Part of MRAK Series “A Jury of the People: You Decide”
By JON FAULKNER
Ben Sperry’s article on the suspension of talk-show host Jimmy Kimmel by ABC frames the legal issues well and concludes by recommending expanded First Amendment freedoms through reduced regulation of airwaves. Deregulation or downsizing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) resonates with Americans who have witnessed censorship and suppression of news at every level, in business and government.
In 1791, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton delivered “position papers” to President George Washington over the constitutionality of the proposed bank of the United States. Hamilton’s argument prevailed largely because of the “general welfare” clause in the Constitution. This widely interpreted mandate has empowered our federal government to enact seemingly limitless domestic programs and regulations in pursuit of the public welfare. However, the Framers did not provide a definition of “public welfare.”
Our Constitution relegates to the Judiciary the interpretation of laws we create to protect our Constitutional rights to free speech and a free press. What promotes the general welfare, however, is for the American people to decide.
The public welfare doctrine grants Congress both proactive and reactive powers. These powers are extensive and highly influenced by public opinion. Aside from human rights, which transcend human-imposed limits, our freedoms are limited or expanded by what our representative democracy regards as both reasonable and defensible on the basis of serving the best interests of society.
Kimmel’s controversial comments about the alleged killer of Charlie Kirk prompted backlash and actions by ABC’s affiliate stations and FCC. The suspension, driven by decisions from affiliate groups Nexstar and Sinclair to preempt Jimmy Kimmel Live!, followed remarks by FCC Chair Brendan Carr, who urged affiliates to “step up” in reaction to Kimmel’s comments, implying that broadcasters must act in the “public interest” or face potential fines for a “pattern of news distortion.”
The near immediate reaction by Nexstar and Sinclair implies the presence of pressure, but Carr’s statements were transparent and suggestive. Lawyers like Stout will speculate about the line between censorship and regulatory guidance, but these are distractions from the bigger issue: the growing power of Government to intervene and the arbitrary execution of that power. The Biden-Trump transition is corrective or destructive, depending upon one’s view, but the Twitter Files and many other revelations of abuse are more than worrisome.
The Kimmel case asks Americans to decide how we defend our right to a free press. The concept of the need to control content on behalf of the public welfare is on the table. We must decide for ourselves what kind of country we want, and how to safeguard our freedoms.
Americans who favor de-centralization of corporate power and influence in media, for example, should hold Disney accountable for pressuring affiliates to carry a show their local marketplace does not support. Congress is accountable for more robust enforcement of internal safeguards designed to expose and remove bad actors within the Executive.
Americans need to decide the degree to which we regulate our airways or tax them. Maybe the FCC is another agency we don’t need. But FCC’s authority over airwaves misses the larger point, which is how Americans wish to regulate media in a manner that promotes the general welfare, and avoids infringements upon Constitutional rights to free speech and a free press. What constitutes unacceptable levels of deceptive news, “hate speech”, violence or pornography, we Americans—not the courts–get to decide.
Good Hollywood observation. How about sticking with observations that serve Alaska?
What DK says! Let’s get back to local stuff that is controversial so we can have a debate.
And just a small critique: try to prevent merely copying parts of articles already published elsewhere. While technically it may not be plagiarism it is not
professional.
So when do we get Tim Allen shows back? Roseanne? Tucker Carlson? Apologies for the censorship of twitter and other sites?
Get rid of “the view” while we are at it
I watched an episode of The View once.
Now i know why it is not called The Views.
Ratings were tanking. Business wasn’t making money off Kimmel dribble. This is not a first amendment case.
That will be litigated. I think Kimmel has the cash and backing to press the case and get a favorable ruling. Of course it”s all a big distraction. Anything to keep people from talking about the multiple wars, poor economy, wealth transfers to the top 0.01%, civil rights crackdowns, failing institutions, corruption in high offices, Epstein, etc…
Curiously, two major affiliate networks preempted Kimmel’s show when it went back on air. That represented over 20% of ABC’s market.
If the FCC chairman and Trump just kept their mouth’s shut, there would be no question of 1st Amendment.
I whole-heartedly agree. The First Amendment allows Jimmy “whoooo?” Kimmel to say whatever he wants, as long as it’s not comparable to yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. The viewers, corporate sponsors, and broadcast stations get to vote with their, viewership, sponsorship, and ability to pull shows out of their line-ups, not to mention the lawyers and courts getting involved for slander, misrepresentation, breach of contract, etc. etc. The government should definitely not be involved in determining “acceptable speech” from any viewpoint. “I may not like what you have to say, but I will (still) defend to the death your right to say it…” – retired member of the US military.
Of course the obama and biden regimes continually denied 1st Amendment Right to individuals and used the taxpayers’ money to engage in governmental tyranny and censure.
These pearl clutchers simping for kimmel today … absolutely silent back then.
So you feel we should model Obama & Biden?
That’s an odd take: “The Left does it & we want to be like them!”
That’s because your side has no speech worth fighting for, just grievances. Frankly we truly don’t care about your 14th century opinions on everything
“…just grievances.”
Have you ever met anyone woke? Or an advocate for DEI?
.
Talk about a kettle/pot situation.
Thank you.
Actually, it is permissible to yell “fire” in crowded theater (an uncrowded one as well) … IF there actually is a fire!
If you see a fire in a crowded theater, you absolutely should call attention to it.
The government didn’t suspend Jimmy Kimmel. His suspension was a business decision by his employer. His employer has every right to suspend him if he broadcasts content that doesn’t meet their standards. As usual, Kimmel and his media cohorts went straight to Trump and quickly changed the story to Trump suspended him. Just another political stunt.
Wow, do you actually believe this? Trump and his FCC pitbull specifically have gone after Trump’s detractors. You are right, it was a business decision, but one made under extreme duress from the government. The explicit threats the FCC chairman, Trump, and his various other functionaries made were the reason for this business decision.
The true business decision, that wasn’t forced by the government, was reinstating Kimmel after Disney’s stock tanked and they lost tons of subscribers. That’s how it is supposed to work, let the market determine what is and is not acceptable, not the whims of a thin-skinned and petty president.
And, for the record, I am not defending anything Kimmel said.
The 1st Amendment is a restriction on Congress and that is the end of it. For crying out loud, read it. It is written in plain English and it only means what it says. That is the purpose of the written language. There are 50 other Constitutions, have any of you EVER read ONE of them. They all cover speech and the freedom of speech. Only the United States Congress can violate the 1st Amendment. Read It!
“What constitutes unacceptable levels of deceptive news, “hate speech”, violence or pornography, we Americans—not the courts–get to decide.”
You’re conflating speech with pornography and violence which is not appropriate. God instituted government to enforce laws that protect the rights of individuals and society. There is no place for pornography or unrighteous violence and those who engage in those behaviors should be stopped. Speech is protected but all things have a limit (like not allowing a protestor to use a megaphone in someone’s ear, or speaking pornographic things in public – like reading pornographic books to kids). The government doesn’t need to get involved with Kimmel, the public outcry did take care of that.
Let Jimmy Kimmel cancel himself with his own drivel.
Just more public funded BS same as NPR “National Propaganda Radio”
I will still refrain from watching. Kimmel just isn’t funny.
Excellent, you don’t like what he’s peddling, don’t watch him! By not watching him, his ratings go down and his studio loses money, then they make a business decision based on the market to cancel him or reduce his budget. That’s how it is supposed to work.
It’s amazing to me how quickly MAGA forgot about leftist efforts to silence disagreeable (to them) conservative voices in recent years, yet now MAGA wants to do the very same thing.