There’s been quite a stir lately following news that Jimmy Kimmel’s show on ABC is indefinitely suspended.
The reason? Some controversial comments Kimmel made regarding Charlie Kirk’s passing. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has labeled this move as “despicable,” arguing that Kimmel should have the right to express himself freely.
Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, who might be eyeing a presidential run, echoed these sentiments, stating that ABC’s decision is “an attack on freedom of speech.” Along with Schumer, Pritzker and various advocates for free speech—including President Trump and FCC Chair Brendan Kerr—have publicly criticized what happened to Kimmel, framing it as absurd for late-night comedians.
However, Kimmel’s show isn’t facing suspension because of political figures or insistent pressures. Instead, it appears that ABC and parent company Disney opted for this route due to dwindling audience numbers and advertising revenue.
Corporate decisions often hinge on viewer engagement, and it seems Kimmel’s comments pushed the limits for Disney’s various interests. There’s a perception that Kimmel’s performance wasn’t meeting expectations, represented by a notable downturn in ratings. Some affiliates of ABC, including those owned by Nexstar and Sinclair, decided to stop airing his program. Disney, wanting to keep these affiliates satisfied, seemingly prioritized their interests over Kimmel’s comedy.
While Schumer may rightly assert Kimmel’s right to free speech, it’s misleading to claim that he automatically has the right to that platform on ABC. Kimmel’s departure from the network for his comments isn’t undemocratic; rather, it’s part of a marketplace of ideas trying to value sensible discussions over erratic ones. Democracy celebrates the flow of various viewpoints, but it doesn’t guarantee a fixed venue for any specific idea. Kimmel can continue to express his thoughts but might need to find a different stage to do so.
If ABC truly feared backlash from Trump or Kerr, one would expect them to have canceled other shows like The View long ago. Over the years, the hosts have made comments that could rival Kimmel’s in oddity, yet ABC still broadcasts it—likely because it attracts audiences. George Stephanopoulos remains as a news anchor, despite his ties to legal issues involving Trump. There have been settlements regarding George’s remarks.
The First Amendment fosters a messy rhetorical arena that aids in sorting out diverse perspectives. Both Trump and Kerr can express their opinions, using their platforms to press media outlets into accountability.
Historically, the free press has proven resilient against political heat. Trump criticizes a slew of media, from the New York Times to CNN and NBC. Yet, all these outlets remain operational, continuing their critiques.
For those anxious about political or FCC influences controlling the media landscape, it may be time to relax a bit. The current Supreme Court has consistently backed free speech under Chief Justice John Roberts.
Trump and the FCC don’t possess the power to penalize ABC or Disney over Kimmel’s remarks. In the unlikely event that the FCC were to act against the company, it would probably face significant legal challenges. The judiciary recognizes that even those like Kimmel, who may mislead or confuse, will be allowed to express a wide array of views.
Jeffrey McCall I am a communications professor at Depauw University.
