← All Of It with Alison Stewart
All Of It with Alison Stewart
Free Speech, Politics, The Media Business and Late Night Comedy Shows
00:31:18
Loading summary
Transcript55 lines
- [00:00]
A
For 140 years, MultiCare has been in Washington prioritizing long term solutions, partnering with local communities and expanding access to care. Together, we're building a healthier future. Learn more@mycare.org.
- [00:24]
B
This is all of it on WNYC. I'm Alyson Stewart. Coming up on tomorrow's show, climate change is reshaping how and where people live. Extreme weather, heat, droughts and floods are important factors to consider whether you're a homeowner or a renter. New York Times finance reporters Ron Lieber and Tara Siegel Bernard put together a guide to assessing climate risks and they'll join us to share their advice and take your questions. That is in the future. Right now, let's get this hour started with a conversation about comedy, Jimmy Kimmel and free speech. It's been almost a week since ABC abruptly pulled Jimmy Kimmel Live off the air, but yesterday the network announced Jimmy Kimmel would return tonight. Abc, which is owned by Disney, made the original decision to suspend Kimmel after corporate and conservative political pressure in reaction to what Kimmel said about Charlie Kirk's accused shooter on his show. This is from September 15th.
- [01:30]
C
We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying.
- [01:34]
D
To characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of.
- [01:39]
C
Them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.
- [01:43]
B
The FCC has said that the broadcast figures like Kimmel should avoid speaking about political ideology and instead use their quote, licenses to, quote, unquote, operate in the public interest. The question is whose public interest? Critics are saying that Jimmy Kimmel is being censored for voicing negative opinions about the Trump administration. And considering the FCC's involvement in the decision, some believe ABC's removal of Jimmy Kimmel Live is an attack on every American's right to free speech. To recap this tumultuous week in media and the implications for free speech is David Folkenflick, NPR's media correspondent. Hi, David.
- [02:19]
D
Hey, Alison.
- [02:20]
B
And this is also a comedy story, given Jimmy Kimmel's background as a comedian on late night tv. So we also have Jesse, David Fox, senior editor at Vulture, host of the Good One podcast and author of comedy book How Comedy Conquered Culture and the Magic that Makes It Work.
- [02:36]
C
Hey, Jesse, thank you for having me.
- [02:38]
B
So I want to get both of you. I want to get an overview from both of you.
- [02:41]
C
Sure.
- [02:41]
B
We'll start with you, David. There's been a lot of opinions about Kimmel's suspension. He's going to return tonight. We thought right now as we go to air. How rare an event is this in recent American broadcasting?
- [02:56]
D
Well, there's certainly been times where people have been given a forced timeout. You've seen this on places like the View. You saw, you know, Roseanne Barr be in some ways pulled from air, I think temporarily. She certainly was ultimately permanently exiled. That Bill Maher referenced in recent days that he was forced off the air by ABC over two decades ago over remarks he made after the 911 terror attacks on the country. So it's not unheard of. What's really striking is the involvement of and I'm sure we'll talk about it. But was the insertion into the debate. Entering the chat room was the president's chief broadcast regulator, Brendan Carr, who made these comments before real actions were taken, both by some of these huge station groups that pressured Disney and then ultimately by Disney itself.
- [03:50]
A
Jesse, you recently wrote a book about comedy and how comedy conquered culture. What's your been reaction over the last week from your perspective as someone interested in the role of comedy in culture?
- [04:01]
C
Yeah, I mean, it's been really fascinating to see this type of situation happen in America in many ways. Like there's been versions of this that I write about in the book where in Russia people will be taken off the air or forcibly deported or something like that. So to see actually in America sort of like a baby step towards an authoritarian take on free speech has been fascinating to play out. It's also been interesting to see how the comedy community has reacted.
- [04:35]
A
Listeners, would you like to get in on this conversation? How have you felt about Jimmy Kimmel Live being suspended? What effect do you think the story has on comedy as an entertainment genre? Our number is 21243 WNYC. How do you decide when someone has crossed a line? What do you think this story says about the state of free speech and the First Amendment protections in America today? Our phone number is 212-433-WNYC 212-433-9692. David, from your reporting, you've been doing a lot of reporting about this. Why do you think the Trump administration is targeting late night comedians specifically as figures that they want off the air?
