| |
| ▲ | suzdude 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Correct, you did. You omitted the quote. If you choose to add meaning, or put words in Mr. Kimmel's mouth, that is your decision. In any case, if you think such a statement is objectionable, then you would conclude many statements made by the current president would prevent any network from putting him on air, correct? | | |
| ▲ | rattlesnakedave 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah, when the president starts a television network, gets a broadcast license from the FCC (under which he must meet “public interest” requirements), spins up a late night program, and then begins deliberately spreading misinformation to score political points, then yes, threaten to revoke his license. | | |
| ▲ | suzdude 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Why are you are ignoring the question? You are creating a hypothetical to ignore it. Under your view, the networks, as they stand, should never have allowed him on the airwaves to begin with. | |
| ▲ | intended 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The president of the USA is a de facto “public interest” position. The burden of acting and speaking in the public interest is the whole dang job. | |
| ▲ | FireBeyond 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | How’s the state of Fox’s license look to you? Or have they never ever spread misinformation for political purposes? | | |
| ▲ | croes 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Have they ever spread information for political purposes? | | |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | croes 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You do realize that Kimmel‘s show is not a news show? He can suggest whatever he wants. Like the president suggests the extreme left is responsible for Kirk‘s murder. No wait, the president didn’t suggest he claimed it as a fact. Can’t wait for his cancellation. |
|
