Democrats to Trump: Stop Jawboning, That's Our Job!
Democrats are vowing to break up media companies that kowtowed to Trump if they take back power.
In last week's newsletter, I focused on the Trump administration's obvious jawboning hypocrisy when it comes to Jimmy Kimmel: Trump folks railed against the Biden administration for pressuring social media companies to censor conservatives, yet are now engaged in a variation of the exact same thing.
You are reading Free Media from Robby Soave and Reason. Get more of Robby's on-the-media, disinformation, and free speech coverage.
There's plenty of hypocrisy to go around, however. Indeed, in their responses to this whole kerfuffle, Democrats have revealed that their solution is not a solution at all, but a threat to up the ante the second they regain power.
To recap, Kimmel's removal from the airwaves has alarmed many defenders of free speech—not because Kimmel has the right to a stage, a show, and an audience, but because the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) involved itself in a decision that should be made by private entities. By threatening to take regulatory action against media companies that platform Kimmel, FCC chair Brendan Carr earned a rare rebuke from several members of his own party, including Republican Sens. Ted Cruz (Texas), Rand Paul (Ky.), and Dave McCormick (Pa.).
When a government actor tries to extort a private actor into taking some action, it's called jawboning. In this case, the desired action was the silencing of Kimmel, who used his show's opening monologue last week to imply that the alleged killer of Charlie Kirk, Tyler Robinson, was part of the "MAGA gang," i.e., that the shooter was identified with the right. This was neither funny nor true. Kimmel can and should suffer the market consequences of his claims: His viewers can desert him, his bosses can punish him, and companies that broadcast him can find something else to air in the 11 p.m. hour. The government shouldn't force him off television, however, and the FCC shouldn't imply that it will makes things very difficult for his corporate masters unless they muzzle him.
Like I said last week, there's absolutely nothing unprecedented about what's going on here. Carr's directly threatening language—address the Kimmel situation "the easy way or the hard way"—was perhaps a less subtle example of jawboning, but it's well in keeping with the previous administration's actions on disfavored speech. Biden White House Digital Strategy Director Rob Flaherty, for instance, repeatedly pressed social media companies to take down content that was contrary to Biden's interest.
So perhaps it should come as no surprise that Democrats are not responding to the Kimmel situation by demanding some new limit on the FCC's ability to regulate speech. They are not vowing that a future Democratic administration would respect the sacrosanct First Amendment rights of private speech. On the contrary, they are promising to punish the victims of the jawboning—the private companies.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D–Conn.) made this explicit during a recent interview on MSNBC.
Murphy: "The second remedy is for the Democratic Party to make clear that if you give us power, we're gonna break up these corporate monopolies, and in particular these media monopolies … if we want to be credible as a critic of Trump's slide to totalitarianism, then we have to… pic.twitter.com/cjIHBcF0IP
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 25, 2025
Murphy said that if the Democrats regained control of the presidency and Congress, they would move swiftly to regulate and break up large media companies—and presumably, Big Tech companies—that kowtowed to Trump. If you think about it, what he's basically saying is kowtow to us, not the GOP, or else!
One can't help but feel a little sympathetic to the owners of the companies, who really just want to be left alone, make profit-maximizing decisions, and avoid punitive regulation. But they're damned if they do—MAGA will hurt them—and damned if they don't—Democrats will hurt them.
As long as Democrats remain the party that is more inclined to favor sweeping regulatory action aimed at breaking up the largest and most successful tech and media companies in the U.S.—in other words, the party of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders—the Republican Party might seem like the more welcoming team, even if Trump is as bad a jawboner (heh) as anyone else.
Speaking of Censorship
YouTube has announced that everyone kicked off the platform for violating pandemic-era content rules is now welcome back, following an investigation by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R–Ohio) into the Biden administration's jawboning of parent company Alphabet. Reason's Elizabeth Nolan Brown had an excellent write-up of this decision in her own newsletter, so I won't dwell on it in too much detail.
I am particularly satisfied by this outcome, however, since my show, Rising, was unjustly suppressed by YouTube in 2022. The platform suspended us for a week, ostensibly because we violated an election integrity policy: denying the validity of the 2020 election. But of course, no one on the show made any such claim—rather, we played a news clip of Trump making the claim. In any case, it's always nice to get some recognition that the moderation policies of that era were heavy-handed and motivated by government malfeasance.
Here was my commentary on Thursday's episode of Rising, discussing YouTube's change of heart.
This Week on Free Media
I'm joined by Amber Duke to discuss Kamala Harris's revenge tour, and much else. Also, I'm currently recording an episode with Andrew Heaton, which will debut later this week!
Worth Watching
I just finished two things I've been working on: The second season of Netflix's Wednesday, and the Cormac McCarthy novel Blood Meridian. One is a timeless meditation on man's inherent capacity for violence and the savage roots of the American experiment, and the other is about cowboys.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Is reason getting paid for the number of times they can say jawbone?
but because the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) involved itself in a decision that should be made by private entities.
Did they? Can I see the memo?
I can show you the memo the easy way or the hard way.
Then show it. And please, again compare it to GEC and emails to social media while ignoring the 1927/1934 laws.
I'll wait.
You might have missed the joke.
