Fuck CBS. They bow to trump

[Shadowy Man]

lol, all this because two late night shows that hardly anyone watched were canceled?

No 'all this' is because some right wing loudmouth that only rightwingers listen to, got killed by a rigntwinger from a different faction of the right wing (gropers?).

Behave yourself, the writing was on the wall for these shows just by the way the broadcasting industry has moved to streaming.

And yet the companies waited until the government coerced them into it by dangling the threats of revoking licenses and disapproving mergers. Interesting. Is it ok for the government to do that because the free market probably would have done it anyway at some unspecified time in the future?

 

[TSwizzle]

lol, all this because two late night shows that hardly anyone watched were canceled?

No 'all this' is because some right wing loudmouth that only rightwingers listen to, got killed by a rigntwinger from a different faction of the right wing (gropers?).

Behave yourself, the writing was on the wall for these shows just by the way the broadcasting industry has moved to streaming.

And yet the companies waited until the government coerced them into it by dangling the threats of revoking licenses and disapproving mergers.

Conveniently. But it was more than likely their days were numbered. That format of tv show has been in decline for years.

Interesting. Is it ok for the government to do that because the free market probably would have done it anyway at some unspecified time in the future?

The FCC is a quaint, old fashioned organization that has oversight over the airwaves. Kimmel et al can move to streaming podcasts to air their views unfettered by the FCC if they so wish.

 

[Elixir]

 

[scombrid]

Heritage foundation knows to prop up his ego so it can continue its own work.

 

[Elixir]

 

[Shadowy Man]

lol, all this because two late night shows that hardly anyone watched were canceled?

No 'all this' is because some right wing loudmouth that only rightwingers listen to, got killed by a rigntwinger from a different faction of the right wing (gropers?).

Behave yourself, the writing was on the wall for these shows just by the way the broadcasting industry has moved to streaming.

And yet the companies waited until the government coerced them into it by dangling the threats of revoking licenses and disapproving mergers.

Conveniently. But it was more than likely their days were numbered. That format of tv show has been in decline for years.

Interesting. Is it ok for the government to do that because the free market probably would have done it anyway at some unspecified time in the future?

The FCC is a quaint, old fashioned organization that has oversight over the airwaves. Kimmel et al can move to streaming podcasts to air their views unfettered by the FCC if they so wish.

So you are ok with using the FCC to coerce private companies’ decisions about speech/content because Kimmel can always go elsewhere if he wants. Noted.

I ca understand why it was so easy for an authoritarian to become President. Many Americans have no problem with this.

 

[TSwizzle]

So you are ok with using the FCC to coerce private companies’ decisions about speech/content because Kimmel can always go elsewhere if he wants. Noted.

Dude, rightly or wrongly, that is what the FCC do. As I said earlier, it’s a quaint, old fashioned government agency that oversees the airwaves. It has always been this way.

I ca understand why it was so easy for an authoritarian to become President. Many Americans have no problem with this.

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

 

[Shadowy Man]

So you are ok with using the FCC to coerce private companies’ decisions about speech/content because Kimmel can always go elsewhere if he wants. Noted.

Dude, rightly or wrongly, that is what the FCC do. As I said earlier, it’s a quaint, old fashioned government agency that oversees the airwaves. It has always been this way.

Then it should be trivial to give examples of other coercion by FCC in a similar manner, yes? Especially as indirectly requested for by the President

I ca understand why it was so easy for an authoritarian to become President. Many Americans have no problem with this.

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

Ends justify the means, right?

 

[Elixir]

it’s a quaint, old fashioned government agency that oversees the airwaves

Now it’s a fascist tool that dictates broadcast content.
Never was that before your fascist Orange rapist became “president”.

 

[unapologetic]

That format of tv show has been in decline for years.

It isn't the format. It is the audiance for that timeslot. Comedy/taklshow is the best format ever found for that timeslot/audiance.
Gameshows will not keep that audiance or advertizers.

 

[TSwizzle]

So you are ok with using the FCC to coerce private companies’ decisions about speech/content because Kimmel can always go elsewhere if he wants. Noted.

Dude, rightly or wrongly, that is what the FCC do. As I said earlier, it’s a quaint, old fashioned government agency that oversees the airwaves. It has always been this way.

Then it should be trivial to give examples of other coercion by FCC in a similar manner, yes? Especially as indirectly requested for by the President

I’m only informing you of what the FCC does. Wasn’t there a big fuss about Elvis’ thrusting hips?

I ca understand why it was so easy for an authoritarian to become President. Many Americans have no problem with this.

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

Ends justify the means, right?

This has been very convenient for some parties but it was going to happen anyway. I’m sure democracy will survive despite Kimmel and Colbert not having a show anymore.

 

[TSwizzle]

That format of tv show has been in decline for years.

It isn't the format. It is the audiance for that timeslot. Comedy/taklshow is the best format ever found for that timeslot/audiance.
Gameshows will not keep that audiance or advertizers.

same thing. Either way, these shows are niche and were on the way out.

 

[unapologetic]

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

It is not about the shows. And they were not faling. (Otherwise they wouldn't be in that timeslot on EVERY network.)
The problem is a fachist president pushing his weight around.

 

[TSwizzle]

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

It is not about the shows. And they were not faling. (Otherwise they wouldn't be in that timeslot on EVERY network.)
The problem is a fachist president pushing his weight around.

The networks dropped the shows and they did it willingly, before the FCC was even involved. The slightest hint of a FCC investigation had the Kimmel show yanked because they were going to jettison it anyway so this gave them a plausible excuse. Take up your grievance with the network if you are so invested in Kimmel.

 

[Shadowy Man]

So you are ok with using the FCC to coerce private companies’ decisions about speech/content because Kimmel can always go elsewhere if he wants. Noted.

Dude, rightly or wrongly, that is what the FCC do. As I said earlier, it’s a quaint, old fashioned government agency that oversees the airwaves. It has always been this way.

Then it should be trivial to give examples of other coercion by FCC in a similar manner, yes? Especially as indirectly requested for by the President

I’m only informing you of what the FCC does. Wasn’t there a big fuss about Elvis’ thrusting hips?

Did the FCC threaten the licenses if they didn’t take Elvis off the air because it offended the President?

You are the one who said it “has always been this way” so you should easily be able to provide equivalent examples.

I ca understand why it was so easy for an authoritarian to become President. Many Americans have no problem with this.

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

Ends justify the means, right?

This has been very convenient for some parties but it was going to happen anyway. I’m sure democracy will survive despite Kimmel and Colbert not having a show anymore.

Yes. A good democracy is one in which tv shows stay on the air if they adhere to the whims of the President. Thats what the first Amendment implies, right? I’m sure you’ll agree with this when a Democratic president stays revoking licenses for channels that aren’t woke enough, right? Even Ted “Cancun” Cruz recognizes the potential abuse this can lead to.

 

[unapologetic]

It is not about Kimmel. I say agan: Rump is out of fucking control of himself.

 

[TSwizzle]

So you are ok with using the FCC to coerce private companies’ decisions about speech/content because Kimmel can always go elsewhere if he wants. Noted.

Dude, rightly or wrongly, that is what the FCC do. As I said earlier, it’s a quaint, old fashioned government agency that oversees the airwaves. It has always been this way.

Then it should be trivial to give examples of other coercion by FCC in a similar manner, yes? Especially as indirectly requested for by the President

I’m only informing you of what the FCC does. Wasn’t there a big fuss about Elvis’ thrusting hips?

Did the FCC threaten the licenses if they didn’t take Elvis off the air because it offended the President?

You are the one who said it “has always been this way” so you should easily be able to provide equivalent examples.

I don’t know what the FCC did about Elvis or any other breaches of FcC rules. Why do you think Howard Stern went to Sirius and changed his format?

I am not going to waste anymore of my time trying to explain to you what the FCC does.

I ca understand why it was so easy for an authoritarian to become President. Many Americans have no problem with this.

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

Ends justify the means, right?

This has been very convenient for some parties but it was going to happen anyway. I’m sure democracy will survive despite Kimmel and Colbert not having a show anymore.

Yes. A good democracy is one in which tv shows stay on the air if they adhere to the whims of the President. Thats what the first Amendment implies, right?

Again, this is not a first amendment issue. Kimmels first amendment rights are still in place.