- [05:17]
D
I think there's a pretty direct line here between the president's personal peek about the fact that the two people who have been pulled from the air, Stephen Colbert's show has been canceled. It's going to go through the end of, I believe next June. A decision made by owners of CBS network who were trying desperately to get approval of the FCC to transfer.
- [05:42]
B
The.
- [05:43]
D
CBS local station licenses to their new owners over at Skydance Media, you know, and Jimmy Kimmel. Kimmel and Colbert have been two of the most acerbic and unfettered critics and satirists of the president, with some, despite the diminishment of broadcast news ratings, a certain amount of significant reach. They got under his skin. You'd see it in his tweets and his truth, you know, social postings and his statements publicly and the like. And here we are with one whose show is being canceled, the other who was suspended at a moment of great public sensitivity and tumult over the assassination of Charlie Kirk. But the president's allies and the person, particularly of Brendan Carr, using it as an opportunity to go after somebody who Trump has indicated time and again he'd like to be off the air.
- [06:34]
A
Comedians are criticized from both sides of the political divide. Think about Dave Chappelle, who was criticized for what he said about transgender people. Jesse, why do you think comedians have this ability to become cultural lightning rods?
- [06:48]
C
Yeah, I mean, I think they. There is a way that comedians speak that is just sort of catchy. I think in many ways it just sort of like it cuts through chatter. And I think over the last few decades, there's just been more chatter than ever because everyone has sort of a certain sort of platform. And the funniest among us kind of cut through that. And I think we afford them liberties and have for centuries that other people just usually don't have in terms of being able to talk about certain issues. And then people with that afforded liberties and came at a time where attention is so valuable has come a certain sort of authority to talk about certain things. And those who have other sorts of authority do feel threatened by the comedian's ability to say things that they may or may not want them to say.
- [07:40]
A
This is for both of you. I'll let you start. David Kimmel, Colbert, Seth Meyers, they typically criticize Trump on a nightly basis. Foul, maybe a little bit less so. But politics has been, has been fodder for Late Night forever. Back to Bill Clinton, George and George Bush. So my question is, has this been like the frog boiling situation or is this a sudden change? What do you think, David?
- [08:06]
D
I mean, you know, if you think about presidents, over time, they've wanted to show that they're in on the joke, that they can take a joke, that they're bigger than the satire, even if privately they've been frustrated by it. You know, Bill Clinton famously appeared on the Arsenio hall show and played sax to prove that, you know, he had some soul to him and that he was not just a stiff policy wonk. And, you know, others have done similar things over time. Obama appeared on Nick Galifianakis talk show satire. It's making sort of a meta thing, making fun of the very genre between two ferns. In the case of Trump, he is very comfortable with the entertainment realm. He likes being in the Klieglights of a TV studio. He liked being indulged for a lot of years and promoted for a lot of years on a lot of shows just like this, including Jimmy Fallon's. He doesn't like being the butt of jokes. He just can't process that very well. And it is true that when he's been president, both in his first term and in the first months of his second term, he has been the focus of a lot of satire and a lot of derision, which I think he's even more takes greater exception to that may be due to the extraordinary nature of his presidency and the way in which he governs. There's a lot of grist for them to work with, but I think it's a little bit like the pot boiling and the frog, in a sense, in that this is an opportunity for Trump and his allies in government and outside of it to score points with his core base and to say, hollywood doesn't respect you because it doesn't respect me. And that's really the message that he sends time and again. And there are ways in which there's some truth to that when it comes to late night folks, but usually they're looking for people who can take a punch, and Trump, despite all the tough guy nature of it, really can't. And it's come in concert. We can talk later about this, but it's come in concert with a concomitant, you know, a real assault or siege on the notion that there can be independent voices providing criticism and dissent and facts in terms of reporting that the president doesn't like. You know, Kimmel was basically seems to have been wrong or certainly wasn't right in what he said, wasn't clearly right in what he said about the nature of who the shooter is. I don't think we have a strong grasp on it, but the initial evidence presented in the indictment against the shooter for the murder of Charlie Kirk seems to show that he was against what Kirk had to say ideologically from his left, not from his right. But I think we have to have a certain degree of humility about it. That's not something Kimmel showed. But then again, Kimmel's a comic.