No. I get you were only acting retarded.
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-was-only-pretending-to-be-retarded/photos/page/2
Iggy Pop is looking for the joke with a microscope.
I caught iggy pop in a stage dive.
One I've the best shows ever. The crowd was intense, but not violent. Saw iggy post 2016. He should have retired tds killed him
His viewers can desert him, his bosses can punish him, and companies that broadcast him can find something else to air in the 11 p.m. hour.
Which is what happened.
The government shouldn't force him off television,
Which didnt happen.
In fact reason joined in the false narrative thst pressured Disney to make it a 3 day paid vacation. Disrupting what the market wanted.
Tell us you don't understand what jawboning actually entails. It's not that Brendan Carr actually physically forced Jimmy Kimmel off of television, it's that he threatened ABC in his words that he said that Kimmel should be suspended or fired and then followed that up with a not-so-veiled threat "we can do this the easy way or the hard way." Carr's words were so blatantly a threat to ABC that not even you can gaslight your way out of this, try as you might.
In fact reason joined in the false narrative thst pressured Disney to make it a 3 day paid vacation. Disrupting what the market wanted.
Reason is part of the market, Carr in his role as FCC chair is not. One carries the threat of regulatory action, and the other is one of thousands of voices that make up the marketplace that is free to consume or not consume ABC's content.
Tell us you are devoid of the actual facts as you rush to prove you're ignorant and solely care about a narratice.
The fucking timeline has been posted here many times. But you all still pretend a comment on a fairly small podcast was the driver. Because facts dont matter to you.
Then tell us how you dont understand 100 years of law and precedent.
Then remind us youre not a hypocrite like Reason who didnt scream muh private companies.
Getting fucking pathetic from some of you.
Carr shouldn't have made the statement, but not one fucking entity has stated it had to do anything with the suspension. But you dont care.
Carr shouldn't have made the statement
He gets it!
The timeline is meaningless. We only know when Carr publicly stated his little mafioso warning. What matters is that Carr publicly threatened a private company. The timeline is irrelevant because you don't know what other communication was happening between Carr, other people at FCC, and ABC / affiliates. It's the fact that FCC threatened ABC at all that's the problem.
And now you have the Twitter-In-Chief threatening extortion through lawsuits. Will you defend that too?
Facts are meaningless -Leo.
You don’t know that either. So drop it. Or just stay stuck on stupid.
Odds are you stay stuck on stupid.
I should add, this is as sickening as what the Biden administration was doing to social media platforms, deplatforming people at that time as well. I don't know that we know the timeline and that those were explicit threats either. That doesn't mean that the Biden admin isn't equally culpable whether the pressure was implicit or explicit.
Both sides because I only care for my retarded narrative - Leo
If you cant tell the difference between setting up a non appropriated censorship agency and mass sending emails with making a statement regarding a 90 year old law, you werent just pretending to be retarded.
So so,e off handed comments are as bad as threatening social ,edit platforms and even putting CIA people in their offices as if they were political officers?
Your ‘boaf sidez’ argument is bullshit, eh comrade?
This trends towards that “Your words are violence and my violence is speech” cognitive dissonance.
What about farts?? Farts could spread Covid and so to me they are violence…and smelly. Although I would love to be close enough to Trump to smell his farts…and Melania’s. So I would like to meet them after they had a KFC dinner and just soak it all in!
You're doing quite well in the competition for largest dipshit here. Keep it up.
Violence is violence, but democrats have created an unprecedented amount of violence through their rhetoric.
Time to be rid of them.
Chumby, not really. It trends towards "a purported public servant's words violated his oath and our Constitution." Please see my comment to Jesse, below, quoting Madison (and the Virginia Assembly), Article VI and 5 U.S.C. 3331.
SCOTUS gave, Whether some conduct that violates our Constitution is "as bad as" other conduct that violates our Constitution is irrelevant. Please see my reply to Jesse below quoting Madison (and the Virginia Assembly).
Leo, it's not merely sickening. The conduct at issue by people who purport to be public servants violates their oaths of office and our Constitution. Please see my reply to Jesse below quoting Madison (and the Virginia Assembly), Article VI and 5 U.S.C. 3331.
Jesse, what is your point? You seem to be implying that you think people who purport to be public servants should be permitted to threaten to use their power to retaliate against critics. Such abuses of positions that people hold solely to serve the public interest is, as James Madison said in the Virginia Report of 1800 to oppose the Sedition Act of 1798, "a power not delegated by the constitution, but on the contrary, expressly and positively forbidden by one of the amendments thereto; a power, which more than any other, ought to produce universal alarm; because it is levelled against that right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication among the people thereon, which has ever been justly deemed the only effectual guardian of every other right."
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-17-02-0202
The primary principle that should matter to everyone is that every public servant (state and federal) swore (and proved that they knew) that their first, foremost and constant duty was "to support" our "Constitution," as Article VI clearly requires.
Carr (and every public servant in the executive branch below the president, in
compliance with 5 U.S.C. 3331) swore (and publicly acknowledged that they knew) that their first, foremost and constant duty was to "support and defend" our "Constitution" against "all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance to" our Constitution (not any person, party or ideology that violates or attacks or undermines our Constitution). Carr violated his oath and our Constitution.
