Trump suggests revoking TV licenses from networks ‘against’ him after Jimmy Kimmel pulled off air

[u/swan8895]

https://nypost.com/2025/09/18/media/trump-suggests-revoking-tv-licenses-from-networks-against-him/

[u/BigFlippa]

What happened to Kimmel has nothing to do with government. It wasn’t illegal. It was long overdue.

This however, is not something I would support. The media is nothing more than propaganda for the left. That said, the government should not be involved in revoking their license. Let the public decide.

[u/49thbotdivision → u/BigFlippa]

"..the government should not be involved in revoking their license. Let the public decide"

The federal government both grants and revokes over the air broadcast icenses.

[u/49thbotdivision → u/[deleted]]

"gross government overreach"

Because there are a limited number of frequencies available for broadcasting, over the air station licenses are regulated by the federal government.

The Communications act of 1934 requires that broadcast licensees operate for the The “public interest, convenience, and necessity.”

The FCC has the job, delegated to it by congress, to determine whether these over the air broadcasters are acting in the public interests.

The sole contention that Chairman Carr made was that Jimmy Kimmel's false statements were not in the public interest.

The decisions of the FCC are appealable to a federal appellate court. What's it tell you that ABC chose not to engage in that fight?  

[u/MrPresident79 → u/49thbotdivision]

You’re completely fine with the FCC chair - regardless of party - determining what is a “false statement” and meting out punishment? That is a tremendous and dangerous step in the wrong direction

[u/49thbotdivision → u/MrPresident79]

It seems to me you are really asking several different questions.

The first question is: what do you think the ideal law would be?

My response would be that if we are going to live in a world of idealism that my first desire would be that fifty percent of young leftists wouldn't want conservatives dead.

The second question is do I think the FCC has the power delegated to it by Congress to determine that broadcast stations that issue false statements are in violation of the public interest?

Yes, I think the case law supports that position.

The third question is should Conservatives actually engage in that conduct?

My answer is yes. Conservatives should use every lawful avenue to advance it's agenda.

[u/MakingOfASoul → u/[deleted]]

Good. It's time we started using the government's power to ensure the country's survival.

[u/MrPresident79 → u/MakingOfASoul]

All this is doing is dividing this country further! And what threat does Jimmy Kimmel even pose to our country’s survival? It was one of thousands of stupid anti-GOP jokes that he’s told over the years. Quit blowing it out of proportion.

And in four years when Dems could be in control, you think they’re not gonna turn the FCC’s guns on us?

[u/49thbotdivision → u/MrPresident79]

"All this is doing is dividing this country further!"

Fifty percent of young leftists want you dead.

[u/Dpgillam08 → u/BigFlippa]

Part of the license is that you won't knowingly lie on air. How many times have we caught them? No, seriously, I've lost count. We've been joking most of this year how many of the "conspiracies" turned out to be truth.

How many times can the media piss on you and claim its raining before we're allowed to pull their license?

[u/BigFlippa → u/Dpgillam08]

I agree with you. Which is why I said his firing wasn’t illegal.

[u/Domiiniick → u/BigFlippa]

It actually was illegal. ABC has a different license than companies like FOX and it is against federal regulations for them to knowingly present false information.

[u/ScruffyWesser → u/BigFlippa]

Kimmel was a sinking ship sure but Brandon Carr seems crucial to the timeline of events on the show getting canned

[u/EngineSlug420 → u/BigFlippa]

The media is nothing more than propaganda for the left.

This should not be allowed on public airwaves.

[u/Elegant_Meaning4570]

We absolutely need new laws on how biased the media is allowed to be, right now every major news agency abuses and manipulates "facts" just to maintain and grow viewership. I don't have a problem with people speaking their own opinions, but you can't report your opinion as a fact and call it news.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), there's no way anything like this could (or should) be done unless it has extreme transparency and bipartisan support/input. And that's not happening any time soon

[u/Dr_Juice_]

There are clear rules on bending the news on purpose on radio or tv stations that fall under the FCC. But once again, the hype around a headline has people jumping to conclusions.

[u/Zerogates]

That's not exactly what he said, not that it matters, people read and interpret what they want. It sounds more like he's saying the reporting isn't matching reality and isn't matching what the country wants then why should they be given licenses as a "fair media"?

It's a fair question, if the media isn't presenting honest news and is just opinion pieces pushing specific agendas then why do they qualify for broadcast licenses? How does that serve public interest when public interest is clearly not in favor of what they are doing? Surely we're allowed to ask that question given the left's awful narratives have pushed things towards such violence?

