Disney to Bring Back Kimmel; Carr Denies Role in Show's Suspension

Disney said in a statement that it will return the show to the air Tuesday. It suspended the show because “some of [Kimmel's] comments were ill-timed and thus insensitive,” and “thoughtful conversations with Jimmy” led to the decision to return it to the air. Nexstar didn’t comment, but a Sinclair official told us Monday that the company was in discussions with ABC about returning the show to the broadcast lineup. The FCC didn't comment.

"I am glad to see Disney find its courage in the face of clear government intimidation," FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez said in a statement Monday. "I want to thank those Americans from across the ideological spectrum who spoke loudly and courageously against this blatant attempt to silence free speech. It will continue to be up to us as citizens to push back against this Administration’s growing campaign of censorship and control." Gomez said Americans must continue to combat "efforts to stifle free expression" while the FCC "considers steps that would let the same billion-dollar media conglomerates that caved in to government pressure grow even bigger."

Carr said Monday that his comments last week on a podcast, where he said there was “the easy way or the hard way” to address Kimmel's comments on MAGA's response to Charlie Kirk’s murder, were intended to explain the FCC’s news distortion complaint process, rather than a threat. The chairman said he has “expressed no view” on how the agency would handle a news distortion complaint against Kimmel.

Last week, Carr called Kimmel’s remarks “the sickest conduct possible,” saying, "You can make a strong argument that this is a sort of intentional effort to mislead the American people about a very core fundamental fact, a very important matter." On Friday, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, compared Carr’s comments to the film Goodfellas. “That’s right out of a mafioso coming into a bar going, ‘Nice bar you have here. It'd be a shame if something happened to it.,” Cruz said.

Carr said Monday that the characterization of his remarks as threats were “projection and distortion” by Democrats. The previous FCC held up the license renewal for Fox’s WTXF Philadelphia over a complaint about its content and stalled renewals for nearly all Sinclair’s stations, Carr said. He also listed examples of Democratic lawmakers writing letters to cable companies urging them to drop One America News Network and Newsmax, as well as a Baltimore prosecutor who asked the FCC to act against Sinclair Broadcast over its reporting in 2021. At that time, then-Commissioner Carr said "the FCC should make clear that it will not operate as the [Democratic National Committee's] speech police.”

Criticism, Support From the Right

Though Carr lashed out at Democrats, there have been a host of critiques of his statements from the right. Along with Cruz’s comments, long-serving former FCC Chairman Mark Fowler, a Republican, called Carr "a disgrace" last week (see 2509180066). The National Review’s editorial board used Carr’s comments to argue that the FCC should be abolished, adding that if the Trump administration doesn’t want to be accused of bullying companies into canceling Kimmel, “it would help for government officials to not talk like bullies.”

The Cato Institute’s Brent Skorup said in a blog post that the incident shows why the courts should overturn legal precedents that give broadcasters reduced speech protections. “As long as the FCC retains the authority to police broadcast content, every licensed station operates under an implicit threat: say something a powerful political faction dislikes, and your license is in jeopardy,” wrote Skorup. “That’s incompatible with a First Amendment worthy of the name.”

In a blog post Sunday, NAB CEO Curtis LeGeyt said broadcasters “must be able to make decisions about the content on our airwaves free from government influence,” without mentioning Carr or the FCC. The broadcast trade group didn’t respond to repeated requests for comment on the Kimmel matter last week.

LeGeyt said in the post that government pressure has come from both parties, pointing to use of the Espionage Act to investigate reporter sources during the Obama administration and the prior FCC’s proceeding on Fox's WTXF Philadelphia as examples. LeGeyt didn’t mention the Trump administration but instead said, “Today, we continue to see veiled threats suggesting broadcasters should be penalized for airing content that is contrary to a particular point of view.”

“The mere perception that broadcasters acted because of undue pressure is a problem for our credibility and the trust we have built with our audiences,” LeGeyt wrote. NAB will fight to defend the First Amendment “publicly when necessary, and privately when most effective.”

Nathan Leamer, who served as an aide to former FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, supported Carr’s actions Monday in a column for the Washington Examiner. Those claiming that the matter is an example of censorship are "misinformed," Leamer said. “Those affiliates made the best decision for themselves. They saw the market forces at play and recognized that the possible costs of Kimmel were piling up fast.”

In a post on X last week, Leamer suggested that an FCC enforcement item from 2019 about the unauthorized use of emergency alert tones during a Kimmel episode was evidence that the show routinely “flouted the public interest standard” and made it “clear” as to “why Nexstar and Sinclair wanted to stop dealing with him.”

President Donald Trump has also repeatedly praised Carr’s actions, suggesting Friday that networks should lose their licenses for adverse coverage of the president. Though TV networks aren't licensed, ABC and others own local stations that are. “They have a licensing procedure, and they have to show honesty and integrity,” Trump said Friday. “When you have networks that give somebody 97% bad publicity or 94% bad publicity, I think that's dishonesty.”

Meanwhile, a Sinclair Broadcast official told us that threats against Sinclair stations over the Kimmel matter led to its last-minute decision not to air a planned tribute to Kirk on Friday. Shortly before the special was due to start, Sinclair announced that it would instead be shown on YouTube. The change was due to threats against some local ABC stations, a Sinclair official told us. After a Tegna station in Sacramento was shot at on Friday, Sinclair had to put additional security measures in place at its ABC stations, the official told us.

Other lawmakers of both parties have also weighed in. Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rand Paul said Sunday on NBC’s Meet the Press that Carr’s ABC comments were “absolutely inappropriate, [and he’s] got no business weighing in on this.” But “people have to also realize that despicable comments, you have the right to say them, but you don't have the right to employment,” Paul said. “This is television for goodness' sake. You have to sell sponsorships. You have to sell commercials, and if you're losing money, you can be fired. Senate Commerce member Todd Young, R-Ind., directly referenced Cruz’s denunciation of Carr's words and said Americans “must cherish and protect free speech.”

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., said Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union that he doesn’t agree with Cruz on Carr and argued that the FCC chairman’s comments were inconsequential. ABC “is also a network that has not been friendly to [the Trump] administration whatsoever,” Mullin said. “I don’t think a threat would make any difference whatsoever.” ABC executives “made a decision because [Kimmel] said something that was extremely insensitive and a flat-out lie about the president of the United States, and there was no excuse for it.”

Congressional Democrats continued their attack on Carr. Senate Commerce ranking member Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and 11 other panel Democrats on Friday night formally requested that Cruz bring in Carr for a hearing on the incident and demand the FCC chairman “answer for this unprecedented attack on the First Amendment.” Cantwell had already suggested that Cruz call a hearing, and Communications Subcommittee ranking member Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., had separately requested Carr’s testimony.

Carr’s “bullying tactics are offensive to the First Amendment,” the Democrats said in their letter to Cruz. “As you know, the First Amendment prohibits government retaliation against individuals or groups for expressing their views.” The senators noted that Cruz has “long prioritized conducting oversight to ensure our government is not being used to weaponize the censorship of speech. At a time when free speech is under threat, this hearing could not be more important for the American people.”

Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., also asked Carr “to appear before Members of Congress and the American people to explain what appear to be egregious abuses of the FCC’s authorities.” Blumenthal and Warren said in a letter to Carr that they “are increasingly concerned that your unprecedented weaponization of the [FCC] amounts to an unlawful attempt to corruptly wield government authority to chill First Amendment-protected speech and independent, fact-based news reporting.” The senators gave Carr until Tuesday to confirm that he will appear at a hearing, which they said is necessary because “the FCC has failed to provide substantive replies to congressional letters regarding these concerns.”