You mean things like this?
Pres. Obama: "President Crow and the Board of Regents will soon learn about being audited by the IRS.”
Exactly like things like that.
Did you bring this argument when Chuck Schumer threatened Supreme court justices?
Neutral, I didn't see that. But even if I did, that doesn't matter. You might as well ask if you asserted that argument then. But that wouldn't matter either. All that matters anytime any purported public servant violates our Constitution and their oath is that their misconduct be exposed and opposed.
Brendan Carr didn't do a fucking thing.
I personally had never heard the term Jawboning until until Reason used it to deny that the Biden administration had actually censored anyone. As I now understand it, jawboning is a kinder, gentler means of forcing disfavored opinions out of the public square. Hey private companies can't be criticized for doing what the government tells them to. That would be a violation of their free speech rights. And Reason tells me that it's kinda quaint. I think Carr should have kept his mouth shut even though, as Reason keeps complaining, he is acting within the law. He should have set up an office at ABC with a hot line to the white house so they would know what is and is not approved. But that would be quaint.
Tell us you don't understand what jawboning actually entails.
You don't know what it entails. It's like 'gaslighting', 'politically correct', 'woke', 'social justice', 'affirmative consent', and 'Nazism'. You retards don't understand English or the law well enough to say "Carr violated the Opinionated Bureaucrat Clause" or "Carr violated the Smith v. FCC decision" or even "Carr blacklisted Kimmel." So, you invent a term to obfuscate your dislike with the fact that the law or the market/affiliates doesn't give any more of a shit your personal whimsy or dislikes any more than it catered to Trump's or Carr's or Kimmel's or Kirk's.
This is Robby "Civil Libertarian, to be sure" Soave deflecting to Carr and the Trump administration than eating the crow he cooked.
Indeed. Allowing the market to decide, which they did, was the real force behind Kimmel's loss. Not forgetting Kimmel's brainless remarks which set the stage for his loss.
Kimmel is back on but for how long before the dismal ratings spell his doom.
Colbert found out, up next Fallon, The View, John Liebowitcz Stewart which will cause Keith Olbermann's head to explode.
but it's well in keeping with the previous administration's actions on disfavored speech.
This is the same as hundreds of millions for censorship groups? As sending threatening emails?
They dont seem equivalent.
They dont seem equivalent.
It's not even remotely equivalent. Biden had lists of keywords across all the major media platforms. Cover was run for Fauci, Hunter, Clinton, Garland, Schiff... many of them were later pre-emptively pardoned after the fact. Groups were not just targeted but targeted and the targeting obfuscated; and not specifically targeted for any specific matter of whimsy or taste but broadly and systematically targeted to harm the public and bolster the administration.
The dishonest retardation is part and parcel to Reason's "mostly peaceful" retardation, where a silent, premeditated and coordinated stabbing on the one hand is performative free speech like a flash mob and a loud proclamation of someone being deserving of a stabbing on the other is literal violence.
Hunter Biden was certainly busy handing out all those pardons which included himself.
Jesse, whether one violation of our Constitution is "equivalent" to another violation of our Constitution is irrelevant. The relevant principle is that Carr's conduct cleary violated his oath of office and our Constitution.
False
Neutral, please prove me wrong.
I remember one administration that thought it was a grand idea to create a Disinformation Governance Board, commonly known as "the Ministry of Truth" and ran it for several months before its existence was made public during a budget hearing in Congress.
Medulla, exactly. That absurdity was opposed vehemently as soon as it was exposed.
JD Vance is wrong about Reason’s use of jawbone.
he's wrong about the sleepover parties with Tucker
No.
Reason gets paid for how many times they print an article on how bad Trump's tariffs are.
I'm sure Eric is writing about the 2q GDP revisements any day now.
Remember when Trump hit 2.9% GDP and it was the greatest economic in history?? When the black guy hit 2.9% it wasn’t good though.
I think your hitting the crack pipe is clouding your memory
YouTube has announced that everyone kicked off the platform for violating pandemic-era content rules is now welcome back,
The channels were already destroyed. This isnt a fix.
Think many went to Rumble, though those that were monetized should seek financial compensation from YT and Biden.
I suggest seizing the assets of all registered democrats, and unregistered Democrat supporters. These assets can be put towards reparations for all Americans (non democrat citizens).
The strictly informational and historic guntubers who've had to quit and other content creators involved in malicious 3rd party deplatforming attacks can continue to go fuck themselves, however.
Boaf Sidez!!!
Sarc and STG seem to agree based on the other thread.
Did see some team blue apologists running around like they were debutante faggots backstage at a 1970s Elton John concert.
You mean Tony?
Demon-Craps are saying... Ruthless Rethugglicans did shit first and did shit worst, so shit's BLESSED if Demon-Craps do shit in return!!!
FUCKING IDEOLOGICALLY BLINDED IDIOTS on both sides, all sides, can SNOT see that twat is good for the goose, is good for the gander!!! Holy Shiites You Pervfectly BLINDED idiots willfully REFUSE to see!!!
(PS, Biden and the Demon-Craps NEVER blessed "Hang Mike Pence"! So grow the fuck up for once!)