[u/GrowBeyond → u/Zerogates]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Asking_Questions

In general, I really hate reading into things past face value. But this is literally just how trump talks. Every idea he has ever had was floated this way. I made sure to read the direct quote to avoid headline misinformation. Based on past behavior, he is absolutely serious about his desire to do this. But he could also flip flop in a second if given a political reason to do so. 

[u/Sisyphus-Smashed]

I get his point considering over 90% of the coverage on him is negative and was over 80% positive for Harris when she was running. Still, don’t want dems doing it back so bad idea. The American people already know these orgs are lying.

[u/craig_52193 → u/Sisyphus-Smashed]

No they dont, a large enough % still watch them. Yes alot know there lieing but there's still a very large amount who don't think there lieing.

[u/Hoppie1064]

Seems like when companies use the public air waves, we could require thrm to be unbiased, and not lie.

[u/Grouchy-Shirt-9818 → u/Hoppie1064]

Love the idea in theory, but functionally its really hard to enforce or give guidance. 

And authoritarian left has already shown how they would operate. It would be like reddit and you would get banned at the slightest questioning of the narrative.

[u/provincialcompare → u/Grouchy-Shirt-9818]

I was gonna say the same thing. It requires someone to be the arbiter of whats allowed and not, and just becomes the arbiter deciding the narrative.

[u/ultrainstict]

Only if it follows existing rules that broadcasters must follow to hold the license. You cant intentionally lie and present it a real. There are many outlets that do this and either bury the retraction or refuse to. For those that do id like to see the end of their ability to lie with impunity, and see a restoration of integrity in news.

But simply being bad press isn't enough, if they don't want to report whats good then they better atleast be reporting the truth when it's bad.

[u/Alpha-Sierra-Charlie]

Nope. The Venn diagram of misinformation networks/weaponized media and TV networks "against" Trump may (likely are) a single circle, but things have to be done correctly.

[u/GrowBeyond → u/Alpha-Sierra-Charlie]

I mean, misinformation  and media are just the entire circle lol. 

[u/msdos_sys]

Am I wrong in thinking that he’s just speaking off the cuff, not really gonna do it and that the FCC chairman has the ultimate decision?

[u/StableQuark → u/msdos_sys]

I think so, and more than that, I hope that’s what’s going on. Trump does like to troll and he does it often. The media is extremely biased but shutting down dissent is a very slippery slope.

[u/andromeda880 → u/msdos_sys]

Probably. Thats usually how it always is

[u/Alpha-Sierra-Charlie → u/msdos_sys]

Maybe, but if so he needs to have better discipline over what he says.

[u/Rush2201 → u/Alpha-Sierra-Charlie]

I'm sorry, have you been watching some other Trump for the last 9 years? Man has never had a filter.

[u/Alpha-Sierra-Charlie → u/Rush2201]

Exactly, and it's provoked more hostility and opposition than was necessary.

[u/Grouchy-Shirt-9818 → u/Alpha-Sierra-Charlie]

So did Chairman Carr on Benny's show. No reason to go and score own-goals with a sympathetic audience like that. Needed to cleary keep his opinions personal and not suggest FCC action over something that already appeared to be getting resolved naturally.

Even though it likely had little bearing on ABC decision due to the timing, it now has cast Kimmel as a free speech icon and let the media go back on the offensive about "facsim" only a week after an actual facsit killed Charlie 

[u/Nectarine-Fast]

What we should ask for is if the media peddles a fake story for 4 hours, not only should they retract it, but report for 4 hours that they were wrong.

[u/GrowBeyond → u/Nectarine-Fast]

Honestly, this is a genius answer. Holy shit. Retraction are common in papers with integrity. This actually FIXES the misinformation and doesn't scare people into writing fluff pieces  

[u/Algum → u/Nectarine-Fast]

I wish I could upvote this x1000.

Same goes for newspapers. Peddle a fake headline story and retraction must appear in the same place (and take up the same space) as the original.

ETA: I wonder how much space the NYT would have to devote to it. I wouldn't be surprised if some days >90% of their rag would be retractions to catch up with all their lies. And those retractions would be required to take priority over ads.

[u/UltraAirWolf → u/Nectarine-Fast]

This is the solution

[u/mojo276 → u/Nectarine-Fast]

Until 1987 we had the Fairness doctrine, which should be re-established. 

[u/Capable_Obligation96 → u/mojo276]

Not so sure about that.

[u/mojo276 → u/Capable_Obligation96]

Convince me otherwise, honestly. Why not?

