a hypothetical FCC process for adjudicating complaints where local TV stations might allege news distortion by Disney. Carr, who reportedly reacted to Kimmel’s suspension last week by sending a celebratory GIF to a journalist, presented himself yesterday as a dispassionate arbiter of FCC policy.
“What I’ve been very clear in the context of the Kimmel episode is the FCC, and myself in particular, have expressed no view on the ultimate merits had something like that been filed, what our take would be one way or the other,” Carr explained. He added, “But one of the things we’re trying to do as a general matter at the FCC is to empower local TV stations to serve the needs of the local communities.”
Carr’s Selective Memory Under Scrutiny
Chairman Carr has a history of threatening to penalize companies for violating the FCC’s 1960s-era news distortion policy, despite the agency not having made a formal finding of news distortion since 1993.
Elements of Carr’s recent explanation do align with some of his earlier comments, particularly his discussion of the FCC’s process for hypothetical complaints regarding Kimmel. The comedian had drawn conservative ire by stating, “the MAGA gang [has been] desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them.”
However, Carr’s latest remarks notably omitted crucial parts of his statements from last week. At that time, he explicitly warned, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” and insisted Disney must “take action” on Kimmel “or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” Carr directly urged TV station owners to refuse to air Kimmel, suggesting that stations continuing to broadcast the show could face license revocation. He characterized Kimmel’s monologue as “some of the sickest conduct possible.”
Specifically, on right-wing commentator Benny Johnson’s podcast, Carr stated:
“There’s actions we can take on licensed broadcasters and, frankly, I think it’s past time that a lot of these licensed broadcasters themselves push back on [NBC owner] Comcast and Disney and say, ‘Listen, we are going to preempt, we are not going to run Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out because we, the licensed broadcaster, are running the possibility of fines or license revocations from the FCC if we continue to run content that ends up being a pattern of news distortion.’ Disney needs to see some change here, but the individual licensed stations that are taking their content, it’s time for them to step up and say this garbage isn’t something that we think serves the needs of our local communities. This status quo is obviously not acceptable where we are.”
While Carr aims to convince the public otherwise, his denials face strong opposition from within Congress. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) sharply criticized Carr on his podcast, even mimicking Carr’s “easy way or the hard way” comment in a stereotypical mafioso voice, likening the “obvious threat” to a scene “right outta Goodfellas.” Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told NBC’s Meet the Press that Carr’s threats against Disney were “absolutely inappropriate,” asserting that “Brendan Carr has got no business weighing in on this.” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) echoed these sentiments on X, stating, “my colleague, Ted Cruz, said it looked just like Goodfellas. As a First Amendment guy myself, I think he’s probably got it right. You don’t have to like what somebody says on TV to agree that the government shouldn’t be getting involved here.”
Legal scholars from across the ideological spectrum also described Carr’s original comments as a threat. Thomas Berry of the libertarian Cato Institute remarked, “It’s hard not to read [Carr’s statement] as a fairly explicit threat to punish Disney if they didn’t take Jimmy Kimmel off the air, and that’s exactly what ABC did very shortly thereafter.” Daniel Lyons of the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute (AEI) characterized the Kimmel suspension as “part of a long, unfortunate FCC tradition of ‘regulation by raised eyebrow,’ where informal threats shape media behavior without formal action.”
While government coercion of private companies can infringe upon the First Amendment, TV station owners retain the freedom to make independent decisions regarding their content. Carr framed the situation with Disney as organic pressure from station owners frustrated by the increasing power of Disney and other national programmers. “Local TV stations for the first time in a long time stood up and said, ‘We don’t want to run that program,'” Carr claimed, asserting that “Disney on its own made the business decision not to have him air for some period of time.”
However, the significant pushback against Kimmel’s return appears to originate from two major companies, Sinclair and Nexstar, which collectively own dozens of stations. Both companies have stated they will not immediately air Kimmel’s show but are open to future discussions. The Hollywood Reporter noted today that “Sinclair is the largest owner of ABC stations, with 38 across the country,” while “Nexstar operates 28 ABC affiliates.”
The Show Goes On, Regulatory Pressures Mount
Carr reiterated his desire to empower TV station owners, aiming to rebalance their relationships with national programmers like Disney, Comcast, and Paramount. He argued that “national programmers have exerted more and more control and pressure on the local TV stations, so they don’t feel like they can push back” on content choices that “make sense for the local communities.”
Meanwhile, across much of the country, Kimmel’s show will continue. The New York Times reported that “Unlike Nexstar and Sinclair, most local TV groups have raised no objections to Mr. Kimmel’s show. Gray and Hearst, also large owners of ABC affiliate stations, are planning to run Jimmy Kimmel Live! on Tuesday night as scheduled.”
This controversy unfolds as both Nexstar and Sinclair have significant business before the FCC. Nexstar is seeking approval for a $6.2 billion acquisition of Tegna, which requires the FCC to relax its ownership cap rule – a move that would facilitate larger station conglomerates. Sinclair, known for its conservative broadcast segments, also has smaller deals pending with the agency.
Anna Gomez, the sole Democrat on the Republican-majority FCC, previously warned last week that “billion-dollar companies with pending business before the agency” are “vulnerable to pressure to bend to the government’s ideological demands.” In a statement yesterday, Gomez applauded, “I am glad to see Disney find its courage in the face of clear government intimidation. More importantly, I want to thank those Americans from across the ideological spectrum who spoke loudly and courageously against this blatant attempt to silence free speech.”