NEW YORK (AP) — Deciding whether to keep Jimmy Kimmel on his nightly ABC show isn’t just about the man’s jokes. It’s a puzzle filled with business deals and regulatory issues surrounding not just ABC’s parent company but other media players and the Trump administration.
This situation highlights an ongoing trend in the media world — big corporations endlessly merging and forming complex networks with diversified interests.
ABC is a part of the towering Walt Disney Co. empire, which constantly seeks approval from federal regulators for all sorts of business transactions. Lately, Disney has been under the microscope, with multiple investigations launched by the current administration over potential violations concerning antitrust laws, programming, and hiring practices.
Recently, Kimmel faced a suspension after he made some controversial comments about supporters of Charlie Kirk, an assertion that sparked considerable backlash. Brendan Carr, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, branded the remarks as “truly sick” and hinted that the agency may take action.
It’s worth noting that Carr reports to President Trump, who has openly criticized Kimmel’s style of humor in the past.
Moreover, Nexstar Media Group and Sinclair Broadcasting, which manage about 25% of ABC affiliates, decided against airing Kimmel’s program, adding to his challenges.
Last December, to sidestep a confrontation with Trump, Disney shelled out $15 million to settle a defamation suit filed by Trump against ABC News. The company has also made moves to downplay its diversity and inclusion initiatives, which are somewhat politically charged, including revising its reports about the Reimagine Tomorrow program promoting diverse voices.
However, these actions seemingly weren’t sufficient. The FCC directed a sharp letter to Disney CEO Bob Iger in April, expressing concerns that the company harbored practices that may discriminate against certain groups.
The investigation aims to assess whether Disney had effectively discarded any policies that favored “underrepresented groups” in both its character representation and hiring strategies.
On another note, a January deal for Disney to buy into the streaming service FuboTV has also attracted attention from the Justice Department, investigating it for potential antitrust behavior.
In addition, the Federal Trade Commission has initiated its probe concerning Disney’s conduct in collecting data from children’s content without obtaining parental consent. Disney was recently ordered to pay $10 million and alter its practices to settle this matter.
Furthermore, Disney requires federal approval to allow ESPN to wrap up its acquisition of the NFL Network.
These issues amplify the existing friction Disney has experienced from conservative groups, stemming well before the latest developments. For instance, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis clashed with the company over its outspoken criticism of a state law limiting discussions of sexual orientation in the school’s curriculum.
Similarly, Kirk took issue with Disney when they closed the Splash Mountain rides based on a 1946 film depicting plantation life, deeming such actions harmful to cultural integrity.
The two companies, who declared their decision against airing Kimmel, share the need for favorable government relations—Nexstar needs the Trump government’s green light to finalize a hefty $6.2 billion acquisition of Tegna.
On the flip side, Sinclair is grappling with its own compliance issues. In June, they reached an agreement with the FCC to straighten out paperwork irregularities and adhere to advertising regulations for children’s programming. Also noteworthy are Sinclair’s attempts for regulatory leniency to widen their control over station ownership.
Advocates across the landscape are calling for these corporations to prioritize the principle of free speech over their financial desires.
“Where have the leaders gone?” former Disney chief Michael Eisner expressed via social media. “If university presidents, law firm managing partners, and corporate leaders won’t advocate for free speech, who will?”
Interestingly, critiques of the administration’s backlash against Kimmel have emerged from what might be considered unexpected sources — outlets like the Wall Street Journal and Bari Weiss’ Free Press, known for their more conservative leanings.
The Journal argued that while Kimmel’s comments might be questionable, they don’t legitimize movements toward regulatory overreach. The editorial echoed the sentiment that, having faced their challenges with cancel culture, conservatives should fundamentally oppose any forms of it.
In a similar vein, the piece from Free Press asserted that networks dropping key figures following veiled threats by the FCC crosses the line from simple business choices to government coercion, questioning whether the government truly seeks to punish broadcasters for political comedy that clashes with its values.
