Since the assassination of Charlie Kirk just over a week ago, there have been mass disciplinary and retaliatory actions against people whose commentary on social media or otherwise was believed to have trivialized Kirk’s death or to tarnish his public image. Perhaps the most prominent example of this happening was the suspension of Jimmy Kimmel Live!, America’s current longest-running late-night talk show. Earlier this week. Kimmel’s show, which has been known for its critiques of President Trump and the conservative movement at large, was suspended indefinitely by ABC on Wednesday after the companies Nexstar Media Group and Sinclair Broadcast Group pulled his show from their ABC affiliates. They objected specifically to comments Kimmel made during the monologue of the previous episode, in which he stated that the “MAGA gang” was “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 was essentially insinuating that the accused killer may have been a supporter of MAGA, even before any solid characterization of the killer’s motives or political ideology has been done.
Now, obviously, private companies like ABC can pull shows off the air whenever they wish to. That is a wholly business affair. What makes this situation so concerning, however, was that prior to this whole incident, the chair of the Federal Communications Commission (which regulates network TV among other things), Brendan Carr, had stated in an interview that Kimmel’s remarks were not in the public interest, as is required to be able to hold a broadcast license, and called them “truly sick.” He suggested that Kimmel ought to be suspended and hinted at possible disciplinary action by the FCC if ABC did not follow through. It is clear from these comments that ABC had potentially pushed Kimmel off the air to please the FCC. The argument could also be made about Nexstar, the company which pulled Kimmel off the air first and has been recently seeking FCC approval for the acquisition of a fellow television broadcaster named Tegna Inc. President Trump, who had appointed Carr to head the FCC, celebrated Kimmel’s suspension and suggested that the federal government should go further and revoke the licenses of broadcast television networks that “give him bad publicity.”
The President celebrates Kimmel’s suspension on TruthSocial, calling for the suspension of two further late-night hosts whose coverage of him has been critical.
This moment in time is part of the hypocrisy being displayed by the President and the conservative movement. Earlier this year, President Trump and conservatives had made a great deal of boasting about how executive orders were signed that would “restore freedom of speech and end government censorship.” The recent actions undertaken by this administration, however, edge closer to infringing upon freedom of speech. Trump had repeatedly threatened TV license holders during his campaign and continuing into his second term in the White House. Attorney General Pam Bondi had said that her department would prosecute individuals for “hate speech” in the wake of the Charlie Kirk shooting, an action which has been declared by the Supreme Court to be protected free speech time and time again. FCC Chair Brendan Carr, heeding the President’s rhetoric, has launched investigations into the “big three” networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC, as well as NPR and PBS, all of which Trump dislikes. Carr has also said that he is willing to take away broadcast licenses, which has not happened in the history of the FCC since 1971. The comments being made by Trump and Carr are clear threats to the First Amendment to the Constitution, which protects freedom of speech in this country. This is flat-out government coercion and abuse of power that is occurring here. It is a dangerous precedent, and should alarm everyone, no matter where they stand on the political spectrum. One of the most remarkable things about the First Amendment is that you can say anything you want to see, no matter how morally or ethically wrong it is, and you can still say it without fear of government retribution. If the FCC, long an independent agency of the federal government, can be weaponized as a way to silence speech, any future administration can use it to advance its malicious agenda. Ironically enough, the President and administration officials claim to be doing this in the name of Charlie Kirk, who routinely debated students who disagreed with his viewpoints and was a strong advocate of free speech. For all the meandering chatter by Trump and prominent conservatives about how much they care about free speech, they seem to be cheering on its erosion.
Emil Ordonez, a rising college freshman, is the founder and editor-in-chief of Polinsights. He has been deeply passionate about politics and history since learning every U.S. President at the age of five. He was compelled to start this blog after meeting many people who were misinformed or had become apathetic about how society worked. He hopes to provide factual knowledge and insights that will encourage people, especially the young, to get more engaged in their respective communities. In his free time, he edits for Wikipedia and makes maps for elections. He aspires to work in Congress or even the White House in the future.
Leave a Reply