The recent suspension of Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show was a shock to the system for our free media system. I decided to investigate other presidents for what they proposed when it came to media control, as well as how Republicans today are feeling.
I also look into the claim that Kimmel was suspended for poor TV ratings, which some have claimed is the case.
According to Josh Fiallo with The Daily Beast, “President Donald Trump is hinting that he plans to wreak even more havoc at TV networks after Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show was suspended ‘indefinitely.’ Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that ’97 percent’ of the networks are against him and that they may need to have their licenseS stripped. ‘They’re getting a license,’ Trump said. ‘I think maybe their license should be taken away.’”
This move was denounced by Texas GOP Senator Ted Cruz. According to Michael Williams with CNN, Cruz said “But let me tell you: If the government gets in the business of saying, ‘We don’t like what you, the media, have said. We’re going to ban you from the airwaves if you don’t say what we like,’ that will end up badly for conservatives.”
Is this unprecedented? To investigate, I started by looking at how Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama handled conservative media that was just as critical of their presidencies. Neither was happy about right-wing voices like Rush Limbaugh harping on their every move. But neither Clinton nor Obama ever engaged in anything like license revocation that Trump is suggesting.
Clinton did talk about bringing back the “Fairness Doctrine,” the rule allowing equal time coverage, from 1949 until it was suspended during the Reagan Administration in 1987. But he never did. In fact, Clinton signed into law the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which actually benefited broadcasters like Rush Limbaugh (and Fox News, to some extent).
Obama similarly considered bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, a move Rush Limbaugh criticized in a 2009 Wall Street Journal column. Realizing the authoritarian nature of kicking Limbaugh off the air, Obama chose not to revive the Fairness Doctrine in 2009, and took it off the table in 2011. Though far less of a government imposition on the media in comparison with the cancellation of licenses for content that a politician does not like, both presidents realized what a media free from government control means for freedom in our country.
Facing a backlash for a potential full-throttle media censorship, criticized even by other Republican Senators, supporters of this Brave New FCC World have tried to claim that Kimmel wasn’t suspended because of political pressure, but because of low ratings. I also researched these claims, relying on the pro-business, pro-GOP Forbes magazine for evidence.
Toni Fitzgerald with Forbes reports:
“And actually, the most recent round of numbers for Kimmel were positive. He moved slightly ahead of rival The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, which CBS recently cancelled, among adults ages 18-49 – the key demographic for advertisers. They base their ad sales on how many viewers shows pull in that group. Kimmel averaged 220,000 adults 18-49 during the second quarter (three months ended June 30), according to data from Nielsen. That was 1,000 more than Colbert and marked Kimmel’s strongest performance with the demo in a year.”
And he was succeeding in more modern media markets. “On YouTube, where Kimmel’s channel has more than 20 million subscribers, his three most recent videos have all garnered more than 3 million views, suggesting a wider audience than on TV.”
Forbes, which reported Kimmel was #1 with the ad revenue generating 18-49 audience, is smart enough not to rely on arcane Nielsen ratings when it comes to more accurate measures of media viewership.
Fitzgerald added, “ABC did not even try to pretend it was pulling Kimmel for any reason other than the financial impact and backlash from its affiliates, including owner Nextstar, which owns more than two dozen ABC stations and is looking for regulatory approval for a $6.2 billion purchase of Tegna.”
This move was political and threatens our free enterprise system as well.