The Chris Cuomo Project

Episode: The REAL Threat to Free Speech Isn’t Jimmy Kimmel

Date: September 23, 2025
Host: Chris Cuomo

Episode Overview

Chris Cuomo tackles a recent controversy involving the suspension of Jimmy Kimmel by Disney (ABC) and unpacks broader issues of free speech, legal standards, and the outsized influence of social media platforms. Cuomo challenges the narrative that Kimmel’s suspension is a First Amendment issue, explores the differences between corporate and government regulation of speech, and argues that the real threat to free discourse stems from the largely unregulated power of social media giants rather than legacy media actions.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Jimmy Kimmel’s Suspension: Rights, Law, and Corporate Decisions

• Context: Jimmy Kimmel was suspended from Disney/ABC, allegedly for making incorrect or inflammatory remarks about the Charlie Kirk assassin and linking it to MAGA.
• Legal vs. Corporate:
  • "Jimmy Kimmel being acted upon, let's say, by Disney. ABC is not about the law. They have the right. And I'll explain why." (00:30)
  • Distinction between personal opinion and legal standards: corporations have wide discretion unless prodded by government action.
• First Amendment Clarified:
  • “The First Amendment only applies to government regulation of speech, okay? That’s about what the government can do. Not private businesses, except for them violating other laws.” (00:53)
• Government Influence vs. Corporate Choice:
  • No direct evidence presented that Disney faced government pressure. Cuomo remains skeptical of those making transactional/conspiratorial claims without proof.

2. The “Right to Be Wrong” and Evolving Free Speech Jurisprudence

• "Do you have the right to be wrong? I would argue yes." (02:56)
• Free Speech Expansion:
  • Cites the evolution from the Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire case (“fighting words”) to today’s higher bar—speech must pose a “specific and imminent threat” to be legally actionable (03:54).
• Employer Authority:
  • “Does his employer have the right to fire him for it? Yeah, I think they do.” (06:45)
  • “Did Disney have the right to fire him? Yeah. Unless we can show that this was wrongful termination because of government pressure. And that's a pretty high bar.” (07:05)

3. Personal Reflection and Parallels

• Cuomo’s Experience:
  • Draws parallel between his own exit from CNN (involving his support for his brother) and Kimmel’s situation:
    • “I didn’t become some cause for free speech, even though it was not the same situation. Why? Because I wasn’t saying anything about it on my show, right?” (18:12)
• Media Double Standards:
  • Expresses frustration that similar scrutiny wasn’t applied in his own case, and criticizes selective outrage based on personal politics.

4. The REAL Threat: Social Media’s Power and Lack of Standards

• Publisher vs. Platform:
  • Traditional media like Disney/ABC/News Nation are considered “publishers” and must answer for content; social media platforms, per Section 230 of the 1996 Internet Decency Act, are not.
    • “Elon Musk is...the richest man on the planet. He has no responsibilities beyond his druthers for what happens on his platform now.” (19:09)
• Technological Evolution:
  • Social platforms today have immense abilities to moderate, promote, and profit from content—far beyond what was imagined in the law passed in 1996.
  • “If you are a publisher, because you have control over the creation of the content, if that is the legal definition, Elon Musk and the other guys pass that test all day long... They know exactly what Greg Ott is saying. They sell him on the basis of it, they curate it on the basis of it, they make things trend on the basis of it.” (27:54)
• No Guardrails, No Accountability:
  • “Compare it to a Megyn Kelly or any of the pod Bros and you're like, it's nothing compared to what they say. And that's the problem, is that there are no rules there. They can say whatever the fuck they want there and they do.” (21:44)
• Effect on Public Discourse:
  • “Not just bad, not just wrong, evil. It is fringes feeding you misinformation, disinformation, angry, provocative, to piss you off to make them money.” (20:37)
  • Cites the spread of divisive, inflammatory content on social media, and how it infects legacy media culture.