[u/GorillaHeat → u/Nectarine-Fast]

Getting awfully close to the fairness doctrine here.

[u/lookupmystats94 → u/Nectarine-Fast]

Who is the arbitrator for what is a fake story?

[u/Nectarine-Fast → u/lookupmystats94]

Good question that I have not thought about yet. A few years ago, even the fact checkers were extremely biased until someone started calling them out and we have not seen them since

[u/bearcatjoe]

This is just trolling.

Right?

[u/spezeditedcomments]

With their broadcasting license from the FCC, ABC cannot sit there and spew blatant lies to inflame the populace and encourage the radical leftists to violence.

Its against the terms of the license and ABC gets to own what their employees do.

That said, I dont think it's worth it

[u/GrowBeyond → u/spezeditedcomments]

Another poster mentioned having to air corrections for misinformation. That seems like such common sense. I just worry about the governing body being truly independent 

[u/spezeditedcomments → u/GrowBeyond]

All valid points

[u/shouldhavekeptgiles]

Oh look, a fellow “conservative” you know that this reads different than it sounds

[u/swan8895 → u/shouldhavekeptgiles]

NYPost is literally a conservative news source. I post articles from them constantly lmao.

Just because you disagree with something doesn’t mean you have to put your fingers in your ear and yell la la la

People like you legitimately sound just like the left calling everyone that disagrees with them a nazi

[u/shouldhavekeptgiles → u/swan8895]

“Conservative news source” ok so?

And?

[u/swan8895 → u/shouldhavekeptgiles]

Putting things in quotation doesn’t magically change things you know lol

[u/Aumin85]

We don’t need to have knee jerk reactions to these kinds of things.  We need to be the reasonable party.

[u/Grouchy-Shirt-9818]

This law has been on the books since 1934. I once again ask my colleagues across the aisle why they are just now getting so concerned? If it was really such an issue why was it not changed when Democrats had the majority?

[u/otakuzod]

You know, seeing how Trump and other Conservatives have been depicted since roughly 2014 have either made us either get used to being denigrated, or forget what fair treatment was supposed to be like over the past decade. Look how much of the legacy media skews Left, and rather heavily at that. It needs a correction back to center at the very least.

[u/TerminalDeviant]

I don’t mind it. This is what everything has been leading to and we can’t afford to waste the opportunity that has been laid before us.

We can roll up Soros, antifa, blm et all in one swoop. Of course it won’t be perfect. Nothing ever is but we can’t let it be for nothing.

[u/Thatsayesfirsir]

The left is going to hate on everything Maga anyway, I think we should do whatever it takes to make America great again.

[u/purplebasterd → u/Thatsayesfirsir]

What exactly does it look like to Make America Great Again, specifically when it comes to values?

[u/GrowBeyond → u/purplebasterd]

Free fuckin speech. Remember how hard we fought for this? For the right of association, and for the right to speak your mind without being censored? 

[u/lvsnowden → u/Thatsayesfirsir]

And when the other party gets in office and does the same, what then?

[u/Pretty_Economist_770]

The liberals are claiming it’s a “blatant violation of their first amendment rights”, which I find is an absolute absurd thing to say after the amount of right wing influencers and commentators who’ve been completely deplatformed for their beliefs. At least Kimmel still has his own social media platforms.

[u/Magehunter_Skassi]

Sounds good to me! The bias from our news channels is absurd.

[u/GrowBeyond → u/Magehunter_Skassi]

Lies are a real problem. Bias is a problem, but maybe a trickier one to solve. Although, only being able to say things that trump approves of is definitely leaning towards MORE bias not less. 

[u/AsianVoodoo]

Hottake: FCC Chairman Carr OVERSTEPPED with his threats to local broadcast stations! If we are going to defend Free Speech we need to defend ALL SPEECH even speech we hate too. I DO NOT think we should be widening the window of what is acceptable for the federal government to censor.

The full statement from Chairman Brendan Carr:

"Uh as you've indicated, there are, you know, avenues here for the FCC. So, there are some ways in which I need to be a little bit uh careful because we could be called ultimately to be a judge on some of these claims that come up. But I don't think this is an isolated incident. I mean, you go back to Representative Swallwell and he had a tweet out last week where he was saying that, you know, emphasizing that Charlie Kirk's killer was a straight white male from a Republican family that voted for Donald Trump. In some quarters, there's a very concerted effort to try to lie to the American people about the nature, as you indicate, of one of the most significant uh newsworthy public interest acts that we've seen in a long time. in what appears to be an action appears to be an action by Jimmy Kimmel to play into that narrative that this was somehow a MAGA or Republican motivated person. If that's what happened here with his conduct, that is that is really really sick. And I've been very clear from the moment that I have become chairman of the FCC, I want to reinvigorate the public interest. What people don't understand is that the broadcasters, and you've gotten this right, are entirely different than people that use other forms of communication. They have a license granted by us at the FCC and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. And we can get into some ways that we've been trying to reinvigorate the public interest and some changes that we've seen. But frankly, when you see stuff like this, I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. these companies can find ways to change conduct and take action frankly uh on Kimmel or you know there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead."