I saw the NYTimes called us RepooplicKKKunts!! I’m cancelling my subscription!!! Plus I can’t read anyway.
RepooplicKKKunts... I am SOOO gonna hafta steal that!!!
SQRLSY, regarding violations of our Constitution, what many "willfully REFUSE to see" is that violations of our Constitution and public servants' oaths of office are not "good for the goose" or "good for the gander." They're not good for anyone. Please see my reply to Jesse, above, quoting Madison, Article VI and 5 U.S.C. 3331.
Hello my fellow kids, isn’t this censorship thing just the craziest ever?
You get used to it.
That you Rick?
We are all stealing one another’s shtick.
I'm copyrighted. Steal my shtick and I'll see you in court sir. Ah who am I kidding. I don't have a shtick.
That sounds like a shticky situation.
Like when Melania gave Trump a handjibber the first time.
No, no, no -- not according to the laws and the Supreme Court.
Both the 1927 law and the 1934 law expressly require the FCC take into consideration the "public interest". The Supreme Court has okayed the censorship several times. Carr and Trump should have kept their yaps shut, both to avoid the appearance of censorship and to avoid making Kimmel look like a martyr, but as things currently stand, Carr did no legal wrong.
The fact that Reason can’t seem to grasp this is really kind of sad.
The fact that partisan TDS sufferers on both sides applaud their censorship and abhor the other guy's censorship is the problem.
"The fact that partisan TDS sufferers on both sides."
The fact that TDS-addled shit piles have a "both sides" fantasy explains much about their imbecility.
No, shit bag, it is not 'both sides'; and you would appear less of an imbecilic pile of shit if you understood that.
It's doubtful that muzzling a low-ratings comedian because he pointed a finger at pointing fingers was really 'in the public interest'.
Stupid Government Tricks, yes, yes, yes. Carr and Trump clearly violated the paramount law of the supreme law of the land (our Constitution) according to the Supreme Court. See my reply to Jesse, above, quoting Madison, Article VI and 5 U.S.C. 3331.
Your implicit position (that a statute enacted by Congress) somehow is higher law than our Constitution was directly and clearly disposed of by the plain meaning of the plain text of our Constitution, itself. Article VI clearly and expressly emphasized that federal "Laws" are included in "the supreme Law of the Land" only to the extent that they were "made in Pursuance" of our "Constitution," and all legislators and "all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of [all] States" are "bound" to "support" our "Constitution" (not merely federal law, and even more clearly not merely any person or political party).
Although Article II emphasizes that one of the president's core constitutional duties is to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," his highest and most essential core duty is to "preserve, protect and defend" our "Constitution" to "the best of [his] Ability."
In the Report of 1800 by James Madison and the Virginia Assembly (regarding how the purported enactment (and even more so the purported enforcement) of the Sedition Act of 1798 violated our Constitution), Madison illustrated and emphasized how the legislative powers of Congress are subordinate to the legislative powers of the People, and the executive powers of the president (and the powers of all judges) are subordinate to both the foregoing legislative powers.
"The authority of constitutions over governments, and of the sovereignty of the people over constitutions, are truths which are at all times necessary to be kept in mind; and at no time perhaps more necessary than at the present."
In America, "[t]he people, not the government, possess the absolute sovereignty. The legislature, no less than the executive, is under limitations of power. . . . Hence in the United States, the great and essential rights of the people are secured against legislative, as well as against executive ambition. They are secured not [only] by laws paramount to prerogative [but also] by constitutions paramount to laws. This security of the freedom of [speech and] the press, requires that it should be exempt, not only from previous restraint by the executive, as in Great Britain; but from legislative restraint also; and this exemption, to be effectual, must be an exemption, not only from the previous inspection of licensers, but from the subsequent penalty of laws."
The Supreme Court already ruled that the FCC can revoke licenses, or refuse to grant licenses, based on the public interest.
Michael, of course that's true as far as it goes. But you're assuming something that is obviously false. It's impossible for a violation of our Constitution such as jawboning to be in "the public interest." No federal public servant was delegated any power to abridge the freedom of speech or the freedom of the press, and any federal public servant doing so is violating an express prohibition in our Constitution.
You're also again missing the principle behind my comment to which you replied. Even federal law (which is part of the supreme law of the land) cannot override (or purport to authorize anyone to violate) our Constitution. Even more clearly, one or more judges merely purporting to say what a federal law means cannot override (or purport to authorize anyone to violate) our Constitution. That's the precise point of having a Constitution that was put into writing and ratified by the People.
Counter point.
See.more, I didn't see how my statement was contradicted. I saw how Samuel Adams made my point even more clearly and compellingly than I did. Initially, Adams referred to “Sovereign States” (as they existed in 1787). But Adams's quotation concluded by emphasizing the crucial truth about our Constitution: “If the several States in the Union are to become one entire Nation, under one Legislature” then “the Idea of Sovereignty in these States must be lost.”
Adams was right. Our Constitution was ratified by the People (by the requisite minimum number of states) in 1788, so it became the supreme law of the land and it thereby established the sovereignty of the people. As the Preamble emphasizes, "We the People" did "ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America" to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves." As Article VI emphasizes, our "Constitution" is paramount among the three legal authorities that are included in "the supreme Law of the Land" and absolutely all state and federal public servants are "bound" to "support" our "Constitution." With those words, the People established that the People are the supreme legislative power in the US, i.e., the People are sovereign.
Robby, you might want to check the timeline if when I get and the affiliates both made their dissatisfaction known to Kimmel vs Carr opening his mouth, or would that be too much like journalism for an editor? Keep shilling the lie comrade, keep shilling.
I think Robby's reputation for journalism is pretty good.
Also it's fact that Carr's threat came before the affiliates or ABC made their decision.
As ML pointed out:
And as I pointed out:
https://reason.com/2025/09/21/the-fccs-involvement-in-canceling-jimmy-kimmel-was-unbelievably-dangerous-ted-cruz-says/?comments=true#comment-11216703
We don't know why ABC and Nextstar made their decisions and the timeline doesn't help clarify it.
Yes, thanks to Quicktown Brix and others, the AuthorShitarians, TotalShitarians, and Slurpporters of Government Almighty Speech Cuntrol got their ASSES handed to them on this one. Especially that overflowing-with-hate-and-lies Marxist Moose-Mammary Necrophiliac, AKA Mother's Lame Lament, with a Head full of Cement. See indeed the cumments at https://reason.com/2025/09/21/the-fccs-involvement-in-canceling-jimmy-kimmel-was-unbelievably-dangerous-ted-cruz-says/ in general. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul did SNOT support Dear Orange Leader on this shit... Dear Deranged Orange Leader has DOUBLED DOWN on this speech cuntrol thing, after this fracas, ya know... So now I am wondering HOW SOON swill Orange Shitler be slurpporting "Hand Ted Cruz" and "Hang Rand Paul"?
https://www.npr.org/2025/09/22/nx-s1-5550132/trump-justice-department-comey-letitia-james-virginia
Unease grows at the Justice Department as Trump's threats get even more blunt
This may snot be the VERY best link, butt they are out there... Trump HAS defeated His Own PervFected Lies about SNOT slurpporting more speech cuntrol... With yet MORE threats against the media!!!
There you go Quicktown, you just made Sqrlsy's shit list and earned yourself a NPR link.
Hey overflowing-with-hate-and-lies Marxist Moose-Mammary Necrophiliac, AKA Mother's Lame Lament, with a Head full of Cement... I noticed that PervFetced, Mind-Infected, Deflected, Neglected YOU did SNOT double down on Your Pervfected LIES for once! (No apologies offered for Your Pervfected Lies; that's OK, I do SNOT realistically expect YOU to EVER apologize, since Ye ARE Yea Verily Already PERVFECTED!!!)
Can we for once expect Ye to SNOT cum back here again, endlessly REPEATING Yer Big Lies? Such ass "Dear Donald never blessed 'Hang Mike Pence'?" THAT one, we have heard OVER AND OVER again, liar! Now will Ye PervFectly REFRAIN from endlessly re-telling Yer Hate-filled LIES about Jimmy Kimmel being privately banned BEFORE the fed-cuntrolled speech police cracked down?
Dont worry. You get used to it.
Thanks for posting this. Looks like maybe Jesse doesn't understand timezones very well based on his "gotcha" attempt above?
Regardless, the timeline is meaningless. The fact that the FCC would threaten a company mafioso style is a problem whether it was the factor in a decision or not.
Regardless, the timeline is meaningless. The fact that the FCC would threaten a company mafioso style is a problem whether it was the factor in a decision or not.
Yes. The timeline stuff is just an effort to minimize Trump's attempted suppression and power grabs.
If someone wants to defend Trump, they could point out that unlike Biden that quietly and successfully stifled speech, so far Trump only amplifies those he tries to suppress while drawing attention to his authoritarian tendencies with his Streisand effect technique. Trump's best trait is his incompetence.
The timeline is meaningless because, as SGT pointed out above, the law requires them to at least investigate complaints (in regards to tv and radio broadcasters, not so much with social media or tech companies). And unfortunately, the government long ago decided they own and control these spectrums.
Having said that, I’m kind of torn now on whether it’s better for Carr to run his mouth on a conservative podcasters channel vs the back channel bullshit the Biden Regime (I say regime cause it’s obvious that neither he nor Kamala were running anything), not to mention previous administrations, used to get their way.
I'm gonna go with, if you're going to do it, it's less evil to do it publicly and loudly, targeting big enemies that have a big voice rather than surreptitiously stifling private citizens with practically no option to fight back.
Having said that, it's more disappointing coming from the right since it's expected from the left.
That’s kind of where I’m at.
“Having said that, it's more disappointing coming from the right since it's expected from the left.”
I can understand that sentiment.
Seems to be both bad in similar but distinct ways. Trump's admin is loud and proud which is clearly intimidation, but implies they don't think it's wrong. Biden's administration was sinister in pressuring behind closed doors hoping not to get caught. The latter sort of implies they think it is wrong but don't care. So I guess it's marginally worse.
Both sides are equal!!!! Push that narrative.
Tens of millions, iC involved, proof of emails to companies
Vs
A comment on a podcast about a law that didnt apply to above. Lol.