- [10:55]
A
Did you want to add to that?
- [10:57]
C
Yeah, I will add. Like, I do think there's a frog boiling quality to generally late night becoming more political. And that's just the nature of where Americans turn for politics. But it should be noted that stuff like this wasn't really happening the four years Trump wasn't president. Right. It's like Trump was president and things like this felt like they're happening. Then Trump was not president. It did not seem like it was happening. Then he's president again and stuff is happening. Right. It's like the White House Correspondent's Dinner had comedians recently, five years ago, four years or whatever. And then immediately he comes back and they're basically done with comedians forever. And I think he is uniquely threatened by pop cultural figures. I think the despite the fact of how diminished late night is becoming in terms of viewership, he is a person of that world. He is jealous in many ways or seemingly of the how beloved Kimmel is as a figure inside of Hollywood. And I do think he is uniquely sensitive to those things, even if clearly, as was proven by the last election, his campaign was more savvy about these sort of alternative comedy spaces as an avenue to reach new audiences. So it is both. Yes, this is sort of a culmination of two things happening at once. But Trump is a unique figure in terms of these things happening.
- [12:15]
A
I would say we're speaking about Jimmy Kimmel Live being suspended and the implications in media and comedy. Kimmel's first show is back tonight. My guests are David Folkenflick, NPR's media correspondent, and Jesse David Fox, senior editor at Vulture. And we are hearing from you. How have you reacted to Jimmy Kimmel Live being temporary, pulled off the air? What effect do you think this has on our First Amendment? Let's take a couple of calls. Let's talk to Jessica, who is calling from Montclair. Hi, Jessica, you're on the air.
- [12:48]
E
Hi, how are you? Thanks for this discussion. My, my question is, or my comment is there's a lot of fuss about this. There's a, you know, this Jimmy Kimmel white man being canceled. And I think there's a long history of performers and political commentators and comedians of color being canceled, maybe not in such a public way like being pulled from their show. And I just find it very interesting that there's such a there's this huge reaction to Kimmel, which I agree with. But where's the reaction to other voices that are not allowed to speak or.
- [13:35]
A
Thank You, Jessica, Marcia in Brooklyn. Marcia, you're on the air.
- [13:39]
E
Yeah, hi. Thank you. That's a good point, Jessica. I'm a little concerned that we might be too careful in our language when you have guests on I have to get away from the dog, but I'm sorry, I'm in the dog park. Which has to do with they're telling the truth. These comedians are truth tellers. When they refer to a cheap liar and felon, that's not a joke. They're caging it with some humor. But they are giving us truth, which is often hard to hear amidst all the social media platforms.
- [14:19]
A
We understand. Seems like your dog agrees as well. Thank you so much for calling in, David. I wanted to get to the FCC part of it. The decision to suspend Kimmel was made in part by Disney, which owns Ambassador abc. But there was also pressure from the Disney affiliates and people who hold FCC licenses. What does this story represent about the divide between the local affiliate and the broadcast network? Let's start there.