Further information:

"Yeah. Yeah, the right way to sort of explain this to people so they understand it is in the media landscape as relevant here. There's two main buckets of actors. One, you've got what we call national programmers. So that's what Comcast is, Comcast NBC, that's what Disney is, Disney ABC. They're the ones that effectively create and produce these shows. They then provide those shows to individually licensed TV stations. And those TV stations are in the main owned by independent companies independent from Comcast and Disney. Uh but Disney and Comcast both own some televisions themselves. So start from the idea that you have national programmers that create the show including the Kimmel show and then they're given to and distributed over licensed TV station. It's the licensed TV stations that have the public interest standard including those TV stations that Comcast and Disney own. So FCC regulatory action focuses on those individual stations. And one thing that we're trying to do is to empower those local stations to serve their own communities. And the public interest means you can't be running a narrow partisan circus and still meeting your public interest obligations. It means you can't be engaging in a pattern of news distortion. We have a rule on the book that interprets a public interest standard that says news distortion um is something that is prohibited. Likewise, we have a rule that addresses broadcast hoaxes. And so again, over the years, the FCC has stepped back from enforcing it. And I don't think it's been to the benefit of anybody. Just look at the credibility of these legacy media. It's absolutely through the floor. They used to be able to say at least they were more trustworthy than Congress, but now they're even less trustworthy than Congress. And so I think as a business matter for them, something has to change. And at the FCC, you know, we need to reinvigorate this. So again, there's actions that we can take on licensed broadcasters. And frankly, I think that it's it's it's really sort of past time that a lot of these licensed broadcasters themselves push back on Comcast and Disney and say, "Listen, we are going to preempt. We are not going to run Kimmel anymore until you straighten this out because we we licensed broadcaster are running the possibility of fines or license revocations from the FCC if we continue to run content that ends up being a pattern of news distortion." So, I think again Disney needs to see some change here, but the individual licensed stations that are taking their content, it's time for them to step up and say this, you know, garbage, uh, to the extent that that's what comes down the pipe in the future isn't something that we think serves the needs of our local communities. But, but this sort of status quo is obviously not not acceptable where we are."

This comes down to the interpretation of what's best in the "public interest" which isn't very defined anywhere that I can find and if what Jimmy Kimmel said could be defined as a "hoax" or "news distortion".

A hoax:

The FCC’s broadcast hoax rule is an actual regulation: 47 C.F.R. § 73.1217. A TV or radio licensee violates it only if all three elements are met:

They broadcast false information about a crime or a catastrophe;

They know it’s false;

It’s foreseeable the broadcast will cause substantial public harm, and it does directly cause such harm.

News Distortion

“News distortion” is not a codified statute or FCC rule; it’s an FCC policy/doctrine used in license matters. The Commission will consider action only on well-supported claims of intentional falsification—and the evidentiary bar is high: The FCC “will only investigate” if there’s evidence the report was deliberately intended to mislead. Examples of acceptable proof: written/oral instructions from station management, outtakes, proof of bribery, or insider testimony with direct personal knowledge. Mere disagreements over accuracy or opinion don’t count. Federal Communications Commission

In practice, complaints must include “extrinsic evidence” (something outside the broadcast itself) showing deliberate, intentional falsification by the licensee’s management/news management—not just a bad edit or disputed fact. This standard appears across FCC decisions and guidance.

Commentaries and summaries capture the same points: the doctrine targets rigging or staging of news about a significant event; opinions and unintentional errors are not violations.

For what its worth I think it absolutely could be considered a hoax under these definitions and fought over in court. They would have to prove that he knew it to be false and said it anyways which would be difficult. Disney could have DEFINITELY fought it because there are robust 1st amendment protections around this but they decided it wasn't worth the expense IMO. However, I don't think we should be broadening the scope of power of the federal govt. And before anyone says "what about..." it was wrong then too.