5. The Call for Reform

• Section 230 Obsolete:
  • Cuomo argues it is time to reconsider the protections given to social media, as they now curate and manipulate content.
• Social Media’s Outsized Influence:
  • “Disney, Nexstar, they are penny players compared to Elon, compared to Zuckerberg, compared to China. That’s where the money is. That's where the corporate influence is. Why do you think there are no guardrails on them?” (22:31)
• Need for Accountability:
  • Repeated calls for some form of consequences and standards for platforms monetizing speech, though he admits not knowing the perfect solution: “I just know that you can't look at the dumpster fire that is social media...and there is no accountability...and there is no question that what is on social media from major purveyors...is so much more inflammatory, incorrect, and often evil.” (29:50)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the legal standard:
  • “This is not a First Amendment issue unless you can show there was government regulation of it.” (13:07)
• On selective outrage and transparency:
  • “Are they being transparent about how they feel about Jimmy and whether they're friends of Jimmy? Because I gotta tell you, I hear people arguing that this seems to be about a corporation caving to something political. I didn't hear that when it was me…” (04:31)
• On personal integrity:
  • “I am not a MAGA supporter. Why? I don't believe in these movements, okay?...I got people threatening me, threatening my family real enough that I have to pay for private security. I don't want to hear it, okay? You may not like my opinions, but do not think that I'm hiding a fucking loyalty, okay?” (09:06)
• On the impact of unregulated social media:
  • “It is fringes feeding you misinformation, disinformation, angry, provocative, to piss you off to make them money...and it has gotten increasingly worse because it can.” (20:37)
• On the need for reform:
  • “The division in this country is sourced from social media more than anyone else. And I know that they sell you that. No. Legacy media...is the problem. Legacy media has guardrails, corporate considerations, and exposure to litigation and economic ramifications. Social media, we have seen none of that for those guys.” (30:58)
• Summing Up:
  • “Do I care about what happened to Jimmy Kimmel? Yes. Do I think it was right? That’s a matter for my own opinion. Did they have the legal right to do it? Yes. Until I hear real proof that they were manipulated into it by the government...” (30:32)
  • “There’s got to be consequences for doing it wrong. And there’s got to be an understanding of what wrong means. And our social media doesn’t have it. And kiddie porn is not enough. Going after human traffickers is not enough, okay?” (32:25)
  • “What do you think? Let me know. Because here we believe in a fair exchange. You don’t have to like it to get my attention.” (34:38)

Important Timestamps

• 00:30–07:30: Legal/constitutional perspective on Kimmel’s suspension and employer rights
• 09:06–12:10: Cuomo addresses his own situation, clarifies independence & personal threats
• 18:07–25:00: Transition to social media’s unique legal treatment and influence
• 27:54–34:38: Deep dive on Section 230, tech companies’ responsibility, and final call for reform

Summary Table: Perspective Comparison

| Issue | Legacy Media (Disney/ABC/CNN) | Social Media (Twitter/Facebook, etc.) | |-------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------| | Legal Liability | Accountable as publishers | Protected as platforms (Section 230) | | Employer Standards | Standards, brand/image controls, consequences for speech | No or limited guardrails; owner discretion | | Government Regulation | Subject to FCC, legal challenges | Virtually none; minimal exceptions | | Speech Consequences | Firing, suspensions, litigation possible | Inflammatory, misleading, or evil content often unchecked | | Profit Motive | Yes, but circumscribed by law/brand/image | Intensely driven, often by virality and outrage | | Influence on Discourse | Channelled through editorial processes | Algorithms amplify division, outrage, and misinformation |

Conclusion

Chris Cuomo argues that while individual cases like Jimmy Kimmel’s spark major headlines, the bigger, less-scrutinized threat to free speech and civil society comes from unchecked, algorithmically-driven social media platforms. Legacy media must answer for its content and faces real consequences; tech giants, protected by outdated laws, curate and profit from incendiary content with little to no accountability. For Cuomo, the solution requires reform, not just appeals to the better angels of human nature, and it begins with recognizing where the real risk lies.

“Let’s get after it.”