| ▲ | ahmeneeroe-v2 13 hours ago |
| Highly cherry-picked. The next paragraph says that FCC limits broadcast of indecent and profane material. As I said, the FCC is allowed to enforce a certain morality. It seems clear that the morality being enforced would fall in line with the ruling power of the day. |
|
| ▲ | voxadam 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| “We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.” What part of that sentence qualifies as either indecent or profane? |
| |
| ▲ | platevoltage 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't think that's what did it. It was the showing of Trump being asked about his "friend" Charlie Kirk being killed, for which his response was "They're building my ballroom. It's gonna be the best ballroom. Trump has been trying to get Kimmel removed for a while for making fun of him. This was just an opportunity. | |
| ▲ | ahmeneeroe-v2 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I said that the FCC is allowed to enforce morality. The morality in question here is lying about someone being assassinated for their political views. The right sees Charlie Kirk as a political martyr (e.g. their MLK) and they don't want that taken away. | | |
| ▲ | davorak 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | > The morality in question here is lying about someone being assassinated for their political views. Please quote Jimmy to clear up what you think the lie was. | | |
| ▲ | ahmeneeroe-v2 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | Charlie Kirk was assassinated for his political views. Stated differently: someone with an opposing political viewpoint killed Charlie in order to stop Charlie from promoting Charlie's politics. Jimmy Kimmel said that Charlie Kirk was killed by someone with the same political views as Charlie. That is the lie. | | |
| ▲ | davorak 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Is there a quote from jimmy you can share and that I can reference? | | |
| ▲ | ahmeneeroe-v2 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | suzdude 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You're lying about what Kimmel said, and you want to claim others are arguing in bad faith? | |
| ▲ | davorak 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I can not start to understand your position without a quote. It has to be something Jimmy said that lead to your beliefs, I know of no better place to start. |
|
| |
| ▲ | beej71 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Kimmel did not say that. You need to get the quote right. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | duskwuff 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Obscenity, indecency, and profanity are narrowly defined by the FCC: https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-pr... Kimmel's performance was clearly not obscene or indecent - it did not depict or describe sexual conduct or excretory organs - and it aired after 10 PM, so whether it was profane is irrelevant. |
| |
| ▲ | ahmeneeroe-v2 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | bad reading comprehension. here is what I said: >As I said, the FCC is allowed to enforce a certain morality. It seems clear that the morality being enforced would fall in line with the ruling power of the day. | | |
| ▲ | duskwuff 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | And what you said was incorrect. Under 1A, the only content which the FCC can ban outright is obscenity, defined as per the document I linked; see FCC v. Pacifica for context. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |
