4 ms·

Must have been a VERY strong demand for Disney to completely ignore it.

arp242 1y ago
They didn't ignore it. The show was suspended for several days. Over some really tame remarks. The warning is pretty obvious to anyone paying attention.
logicalmind 1y ago
Companies are driven by profits, but their decisions are usually based on legalities. I think their knee-jerk reaction to pull Kimmel was due to what might happen, or what the government was threatening to do. That doesn't amount to damages, legally. However, if they bring Kimmel back, and the government follows through on its initial threats, then that does amount to damages for which they can sue the government.
tene80i 1y ago
Irrelevant. You were arguing this was an ordinary part of business, and the point is that it clearly isn’t. Now you’re moving on to how much it matters that the government made such a demand. It matters very much, because it is unprecedented and outrageous. But I was only replying to your partial account, which left out the most crucial aspect of the entire affair.
- Jensson 1y ago
  > It matters very much, because it is unprecedented and outrageous It isn't unprecedented, Biden administration did that as well. This is normal for the US government, they never were strict with free speech they always pressured corporations to censor. https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/weaponization-committee-exposes-biden-white-house-censorship-regime-new-report https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/weaponizati...
  - tene80i 1y ago
    Anything equivalent to “We can do this the easy way or the hard way” said to a TV network by the official who can withdraw their licence to broadcast?
mcphage 1y ago
I'm sure Disney is aware that there will be consequences to reinstating Kimmel. Maybe their proposed merger won't go through. Maybe something else—but they will be punished by the administration for it.

They didn't ignore it. The show was suspended for several days. Over some really tame remarks. The warning is pretty obvious to anyone paying attention.

logicalmind 1y ago

Companies are driven by profits, but their decisions are usually based on legalities. I think their knee-jerk reaction to pull Kimmel was due to what might happen, or what the government was threatening to do. That doesn't amount to damages, legally. However, if they bring Kimmel back, and the government follows through on its initial threats, then that does amount to damages for which they can sue the government.

tene80i 1y ago

Irrelevant. You were arguing this was an ordinary part of business, and the point is that it clearly isn’t. Now you’re moving on to how much it matters that the government made such a demand. It matters very much, because it is unprecedented and outrageous. But I was only replying to your partial account, which left out the most crucial aspect of the entire affair.

Jensson 1y ago
> It matters very much, because it is unprecedented and outrageous It isn't unprecedented, Biden administration did that as well. This is normal for the US government, they never were strict with free speech they always pressured corporations to censor. https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/weaponization-committee-exposes-biden-white-house-censorship-regime-new-report https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/weaponizati...
- tene80i 1y ago
  Anything equivalent to “We can do this the easy way or the hard way” said to a TV network by the official who can withdraw their licence to broadcast?

mcphage 1y ago

I'm sure Disney is aware that there will be consequences to reinstating Kimmel. Maybe their proposed merger won't go through. Maybe something else—but they will be punished by the administration for it.