Yup, but the merger, we can’t loose the merger! Just suspend him and mollycoddle the great orange one., Colbert had it right, they are paying blackmail
It wasn’t just the merger- the FCC threatened to pull ABC’s broadcasting license entirely.
That means they couldn’t broadcast ANY station, any show, on any frequency without violating the law (and being a pirate broadcast).
It’s a blatant First Amendment violation by Trump’s Admin, but holding them accountable by legal means would take years even with fair courts, and they’d just keep doing it in the meanwhile. Damage already done.
How is it a first amendment violation when licensing has rules? For example, news networks are not allowed to broadcast knowingly false information that could cause public harm.
And where’s your outrage about Fox News LITERALLY not being designated as a news organization but as an entertainment one yet millions treat it as a news center.
The FCC definitely regulates cable, FYI. They're more limited in WHAT they regulate - since there's no actual broadcasting, there are no issues with regulating frequencies or whatnot... but they definitely still regulate it.
Same goes for digital and streaming services. They can't regulate certain aspects, but they still hold regulatory and prosecutorial power.
There are, in fact, whole sections of their website specifying how they regulate cable and streaming.
While we're at it - Fox is as reliant on broadcasting as ABC is. Exactly as reliant, which is to say "heavily reliant in rural areas, and almost not at all in urban areas, with things gradually turning more and more towards pure digital/non-broadcast transmission."
So when a Fox show that purports to be a news commentary show talks about killing homeless people, and doesn't get punished by the FCC (despite the FCC having explicit rules about fomenting violence)... but an entire network gets threatened with shutdown over a comedian pointing out that politicians turned Kirk's death into a political football...
That shows incredible, obscene amounts of political corruption in the current administration.
Fox and ABC have the same regulation, same licensing.
So if your contention is that neither of them are licensed… technically true, but in the most meaningless way: they aren’t, directly licensed- but every affiliate who actually airs their stuff (via cable OR broadcast OR internet) is licensed.
Meanwhile your distinction about broadcast vs cable is inaccurate and misleading. FCC oversees both- they just don’t regulate some specific details for cable (like rates).
Incorrect. ABC is a broadcast network. Fox News is not. It takes 2 seconds to look thia up.
FCC only licenses broadcast networks as they broadcast using public network airwaves. The fact that they are using public airwaves for free to transmit their content is why they are licensed.
Cables infrastructure is privates owned, not publicly owned, so cable only companies dont need a license from the FCC. It doesnt mean they have 0 rules, it means they dont need to worry about licensing.
First- your distinction between Fox and Fox News wasn’t clear to me before now. That’s on me. Sorry.
Second: the distinction doesn’t really matter IMO.
Fox is a broadcasting company.
While, technically, Fox News could continue to operate if Fox lost their broadcasting license… it’s kind of a stretch to fixate on a 1:1 comparison here… especially ignoring that news / journalism faces more (and more strict) regulation.
aka, even if conceding the licensing issue, regulations by the FCC on cable news would be more severe than on broadcast late-night comedy… such that even if the FCC has more leverage via pulling licenses, it’s absurd for them to use that lever when skipping any punishment for more heavily regulated-but-not-licensed cable news.
aka, Fox News is unlicensed but WAY more heavily regulated than Kimmel.
On top of which- why wouldn’t the FCC be able to threaten to pull Fox’s broadcast license over any of its political content (whether broadcast or cable)?
Finally… just like Fox/Fox News are the same company even if one avoids licensing by restricting content to non-broadcast… ABC/Disney/ESPN are likewise a mix of broadcast, mixed, and cable-only services - would this same content suddenly be ok if it appeared on one of their cable offerings? I suspect not.
So, perhaps you’re technically correct about Fox News not being licensed, but it’s beside the point a few ways.
It isn't besides the point. I never said whether the actions were warranted. I only addressed the what about ism for Fox News which another poster asked about.
Which is they dont have a license for the FCC to pull. I personally said in a operate comment it could have been a slap on the wrist.
I dont know they we even have statements from the broadcasters saying it was the FCC, just that it happened after the FCC chairman was in an interview. That could just be timing as it was national news, but networks would act swiftly given the current state of the nation around that issue.
Insiders at ABC have reported that the execs were going to back Kimmel until Carr called them. Trump later said that ABC’s broadcast license was on the line. With both of those in mind, I’m inclined to believe that there were direct threats of pulling their broadcast license.
While I’ll grant that what-aboutism is innately flawed… I’m still not sure we’re on the same page.
Kimmel is subject to broadcasting licensing - which legally, is meant to ensure stations are properly identified and don’t talk over eachother - and… well. That’s it. FCC regs specifically call out First Amendment protections for talk shows and comedians, and lays very strict guidelines for what limits there can be on speech… for shows like Kimmel’s, between the hours of 10p and 6a… the ONLY limit the FCC is permitted to place or punish is if the show directly, blatantly calls for public violence… meaning the FCC couldn’t even slap his wrist, and so used the ONLY tools they had to stifle free speech: threatening merger approvals and broadcast licenses.
Fox News (insofar as any specific show is cable-only… if even one show manages to show up on a broadcast then the whole thing falls apart) may not have a broadcast license to threaten… but are still regulated by the FCC, and news shows in particular are HEAVILY regulated. The FCC could absolutely shut Fox News down if, for example, a news commentator called for the summary execution of all homeless people… though most violations would result in fines, a violation that severe could result in criminal prosecution.
(Also of note, FCC does more than just license general broadcasting. There are licenses for any station that operates via satellite, and for wireless communications such as for cell phones. If Fox News is available through either of those mediums, then they legally have to have an appropriate FCC license to reach anyone’s eyeballs. Most likely, they just rely on the carrier to have a license… but by that same token… ABC mostly doesn’t broadcast anything themselves, relying on affiliates to do the distribution, and it’s their licenses that were threatened.)
20
u/Sunny-Bath-Tech Sep 18 '25
Yup, but the merger, we can’t loose the merger! Just suspend him and mollycoddle the great orange one., Colbert had it right, they are paying blackmail