Tag Archives: Jimmy Kimmel

Jimmy Kimmel And The Light At The End Of The Tunnel

In a recent newsletter, Paul Krugman addressed what had been my own somewhat optimistic “take” on Disney’s retreat during the Jimmy Kimmel episode.

Krugman began by acknowledging Trump’s efforts at autocracy–and noted that, as his poll numbers have fallen, he has amped up his efforts to intimidate, secure in the knowledge that “craven congressional Republicans and a complicit Supreme Court” will continue to abet his destruction of democratic safeguards. The administration’s demand that Kimmel be removed from the airwaves was part and parcel of that autocratic ambition.

But as Krugman also points out, thanks to American public opinion, Trump’s efforts to mimic Putin and Orban are failing.

When Putin and Orban were consolidating their autocratics, they were genuinely popular. They were perceived by the public as effective and competent leaders. Just nine months into his presidency, Trump, by contrast, is deeply unpopular. He is increasingly seen as chaotic and inept. As David Frum says, this means that he is in a race against time. Can he consolidate power before he loses his aura of inevitability? Will those who run major institutions – particularly corporate CEOs – understand that we are at a crucial juncture, and that by accommodating Trump they have more to lose than by standing up to him?

To put it bluntly, is the Jimmy Kimmel affair the harbinger of a failed Trumpian putsch?

When Putin and Orban began their respective takeovers, they enjoyed several years of popularity–mostly by improving the economic postures of their countries. Thanks to Trump’s incredible ignorance (and his insane belief in tariffs), he took the robust economy he inherited and is in the process of tanking it. Krugman shared the widely available poll results that document Trump’s unpopularity–he is in deeply negative territory, and the people who strongly dislike him vastly outnumber those who strongly approve of him.

If we had a working Congress, unpopularity at this scale would already have turned Trump into a lame duck, but as Krugman notes, he has instead been able to operate as a quasi-autocrat, thanks to a “party that accommodates his every whim, backed by a corrupt Supreme Court prepared to validate whatever he does.”

As a result, Trump has been able to use the vast power of the federal government to deliver punishments and rewards in a completely unprecedented way. But the fact is that Trump has not yet locked in his autocracy. Timid institutions are failing to understand not only how unpopular Trump is, but also how severe a backlash they are likely to face for surrendering without a fight.

And so we come to Trump’s thin-skinned assault on comedians–most recently, Jimmy Kimmel.

Krugman says the signs were there, but Disney ignored them. There were several such signs: Target’s effort to appease Trump by ending its commitment to DEI–an effort that led to a large decline in sales and a falling stock price; capitulating law firms that lost clients and partners to law firms that didn’t. And of course, Tesla…

And yet,

Disney was evidently completely unprepared for the backlash caused by its decision to take Jimmy Kimmel off the air, a backlash so costly that the company reversed course after just five days — too late to avoid probably irreparable damage to its brand…

It’s important to understand that Trump’s push to destroy democracy depends largely on creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Behind closed doors, business leaders bemoan the destruction that Trump is wreaking on the economy. But they capitulate to his demands because they expect him to consolidate autocratic power — which, given his unpopularity, he can only do if businesses and other institutions continue to capitulate.

If this smoke-and-mirrors juggernaut starts to falter, the perception of inevitability will collapse and Trump’s autocracy putsch may very well fall apart.

So how can we make a Trump implosion more likely? The public can help by doing what Target’s customers and Disney’s audience did — make it clear that they will stop paying money to institutions that lend aid and comfort to the authoritarian project.

Big corporations and fancy law firms may fold. Republican legislators may lack integrity and spines. Supreme Court justices may be unfathomably corrupt. But the effort to silence Kimmel has once again confirmed that We the People have the power to remind all of them that we are Americans who value our liberties more than our access to consumer products or entertainment.

The public response to the Jimmy Kimmel episode may well be the light at the end of our current dark tunnel…..

Comments

Media Consolidation And Free Speech

There has been a huge reaction to the silencing of Jimmy Kimmel by our thin-skinned, can’t-take-a-joke (let alone criticism) wanna-be King. Pundits have pontificated. Some citizens have protested by canceling their Disney streaming subscriptions and/or trips to Disney theme parks, others are demanding a boycott, and a number have even turned up in front of Disney offices in California and New York. All of those actions have been entirely appropriate, but very few have focused on an element of our media environment that has enabled–even invited–the sort of ham-handed blackmail that has allowed the administration to muzzle speech of which it disapproves.

A recent essay from Lincoln Square connected the dots between that blackmail and the unprecedented media consolidation that has made it much more effective than it would otherwise have been.

As the essay noted, Kimmel was suspended because “billionaires who own the American media decided they were willing to capitulate to a dollar-store despot who decided his voice was no longer acceptable.” When a government regulator of broadcasting licenses goes on television and threatens to punish a network if it doesn’t rid the administration of the offending comic, the subsequent and immediate removal of the program “isn’t free will. It is state coercion made possible by billionaire media consolidation.”

The suspension also exposes a structural problem. A handful of companies control nearly every lever of American media. Nexstar is in the process of buying Tegna, a $6.2 billion deal that would give it reach into almost 80 percent of U.S. households if regulators (like Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr) approve it. Sinclair already holds enormous power. Gray is not far behind. Together, they dominate what gets marketed and sold as “local news.”

On the studio side, Larry Ellison and his son, David, just closed an $8 billion merger with Paramount. They are now openly vying for a Warner Bros. Discovery deal. Combined, that would give them control of two of the largest content pipelines in the world. Oracle, Larry Ellison’s company which has made him the richest man in the world, is also expected to play a central role in a restructured TikTok, potentially handing him primary cloud partnership and equity shares in a U.S. majority carveout. Ellison is also one of president Trump’s top political donors.

The picture is stark: The same billionaire network of Trump allies (including Rupert Murdoch and Fox News) controlling the studios, the broadcast stations, and the digital platforms — which we saw with Trump’s recent tech dinner. When government pressure comes, those choke points collapse inward. That is what just happened with Jimmy Kimmel.

And–as the essay points out–it’s interesting that those on the Right who’ve previously been the loudest about the importance of free speech have been suspiciously silent.

The cancellations of Colbert and Kimmel are examples of the power that media consolidation gives to into the billionaires who own the media and especially to the regulators acting–as the essay puts it– as “mob enforcers for the White House.” As it concludes:

If we let this moment pass without rightfully losing our shit and naming it for what it is, then the precedent will harden. The next comedian, journalist, or critic who challenges Trump or his allies will face the same weaponry — or think twice before doing so. And if Rogan and the rest of the self-proclaimed “free-speech advocates” continue to stay silent, then they are not allies in this fight. They are accessories to the silencing.

Billionaires loyal to the president are about to own nearly 80% of local and national media in this country — ahead of midterm elections and widespread military and police crackdowns in Democrat run cities. Jimmy Kimmel may be one of the first high-profile hosts to feel the wrath of this new system, but he will not be the last.

What went dark this week wasn’t just the Jimmy Kimmel Live! studio. It was a signal about where the First Amendment stands in Trump’s America.

Americans who still insist that “it can’t happen here” need to consider a “blast from the past” in a recent column by Charlie Sykes. The column reproduced a 1939 article from the New York Times, titled “Goebbels Ends Careers of Five ‘Aryan’ Actors Who Made Witticisms About the Nazi Regime.”

Read it and weep.

A postscript: since this was written, Kimmel’s show was returned to the airwaves. Evidently, the huge negative public reaction to Disney cowardice had an effect. We the People need to keep up the pressure!

Comments

The Age of Inhumanity

Historians will eventually affix a label to the time period we are living through (assuming, of course, that we do live through it); my predictive powers are considerably less than optimal, but I vote for “The Age of Inhumanity”–or maybe, “The Age of Assholery.”

My exhibits, from just the past couple of days:

Jimmy Kimmel recently delivered an emotional monologue about his newborn son, who’d been born with a heart condition. Ultimately, the story had a happy ending; surgery corrected the defect and they were able to take the baby home. Kimmel’s monologue included a “political” observation:

Before 2014, if you were born with congenital heart disease like my son was, there was a good chance you’d never be able to get health insurance because you had a pre-existing condition. You were born with a pre-existing condition. And if your parents didn’t have medical insurance, you might not live long enough to even get denied because of a pre-existing condition.

If your baby is going to die, and it doesn’t have to, it shouldn’t matter how much money you make. I think that’s something that, whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat or something else, we all agree on that, right?”

Well, no. Evidently not.

Former Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.)–now a radio call-in show host– tweeted his reaction, writing: “Sorry Jimmy Kimmel: your sad story doesn’t obligate me or anybody else to pay for somebody else’s health care.”

I will note here that we shouldn’t be surprised by Walsh’s disinclination to pay insurance premiums that might benefit other people’s children, since he’d previously been sued by his ex-wife for failing to pay child support for his own. A real prince of a guy….

And then there was the funeral home in Mississippi that refused to honor its contractual obligation to provide services when they discovered that the deceased man had a husband.

For most of the 52 years he was in a relationship with Robert Huskey, Jack Zawadski doesn’t remember much in the way of anti-gay discrimination.

Not while they were trying to grow apples on a farm in Wisconsin. Not during the decades they spent as special education teachers. Not even when they moved to Mississippi 20 years ago to retire someplace warmer and more lush, or after they married in 2015, when the Supreme Court declared that gay couples have as much of a right as heterosexuals to marry.

Last month, at age 86, Huskey died after a long illness.

Zawadski, 82, said the funeral home that had been prearranged to pick up and cremate Huskey’s body refused at the last minute, telling the nursing home that they don’t “deal with their kind.”…

The couple’s nephew, John Gaspari, made the arrangements ahead of time with Picayune Funeral Home, the only funeral home in the county with an on-site crematory, according to the complaint. Zawadski had hoped to hold the funeral there so the couple’s local friends could pay their respects. On May 11, 2016, Gaspari contacted the funeral home to let them know Huskey had died.

But after filing the paperwork, including a document naming Zawadski as next of kin, Gaspari got a call from the nursing home. “The Nursing Home relayed to John that once it received the paperwork indicating that Bob’s spouse was male, PFH refused service because it did not ‘deal with their kind,’ ” the lawsuit stated.

Zawadski’s complaint says that the turmoil involved in finding alternative arrangements “permanently marred the memory of Bob’s otherwise peaceful passing,”

I wish I could say that these are isolated examples, but anyone who follows the news knows that they’re not.

What the hell is wrong with these people? What makes them so small and mean-spirited?

Whatever historians ultimately call it, we  live in an ugly time.

Comments