- [14:49]
D
Well, there can be genuinely a tension between local station owners and the network because, you know, the networks are broadcasting to a big country out there, right, in more than 100 markets and close to 200 in some cases. And some of those station owners are not going to be comfortable with some of the material presented. You know, in the 90s, the ABC had this sort of edgy, almost cable like drama called NYPD Blue. I used to watch it. There were a lot of local station owners that didn't like it because they came closer to there's certain kinds of swearing, there's sort of partial nudity. It was a late, you know, it was like a 10 o' clock show, but it was rougher around the edges. It was also very well done. This is a kind of thing that recurs. There's been an extraordinary consolidation of ownership as well. So these station owners take on even more importance in the relationship with the networks. You have Nextar, which is the nation's owner of the most number of television stations across the country, which is seen as dispositionally a little more conservative and concerned about the sensibilities of its audiences. A bit from the center right. And you have Sinclair, which I used to cover, based outside of Baltimore, which is a huge owner of stations and is outright conservative in its outlook in a lot of its approaches. Fine. And that's been something we've also reported a lot on in the past. Those are true things. So there's a tension there. And both of them, Wednesday, in the hours before ABC made its announcement, came out saying that they would themselves preempt Kimmel, meaning that he would not have been present in dozens of markets except through streaming in major markets, including, say, Washington and Seattle. Now, we can acknowledge that, but also acknowledge another little facet. Those things came after hours after the chairman of the fcc, Brandon Carr, made his remarks on Benny Johnson's podcast. It's worth pointing out Benny Johnson is essentially a far right podcaster. Not only pro Trump, but a guy who turned out had been surreptitiously paid by the Russians, a guy who had been fired from previous jobs for fabricating. He's not the most mainstream, even conservative outlet through which Carr could make his remarks. And Carr said, essentially, we can do this the easy way or we can do this the tough way. ABC has to make this right or the FCC is going to have to get involved and stations should get involved too. Well, suddenly stations did this. Those station groups themselves have major transactions in front of Brendan Carr and the fcc. So nexstar essentially wants to do this deal buying Tegna's station. Tegna owns a number of major television stations around the country. It would require the lifting of what's called a market cap, saying you can only own stations reaching about just under 40% of the nation's population. And Nexstar essentially would want it to be lifted to 80% of the population. There are policy reasons why there may be a good case for that. We live in a time of streaming. There's a lot of cable TV has fallen off like, there are other reasons to argue that the world has changed from when those regulations were put in place. But nonetheless, you know, nexstar is asking Brendan Carr to make this major change to allow them to then have him consider the approval of buying those stations. He seems disposed in favor, but, you know, it is a way that they can show favor to Brendan Carr about his ideological positions on this as well. Similarly, St. Clair wants to offload some of its stations. The transfer of those licenses for the local stations requires FCC approval. And they are considering, have announced they're considering selling off a bunch more, which would again require FCC approval. So you have these stations acting. Carr has embraced it, saying, look, this is localism. Stations are standing up for the interests of their viewers. That could be the case, but it's also the case they're standing with him at a time they need his approval for major business transactions.
- [18:42]
B
We're talking about Jimmy Kimmel live being suspended for a week. The first show is back on the air tonight. We'll have more with my guest, David Folkenflick and Jesse David Fox, as well as your responses. What was your reaction to Jimmy Kimmel Live being temporary pulled off air? Did you do anything about it? Did you cancel Disney? Did you write a letter to the FCC in support? Our number is 2124-3396-9221-2433. WNYC. We'll be right back.
- [19:22]
A
You are listening to all of it on WNYC. I'm Alison Stewart.
- [19:25]
B
My guests are David Folkenflick, NPR's media correspondent, and Jesse David Fox, senior editor at V. We are talking about Jimmy Kimmel Lives being suspended and he is back on the air tonight. So, Jesse, critics say the decision was a pressure to remove Jimmy Kimmel Lives an attack on free speech. On Inauguration Day, the White House posted a line that said Donald Trump would uphold the First Amendment in a big picture. Why is free speech protection important to commentary?
- [19:55]
C
I mean, it is, I mean, in like, it's a large question. Sorry. Dissent is important for democracy. The ability of its people to be able to be free and share ideas are essential for the fundamentals of what it means to have a democratic country. And I think it has been proven that because of comedians ability to wield free speech, they are often targets for people in power. And I think also because comedians are both powerful in their ability to wield free speech, but also not taken seriously, I think they seem maybe easier targets than a newspaper, right? Like, you know, obviously Donald Trump does not has problems with like say, the New York Times and other publications, but it's much harder to take that down then trying to figure out how to parse one sentence that Jimmy Kimmel said that was maybe more inexact. And there was a lot of debates about the value of satire, especially during the first Trump administration, because they're like, well, it's not doing anything right. Why is he still president if political satire was so powerful? And I think in many ways we're seeing how it was more powerful than I think we gave her credit for, because I do think there is something to a person with a very prominent position in our culture routinely criticizing the president. It is why in many ways previous presidents, even those who did not agree with what was being said by comedians, were happy to live in a nation where criticism was allowed. I think it's one of the defining things about the the American culture. So to to fight that is, you know, why people call this maybe a more authoritarian or physicistic perspective on free speech.
- [21:47]
A
David, I don't know if you have.
- [21:48]
B
A response to this But I keep.
- [21:49]
A
Thinking about Bob Iger, who's the head of Disney. He's also married to a former journalist who is the dean of the Annenberg.