I’m sure you’ll agree with this when a Democratic president stays revoking licenses for channels that aren’t woke enough, right? Even Ted “Cancun” Cruz recognizes the potential abuse this can lead to.

No licenses were revoked.

 

[Shadowy Man]

So you are ok with using the FCC to coerce private companies’ decisions about speech/content because Kimmel can always go elsewhere if he wants. Noted.

Dude, rightly or wrongly, that is what the FCC do. As I said earlier, it’s a quaint, old fashioned government agency that oversees the airwaves. It has always been this way.

Then it should be trivial to give examples of other coercion by FCC in a similar manner, yes? Especially as indirectly requested for by the President

I’m only informing you of what the FCC does. Wasn’t there a big fuss about Elvis’ thrusting hips?

Did the FCC threaten the licenses if they didn’t take Elvis off the air because it offended the President?

You are the one who said it “has always been this way” so you should easily be able to provide equivalent examples.

I don’t know what the FCC did about Elvis or any other breaches of FcC rules. Why do you think Howard Stern went to Sirius and changed his format?

Was it government coercion?

I am not going to waste anymore of my time trying to explain to you what the FCC does.

So, you don’t actually have examples then.

I ca understand why it was so easy for an authoritarian to become President. Many Americans have no problem with this.

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

Ends justify the means, right?

This has been very convenient for some parties but it was going to happen anyway. I’m sure democracy will survive despite Kimmel and Colbert not having a show anymore.

Yes. A good democracy is one in which tv shows stay on the air if they adhere to the whims of the President. Thats what the first Amendment implies, right?

Again, this is not a first amendment issue. Kimmels first amendment rights are still in place.

I’m sure you’ll agree with this when a Democratic president stays revoking licenses for channels that aren’t woke enough, right? Even Ted “Cancun” Cruz recognizes the potential abuse this can lead to.

No licenses were revoked.

Because the corporations capitulated after the threat. We won’t know what would have happened had they refused to cancel Kimmel. Maybe you are right and nothing would have happened to their licenses.

 

[TSwizzle]

So you are ok with using the FCC to coerce private companies’ decisions about speech/content because Kimmel can always go elsewhere if he wants. Noted.

Dude, rightly or wrongly, that is what the FCC do. As I said earlier, it’s a quaint, old fashioned government agency that oversees the airwaves. It has always been this way.

Then it should be trivial to give examples of other coercion by FCC in a similar manner, yes? Especially as indirectly requested for by the President

I’m only informing you of what the FCC does. Wasn’t there a big fuss about Elvis’ thrusting hips?

Did the FCC threaten the licenses if they didn’t take Elvis off the air because it offended the President?

You are the one who said it “has always been this way” so you should easily be able to provide equivalent examples.

I don’t know what the FCC did about Elvis or any other breaches of FcC rules. Why do you think Howard Stern went to Sirius and changed his format?

Was it government coercion?

Somewhat, he couldn’t have the show he wanted unless he broadcast outside of FCC rules.

I am not going to waste anymore of my time trying to explain to you what the FCC does.

So, you don’t actually have examples then.

It’s not my problem you are ignorant of what the FCC does. Although I suspect you are just acting dumb.

I ca understand why it was so easy for an authoritarian to become President. Many Americans have no problem with this.

A couple of failing shows that hardly anyone watched have gone off air, how is this a problem?

Ends justify the means, right?

This has been very convenient for some parties but it was going to happen anyway. I’m sure democracy will survive despite Kimmel and Colbert not having a show anymore.

Yes. A good democracy is one in which tv shows stay on the air if they adhere to the whims of the President. Thats what the first Amendment implies, right?

Again, this is not a first amendment issue. Kimmels first amendment rights are still in place.

I’m sure you’ll agree with this when a Democratic president stays revoking licenses for channels that aren’t woke enough, right? Even Ted “Cancun” Cruz recognizes the potential abuse this can lead to.

No licenses were revoked.

Because the corporations capitulated after the threat. We won’t know what would have happened had they refused to cancel Kimmel. Maybe you are right and nothing would have happened to their licenses.

Your complaint is with the networks.

 

[Elixir]

Wasn’t there a big fuss about Elvis’ thrusting hips?

And a million other NON PARTISAN forbiddances.