Marginally worse? So some off handed mildly inappropriate comments is the same as forcing major social media platforms to push DNC narratives and deplatform any dissenters?
Totally the same thing.
"Leo Kovalensky II"
Hope he doesn't pass the "intelligence" to III
If there is a LK III, you’re helping to fund that.
Incompetence? As compared to what other presidents?
Not that I like what they did, but Reagan, Clinton and Obama were competent at getting things done and maintaining support. I'll give GWB half credit for getting stuff accomplished in his time with reasonable support, only revealing his incompetence as the disasters unfolded later. I'd put Biden's handlers somewhere between GWB and Trump...pretty bad..., but Biden on his own would rank dead last.
You're blaming GWB for 9/11 and Katrina? WTF is wrong with you? GWB was horrible in his own right but to tie these horrible events to him is ridiculous.
Trump has accomplished more since he took office than any of them did in an entire term, save for Reagan.
Designate, it's irrelevant here that "the law requires them to at least investigate complaints" and it's irrelevant whether two sets of violations of our Constitution are "equal." See my reply above to Jesse and my reply above to Stupid Government Tricks. The simple truth and the dispositive principle is that Car and Trump violated their oaths of office and our Constitution. No words of any statute can authorize anyone to violate any rights secured by our Constitution. Two federal criminal statutes say exactly that.
Lots of conduct purportedly under "color" of "law" or "custom" is criminal. It is a federal offense for any purported public servant to act “under” mere “color of any” legal authority or purported “custom” to “willfully” deprive "any person" of "any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution” or federal “laws” (18 U.S.C. § 242) or to “conspire” with anyone to “injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person” in "the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to” him “by the Constitution” or federal “laws” or because such person “exercised” such “right or privilege” (18 U.S.C. § 241).
The time line has been posted prior. On top of that we have the literal statements from both affiliates. But you and Mike are so desperate to make this a both sides issue to protect Joe.
Are you and Mike convinced both sets of executives listen to Bennie Johnson live?
Are you and Mike convinced both sets of executives listen to Bennie Johnson live?
Billion dollar companies attempting merger? I'm sure they have people keeping tabs on relevant agencies and considering they were threatened by name, someone would rush the news up the chain.
And at that moment they gathered their financial reports for the show and only then realized that they were losing their shirts and had not considered ending the show prior to FCC Carr making his comments on some barely known pod cast?
I think you are smarter than this...
The only thing more amazing than this story is the observation that every single comment posted before me is greyed out.
I think the long term answer is for networks to stop broadcasting OTA. Or to pre-empt certain programming from broadcast.
That would neuter both the FCC and Sinclair.
..the long term answer is for networks to stop broadcasting OTA
We must maintain out of date technology!
It isn’t. OTA technology has advanced, and OTA broadcasts are making a comeback. Apparently $250/mo. Cable mad satellite bills caused this reaction.
Is your ignorance truly bliss?
Speaking of muting - when your uncle Charlie was assassinated, in your anger, rage and grief, you said you had muted your haters, but yet you keep engaging them with your patented false narratives and insults.
Is this yet another thing you've lied about?
You’re confused. YOU are the liar. Along with all other democrats here.
Fuck off and die, Dumber Than a Bag of Rocks
Hmm mmmm.
Why is "jawboning" suddenly in the vernacular of so many news sites? Get a thesaurus, you idiots.
A thesaurus would be more effort than repeating The Narrative.
What is another word for thesaurus?
Synonym Directory.
Thesaurus? Isn't that some kind of dinosaur??
Oh, I get it! Thesaurus. Dinosaur. Extinct. Obsolete.
VS The Narrative. New. Current. Hip. Cool...
"What is another word for thesaurus?"
That's FUNNY!
^ This
When Reason used the threat of a monetary penalty to prevent me from commenting unless I subscribed to Reason Plus (tm) I suspected that they were violating my 1A rights. Now I understand it was just jawboning.
"Jawboning" means "unmoored from the realities of supply and demand"? Now this whole Kimmel thing is starting to make sense.
Re: Jawboning.
Hypocrisy is the fuel of the duopoly - infinitely renewable BTW.
One can't help but feel a little sympathetic to the owners of the companies, who really just want to be left alone, make profit-maximizing decisions, and avoid punitive regulation.
This is an assumption not just partially false but much more false than in the past.
There used to be an ethos of being left alone in business which was core to professionalism. But as wokeness migrated off campus one of the effected institutions was big business. Big business bas more certified through business schools and less entrepreneurial meaning more and more senior people have been screened for and trained into wokeness. You could see this in how quickly businesses adopted open racial discrimination even of current employees during the BLM riots.
This effect is akin to how the schools themselves adopted a corrupt and weaponized interpretation of Title IX a decade earlier. Some activists worked into position in University Administration while others worked to get appointed to the Department of Education. When the corrupt Dear Colleague letter was issued the University system activists used their position to sideline objectors and literally not a single university refused to adopt a letter which not only wrongly asserted the law but was issued illegitimately on top of that. The same happened with big business and BLM demands. The BLM allies in business always desired to virtue signal their leftism and this was their opportunity.
Shorter Marshal: left evil right good.