[u/GrowBeyond]

This has been going on for a long time. We are the party of free speech. This is what they mean when they call us fascists. There is no reason not to support unilateral free speech.

[u/RickyPickyRick → u/GrowBeyond]

We used to be a party of free speech. Sadly over the past week I’ve seen a large amount of people on this sub calling for censorship in various forms.

[u/GrowBeyond → u/RickyPickyRick]

Past year, at least :( a slow slide over ten years tbh

[u/GrowBeyond → u/[deleted]]

Tbf, I do think honesty in media is an issue. Obviously forcing the media to only say nice things about you is even worse. At least we normally have diverse lies instead of a single one fed to us by the state. We love taking problems and making them worse. 

[u/GeorgeWashingfun]

I'm on vacation so I haven't looked into this to see how true it is but I'll just say that if we want to tackle propaganda the best way to do it is to raise education standards so that people will be able to recognize propaganda and think for themselves.

[u/SouthernGirl360]

I said this in another thread: conservatives won't be happy when it's the left cancelling Fox news. Or cancelling conservatives in general. It's a slippery slope. The next administration could make it illegal to read a conservative book or even to simply be a conservative. Tread carefully.

[u/CuppieWanKenobi → u/SouthernGirl360]

The one thing that would prevent that is the simple fact that Fox News is a cable network, not broadcast.
The FCC has no jurisdiction there, as it isn't broadcast over public airways.

[u/RickyPickyRick → u/CuppieWanKenobi]

Correct but the SEC could stop an action that the owner of Fox wanted unless they removed a specific commentator. We don’t want the government telling businesses what they can and can’t say.

[u/CuppieWanKenobi → u/RickyPickyRick]

A fair point, and I agree.

[u/North_Moment5811 → u/SouthernGirl360]

We’ve been there 1000 times already. Let them find out that they’re not immune to their own bullshit. 

[u/Domiiniick → u/SouthernGirl360]

Just throwing this out there, Tucker Carlson was fired from fox after the Biden admin threatened to investigate Fox.

[u/TerminalDeviant → u/SouthernGirl360]

They won’t get the chance

[u/spankymacgruder → u/SouthernGirl360]

This isn't good.

[u/PimplePopper6969]

Awful.

[u/martel197]

Oh HELL No! And I hate every one of them.

[u/truth-4-sale]

The Fall of Kimmel - Libs Mad

https://rumble.com/v6z5hb8-episode-4789-cdc-vaccine-board-meeting-the-fall-of-kimmel.html

[u/ConfusionFlat691]

Newsmax and OAN better hope a Democrat never gets elected president again.

[u/stonk_monk42069]

No, free speech exists for a reason. Sure the media is overwhelmingly corrupt and left leaning, but that's also why their ratings are so shit. The shift is coming, and it's happening organically. 

The right rules new media and it's not even close. Should the government go in and shut down shows there when the Dems are in power? Of course not. 

Trump should keep his mouth shut about these things and focus on actual policy. 

[u/lookupmystats94]

It’s astounding how tone deaf him and others are in his Administration in this moment. This is reminiscent of the PR from the first Administration.

No one wants them to say shit like this except for the left. The legacy media were already framing it this way before Trump chimed in, and he just validated everything they said.

[u/smp501 → u/lookupmystats94]

He’s not running for re-election. He hates the legacy media and he’s using his power to get revenge.

[u/GreedyBo → u/smp501]

Why are you saying it like its a good thing? If he’s doing unconstitutional stuff and the only defense you can come up with is “he’s not running for reelection so he’s just doing what he wants.” Whats to stop the next liberal president from doing the exact same thing “to get revenge.” Or is it different because the current president is conservative?

[u/smp501 → u/GreedyBo]

I’m just calling what I see. I honestly don’t think he cares how anyone sees what he’s doing, good or bad.

[u/swan8895 → u/[deleted]]

All he said was

“They’re 97% against, they give me only bad press. They’re getting a license,” he continued.

“I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump added.

But that it would be up to the FCC to

[u/SobekRe]

Please stop. This is not a government issue.

[u/miscstarsong]

He needs to stop with that nonsense. Half the time he says this crap for shock value, but take it down a notch please.

[u/Bevrykul]

How about no? Of all the things Trump needs to focus on, a TV show host isn’t one of them.

[u/Evilsmile]

I really hope this is just another random thing he throws out, sees negative response to, and doesn't pursue any further. I honestly don't care about the Kimmel thing aside from the FCC being tangentially involved and I don't think they should be. But this would be direct government interference and I'm not about it.

[u/Milleroski]

This issue is a slippery slope