- [21:57]
B
School of Communication and Journalism, Willow Bay.
- [22:00]
A
Where does he stand on all this?
- [22:03]
D
Oh, I think he stands in a fairly untenable position, but he also stands as the leader of one of the biggest forces in entertainment and one of the, you know, biggest corporate brands in the world. So this is kind of the headache that comes with the job. He's somebody who has been in some ways somewhat more politically outspoken than his predecessor, Michael Eisner, his mentor and tormentor in some ways. He, you know, had ruminated about running potentially for governor as a Democrat and has given to liberal causes and has spoken up, you know, in support of journalists at ABC and ESPN and, you know, those signature brands over the years. Willoughby, his wife, you know, respected anchor and business journalist before that. You know, I think he was in a fairly untenable position and, you know, once his station groups made the choices that they made. And yet, you know, you're seeing the Trump administration and President Trump as an individual, through his lawsuits, go after major institutions that would provide countervailing voices and dissent and at times, information. A lot of law firms, for example, essentially sued for peace with the White House and the president agreeing to do work for pro bono on causes dear to the president in exchange for being allowed to essentially practice law in a way that allows them to have security clearance to do the law that they want. But a number of law firms challenged and sued and have prevailed. You've seen Columbia essentially suit for peace, Columbia University to make sure that it can retain these enormous federal grants that allow its researchers to do vital work on all kinds of things, and some things that raise eyebrows and hackles in Congress and other places. But you've seen other universities challenge that as well, with mixed results, but not entirely unsuccessfully. So, you know, Iger was faced with this question, do I stand up and challenge? Do I find the FCC denying, for example, they want to take full control of a television product ESPN will have before other federal regulators, not probably the fcc, this deal in which they take over the NFL Network and The NFL gets 10% of ESPN, which is otherwise owned by Disney, with Hearst, it's a game of chicken. And he blanched now. He blanched for a week. And now Kimmel is coming back and the question is, was that suspension and, you know, perhaps a way of showing that this was poorly timed and ill framed by Kimmel and that's it, or is it Presaging that. Basically the writing's on the wall for Jimmy Kimmel live as a show because it displeases the President and the administration. And that's kind of where we're at. You know, Carr can invoke what the local stations do. And from a financial standpoint. That's right, it's absolutely correct. But because he initiated and launched this, he set all of this into motion, it's very difficult to interpret this, but as part of the larger onslaught by the administration against outside voices. And let's just remember the First Amendment was designed not simply to encompass thoughtful dissent or perfectly accurate speech or fair speech or speech that we can all agree on. That's not upsetting. It's intended to from the outset, from 1791 or whenever the Bill of Rights was folded in there, the First Amendment was intended to allow for this roiling, boisterous, untidy, and certainly often in the early days, unkind debate about politics and to hold people accountable, both through things like reporting, but things like dissent, which often involves satire and is itself not expected to be perfectly accurate. So that's the nature of the debate we're talking about here.
- [25:57]
B
Let's talk to Bill who's calling in from Pittsburgh. Hey, Bill, thank you so much for calling all of it. You're on the air.
- [26:04]
C
Thank you.
- [26:05]
F
Just a comment about that your guest made earlier about comedians often being the target of people in power. There was a journalist on the, who was a guest on the Stephen Colbert show recently who apparently has written extensively about Russia and Putin's rise to power. And unfortunately, I can't remember the journalist's name, but he mentioned that one of the first. Okay, one of the first targets that Putin had was going after some kind of puppet comedian show. So it just goes to show the chilling effect there that, you know, starting off with the maybe low fruit on the tree and moving forward, you know, it's, it's a joint precedent for what's going on here. The other thing that I just wanted to mention very quickly is that I've read many times what Jimmy Kimmel said verbatim. And he wasn't, he wasn't saying that Charlie Kirk's assassin was, was on the right. He was commenting about the knee jerk reaction that often happens amongst, you know, conservatives or people on the right to try to, you know, quickly lump somebody like that into a category, whether they say it's a member of antifa or the left or Democrats. I mean, this is nothing new. You know, I remember back in the time with The Oklahoma bombing, that one of the first reports that were coming out in some of the conservative news media was that the perpetrator was Middle Eastern. So, you know, it's that kind of thing. And so I hope Kimmel doesn't buckle tonight and, you know, kind of clarifies and stands by what he said.
- [27:38]
B
Thank you so much. Let's talk to Peter, who's calling in from Huntington. Hi, Peter. Thank you so much for calling all of it. You're on the air.
- [27:46]
G
Hi. Thank you so much. My commentary, I think, is a little different. I don't really think this is a First Amendment issue. I think this is more of an issue that if they decided that what Kimmel said, and I also listened to it many times, and it was inaccurate, it wasn't a misstatement. I mean, he just lied about the background of this individual. If the affiliates decided to pull him for that reason or pressure from the outside, he has the right to speak anywhere else. He doesn't have a right to a TV station to do that speech. But we just witnessed the First Amendment being essentially murdered with Charlie Kirk, and we're worried about Jimmy Kimmel's First Amendment right. It's a much bigger issue than just him not being able to broadcast for a few days. He can broadcast anywhere else. At least he's still alive.
- [28:37]
A
Thank you for your call. You know, Jesse, Jimmy Kimmel could go to. Go to YouTube. He could have a podcast. He could do. He could do anything.
- [28:46]
B
Also, who knows what he's gonna say tonight.
- [28:48]
A
He might say like, this is it, goodbye. What would this story say to you if he went to the new media world of comedy? If he said, that's enough with late night. I'm doing my own thing.
- [29:03]
C
Right. I think it's really interesting what the last caller said, because in many ways you could see it somewhat as not a free speech story as much as sort of a corporate manipulation, a corporate. The relationship between capitalism and the White House story. And as a result, why so many, so many audience members and comedians have toured, have went to spaces where they're not. They have no one above them saying what they can and cannot say, which is. So I think that is, that would be the story about, like, why new media has ascended. And I think that is there's a lot of comedians who have thrived in that space saying, Jimmy Kimmel should do that. And I understand that point. But I do think, I think Jimmy, especially as an old school guy, the value of staying is there are so few institutions left. The two and the Considering that Donald Trump was threatened by that seemingly in some way or another does imply that there is some value to it. If he leaves and then she goes, this is annoying job. This job is so much more annoying than if I said this exact same thing on my own podcast. I probably, I can make as much money, I could have my own fans, all that stuff. The job would be easier. I think it's a thing that a lot of people are doing, but it's not the same job and it's not the same platform. And sometimes these platforms matter. I think there's still a value to what broadcast does. And it is this, all of this is as much symbolic as it actually is a direct attempt to silence people. It is, it is. Because again, it's like, it's not like canceling Jimmy Kimmel would end dissent, but it is a very public version of it. And that is what was so attractive, clearly about this example was that Colbert was kind of get canceled. Maybe it was related, maybe it was not. Trump immediately goes to social media being like, okay, Jimmy Kimmel's next. When Jimmy, this happens, Jimmy Kimmel, he's like, cool. Now Seth Meyers and Jimmy Fallon are next. Jimmy Fallon barely even criticized Trump is just about the symbolic power of dominance as much as it is just wanting to silence free speech.
- [31:10]
A
We've been talking about Jimmy Kimmel live being suspended. My guests were David Folkenflick, NPR media correspondent, and Jesse David Fox, editor at Vulture. Thanks to both of you for your contributions. We really appreciate it.
- [31:24]
C
Pleasure.
- [31:25]
A
Thank you. And we also want to thank our callers for being respectful and having a good conversation about that. Thank you so much.
- [31:35]
D
Suffering from dry, tired, irritated eyes. Don't let dry eyes win. Use Sustain Pro. It hydrates, restores and protects dry eyes for up to 12 hours. Sustain Pro Triple action. Dry eye relief.
- [31:47]
H
This is Ira Flato, host of Science Friday. For over 30 years, the science Friday team has been reporting high quality science and technology news, making science fun for curious people by covering everything from the outer reaches of space to the rapidly changing world of AI to the tiniest microbes in our bodies. Audiences trust our show because they know we're driven by a mission to inform and serve listeners first and foremost with important news they won't get anywhere else. And our sponsors benefit from that halo effect. For more information on becoming a sponsor, visit sponsorship.wnyc.org.