As usual your analysis sucks because your only goal is to align with your ideological fantasies.
If you weren't a fool you'd recognize that both are chaotic neutral but the left has built tools which make them more effective and therefore dangerous to normals.
Your goal is projection. Despite your delusions to the contrary, I’m not a leftist. And as far as your D&D reference go - laaaame! Neeerd! Doooooork! Fuck you.
As usual sarc is trying to drag the conversation away from anything damaging to the left, that's how trolls work.
The irony of your post is amazing.
your comments over the years conflict with the picture you're trying to paint.
Yeah, he’s a nerd. Since we can’t all be cool dudes renting HALF million dollar lake cabins, or the tag along drunks living off welfare.
If the Left wnats to be viewed as not "evil" then they should stop saying and doing evil:
"Murphy said that if the Democrats regained control of the presidency and Congress, they would move swiftly to regulate and break up large media companies—and presumably, Big Tech companies—that kowtowed to Trump. If you think about it, what he's basically saying is kowtow to us, not the GOP, or else!"
Murphy is the same asshole who said that "it's war" a week before Kirk was shot.
The only reason that fuckwad wants to open that particular can of worms is because he thinks his political opponents won't shoot back. This is what happened before the Spanish Civil War, when the left couldn't stop their tard-raging and kicked off a massive proxy conflict as a result.
Yeah, he's a peach. Almost makes you appreciate the two milktoast halfwits we send to the Senate. Almost.
Sadly this same sort of perpetuation is occurring within the government where job creation for academics is paramount for securing the swamp and democrat control when the GOP is in power.
Building code and building energy code development and climate change agenda are big examples of this.
The difference between Trump and Democrats is that he thinks businesses should kowtow to him when he is the President and Dems think businesses should kowtow to them no matter which party holds the Presidency.
[tilts hand] Even this is slanted. Trump thinks business should kowtow to him when it makes America Great. Dems don't think they should kowtow to anyone but them.
Holy cow! A reason writer mentioned YouTube!
>>Democrats are vowing to break up media companies that kowtowed to Trump if they take back power.
lol if. which ones, the islamo-marxists or the marxist-islamists?
Never forget: the original "jawbone" was Samson's jawbone of an ass (Judges 15:16)
Never forget: the Jews killed Jesus. (Tucker Carlson 9/21)
It's not like we don't already know this. They spent a decade suppressing, shadow-banning, and demonetizing non-leftist narratives on various social media platforms for the last decade, a trend that only began to turn around when one of the government's made men bought Twitter.
And to think this all started because Zoe Quinn wanted to guarantee that her dumb video game got good reviews.
“And to think this all started because Zoe Quinn wanted to guarantee that her dumb video game got good reviews.”
Kind of amazing when you think about it.
I'm still not convinced gamergate was anything more than a hoax. Were women really being harassed or was it just stupid cunts that use they/them pronouns. How do they know they are women? Are they biologists?
'Gamergate' was some people pointing out that some of the women in the gaming development community were horrible people and that the gaming 'journalists' were in incestuous professional relationships with them.
The rest - all the 'gamers hate women' stuff? That's all the hoax. That's all the distraction the people at the core threw up in order to distract from their lack of professional ethics.
Not to mention they took it further and were downgrading credit scores which caused some people considered conservative to have increased insurance premiums and pay higher interest on loans or be denied.
And who knows how far this actually went?
Didn't read this because I think I know everything about the tragic Kimmel scandal that I'll ever want to know. I've lost count but I think Reason is up to seven articles on the subject. I'm not really interested in watching this circle jerk. Meanwhile an open borders enthusiast just pumped thirty rounds into an ICE facility and murdered one immigrant and critically wounded two more while trying to murder federal cops. The media is already convinced that it's Trump's fault and undoubtedly Reason will agree. But Kimmel still gets the headline here. I know it's a local story but seems like it might be worth a mention below the fold.
This is what happens when you don’t have reasonable gun control.
You can’t hit your target.
It's just common sense.
Amara's Law, Peak Hype Paradox, Insider Exhaustion Effect. It's the idea that people who are "in the know" tire of a trend or story before it has even begun to crest in the mainstream culture.
I am with you, and I think it has something to do with the level of retardation present in this story. Carr is retarded for giving Kimmel an out. ABC is retarded for employing Kimmel. Kimmel is retarded because he thinks political hectoring is funny. And because he was born with a chromosomal surplus.
The more money Disney Corp. loses, the faster that they are part of a hostile takeover. After which Disney’s entire senior management team will be sacked.
Closer to 20 articles. I used the search function and I counted that many where the Kimmel controversy is discussed ( admittedly several covered multiple issues).
That's almost the number of Priscilla Villareal articles we got!
I would mention the number of articles we got about Douglass Mackey or the Alex Jones settlement, but what's the point? It's pretty clear that Reason doesn't actually care about free speech.
STOP? He hasn't even started yet.
Sounds like a self-projection excuse tactic for Demon-rats.
"...If you think about it, what he's basically saying is kowtow to us, not the GOP, or else!..."
Took all of a millisecond to parse that!
Kowtow, brown cow??
Hillary is drinking champagne with her Costco vodka tonight!! Comey’s going down!! Obama’s 3 big mistakes as president were appointing the Bush Republicans Comey and Bernanke and Gates.
