The Campaign Against Network Television Picks Up Steam
On Wednesday, Daniel Suhr did something he’s been doing a lot lately: he filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission over something he saw on TV. Suhr is the president of the Center for American Rights, a nonprofit law firm based in Chicago. For months, his organization has been urging the FCC to revoke the licenses it grants to the major broadcasters, often over the perceived “leftist” bias of their news and opinion hosts.
Wednesday’s filing was over the monologue from Monday’s episode of The Jimmy Kimmel Show, on ABC. Kimmel, who often delivers harsh critiques of Donald Trump and his allies, had addressed the assassination of the right-wing podcaster Charlie Kirk by saying that the “MAGA gang” was “desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them.” The remarks created an uproar; in conservative media circles, they were interpreted as evidence that Kimmel was saying the shooter was one of them. “It was right in our sweet spot,” Suhr told CJR. “All we did was provide the facts and the law that matched with the public outrage.”
Around the same time, Brendan Carr, the chairman of the FCC, went on The Benny Show, a podcast hosted by the influential conservative activist Benny Johnson, to offer his thoughts about Kimmel’s monologue. “When you look at the conduct that has taken place by Jimmy Kimmel, it appears to be some of the sickest conduct possible,” Carr said. “We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct…or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” Soon, Nexstar Media Group and Sinclair Broadcast Group—which collectively own dozens of local ABC affiliates throughout the country—were saying they would preempt the show. By the evening, ABC announced that it was suspending Kimmel’s show “indefinitely.”
Related stories
Related Knowledge Center: The White House vs. the press
Whether it’s the Des Moines Register’s publication of an unfavorable election poll, a routine edit of a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, or the Associated Press’s decision in its authoritative stylebook to continue to use “Gulf of Mexico,” Donald Trump and the White House have used executive authority and legal reprisals in an effort to punish and suppress press coverage that runs contrary to the administration’s preferred narratives.
Democracy and politics | Signalgate | The CBS submission | Voiceless America
Related Knowledge Center: Democracy and politics
News organizations are scrambling to find a coverage approach that adequately informs the American public about the country’s slide from democracy to authoritarian rule.
Related Knowledge Center: Free speech and public protest
The First Amendment is facing challenging times: Crackdowns on campus protests prompted both-sides claims of intolerance. Attempts to head off dangerous health misinformation have been characterized as violations of free speech. Donald Trump is publicly punishing news outlets that deviate from his administration’s version of events while privately suing some outlets into submission.
The White House vs. the press | Voiceless America