Hillary has a serious case of ozempic face.
But her cankles are smaller than ever…if she’s convicted she could wear a regular ankle bracelet instead of the cankle bracelet the FBI spent a billion dollars developing. 😉
She looks like the clown face logo from the movie SAW
>But they're damned if they do—MAGA will hurt them
'Profit-maximizing' to spread disinformation and 'stochastic terrorism'?
Or is it (D)ifferent when the Democrats do it?
Soave - there's going to be one set of rules and for the foreseeable future we're going to be playing by the rules the Democrats put into place.
What's funny is I thought for a minute that this article was going to be pointing out the jawboning *the Democrats have been doing for years* - but no, its 'Trump did it first and now the Democrats are threatening to continue doing what they totally were never doing this whole time'.
It is in the best interest of ABC/Disney to remove Jimmy Kimmel, not because of the bloviating from the FCC on a podcast, but because of the losses and Jimmy Kimmel's propensity to alienate half of the country.
The largest shame is that the ill timed words of Brendan Carr are being used by leftists to make the false claim of Jimmy Kimmel's freedom of speech are being violated. ABC/Disney has the right to fire Jimmy Kimmel for almost any reason with plenty of incidents in past episodes to justify the firing.
Jimmy Kimmel's own words lack sympathy and actually commend the firing of other people for much less, so no tears should be shed on the behalf of Jimmy Kimmel's faux freedom of speech violation claims.
I could give a flying rip about Jimmy Kimmel and if he retains his job for very long even though I suspect that he is already on the networks chopping block. I care more about the stupidity of the FCC comments and even though the leftists invented this tactic, for the MAGA movement to adopt these tactics in the long term will be disastrous even if in the short term it make them feel justified.
Alex Jones settlement
SSDD. The guy is utterly tasteless and *deserves* a good, actual jawboning. Instead, they ruled against him in an amount that even Kimmel and ABC together would struggle to pay, took his business away from him, tried to give it to the people who sued him.
E Jean Carroll. Mostly Peaceful, Russiagate, Stolen Documents, COVID... the people proclaiming "What was done to Kimmel was unfair." are part of the pathos. The people who claim-begged for amnesty and continue to perform the metaphorical propaganda equivalent of walking around and pulling their mask down to cough into their hand are the behavioral contagions. They don't care about free speech any more than they care about your dead grandma or locking your live grandma in a home or euthanizing any/all of you. They only care about forcing you to wear the mask or otherwise behave the way they want you to behave.
You cannot hate them enough.
E Jean Carroll. Mostly Peaceful, Russiagate, Stolen Documents, COVID... the people proclaiming "What was done to Kimmel was unfair." are part of the pathos.
I forgot the editing in favor of Kamala (in addition to all the other dishonest editing scandals) and the "surprise discovery" of Auto Pen's cognitive decline.
We still don't know who exactly was running the country for four years and Charlie Kirk gets shot in the neck but Fauci doesn't get milkshakes thrown at him everywhere he goes but you dumbfucks can circle the wagons around Kimmel? Fuck you. I hope the bloodthirsty savages burn it all to the ground and take scalps.
The top photo shows to braindead humans.
Just ask "cheeseburger" Chuckie Schumer how's it going?
The Democrats have nothing to play with. Zero, zip, nada. Hakeem Jefferies the ghetto dwelling congresscritter who likes to threaten Trump supporters with the gulag can't even muster enough radical votes to stop Trump.
The Democrat party is finished. They did it to themselves and no one else is to blame. They have an astounding approval rating of....30%.
I have no sympathy for Kimmel or any of the other left wing talk show hosts whose ignorant prattle pollutes the airwaves.
Their time is over, the ratings indicate it is so. Americans have had enough of the ranting and raving of leftist, neo Marxist so called talk show hosts who attack middle Americans calling them racists, Nazis, fascists and spout lies, distorted facts and pure rubbish.
Johnny Carson was right when he cautioned late night hosts to avoid politics.
Robby, you clearly misrepresented that Kimmel "used his show's opening monologue last week to imply that the alleged killer of Charlie Kirk, Tyler Robinson, was part of the 'MAGA gang,' i.e., that the shooter was identified with the right. This was neither funny nor true."
Your own falsehood is even less funny and even more clearly not true. The truth is clear and simple: Kimmel told the truth and merely ridiculed the "MAGA gang" because they were "desperately" blaming their political opponents before we even had all the material facts. You, in contrast, had the material facts before you wrote. You knew your misrepresentation about Kimmel was false.
WTF? You failed in your attempt to word salad rewrite history. Sorry for your loss.
Neutral, the "word salad" you criticized (my first paragraph) was Robby' s own writing.
Please try to prove that Kimmel did what Robby falsely said Kimmel did. You can't do it because Kimmel didn't imply what Robby falsely said Kimmel implied. Even Robby didn't dare to try to prove his falsehood was true. Robby quoted only two words by Kimmel: "MAGA gang."
Kimmel told the truth (and Robby knew his allegation was false):
“We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang 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,”
I would like a sincere apology showing they understand they were wrong, before I go back to google. I dont beleive they have changed.