September 18, 2025 • 31 mins
The debates are fierce today over whether free speech is under attack by this administration and whether media companies are overreacting to avoid losing viewers, losing favor with the administration, and ultimately losing money. There are many who believe this isn’t about free speech, it’s about hate speech, and in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, stopping the rhetoric could be a matter of life or death.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Hey, they're folks. At is Thursday, September the eighteenth, the
last night robok and I got a call from a
media industry executive, a friend of ours, and the first
words she said, I'm scared. And with that, welcome to
this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes. I think there
are a lot of journalists seemingly nervous, running scared, concerned
(00:27):
about what we're seeing. And what we've seen now is
that Jimmy Kimmel is off the air indefinitely for making
comments it seems that the President didn't like.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
For making comments that the President didn't like, but didn't
seem that out of character for Jimmy Kimmel. So I
think that's what surprised a lot of folks who actually
heard what he said or read what he said and
thought that's the response, that his show is canceled indefinitely,
(00:58):
first by a media company and then by ABC and
Disney all together. I think it's not an overstatement to
say jaws collectively drops.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
Oh, this is shocking coming off the heels. What we're
month two months or so away from Stephen Colbert that
big announcement. These two guys, Colbert and Kimmel are two
guys who four or five nights a week go on
a full out on the assault of the White House
and the Trump administration. Their criticism sometimes comes in the
form of jokes, but sometimes it can come in the
(01:30):
form or seem as if they're just making political statements
and not necessarily just for the sake of laughs.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
And look, here's the deal. It makes a lot of
sense that that pisses off a lot of people. And
here's how you combat that. You turn it off. You
watch someone else. You don't add to their ratings, and
certainly their ratings have declined. So that is the consequence
of speaking out or making jokes about a current administration.
(01:56):
This is a long standing format that we've all witnessed
and seen. You don't like it, you don't watch, and
that is powerful. So it's confusing to a lot of folks.
I think, why there needs to be an extra step.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
This is.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
They aren't journalists.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
Correct me here though, robe is this the biggest, most
shocking example we've seen of someone of their being consequences
for someone speaking out in a way After the death
of Charlie Kirk, Where is there is there a bigger,
more shocking This is.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
The biggest one. And look, I think when it comes
to a news organization, journalists, even the analysts or commentators
they have on their program, I can understand being held
to a significantly higher standard without a doubt, of course.
But I think I was mostly shocked because this is
a late night comedian who has who continuously and nightly
(02:51):
rails on the President as part of his shtick. And
yes he is serious. Sometimes he is making a stand
and taking a stand, But we do live in the
United States of America, where we have First Amendment rights. However,
we are all beholden, regardless of who you are, to
parent companies who have financial interests, who have other goals,
and other folks that they have to answer to. But
(03:13):
mostly this does come down to ratings, money, etc. And
so I think a lot of that is playing into this,
but it is deeply concerning.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
It has to do with federal regulators. All of those
companies you name who talk about ratings and money and whatnot,
they also have to be they have to answer to
the federal government about what they do. And as we've
seen from the President and the administration, they're not fraid
at all to go after media companies for doing something
they don't like, and sometimes, and we've also seen these
(03:43):
companies are willing to just pay to make the headache
go away. We mention indefinitely grow there's a possibility, and
I think some would say in likelihood that Jimmy Kimmel
is never coming back to Jimmy Kimmel Live and that
show will never go back on the air.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
I think that that is the most likely scenario, and
I'm sure Jimmy Kimmel is very aware of that as well,
because once you are taken off the air like this
in such a major way, what would be the reasoning?
How could he emerge and still be able to do
what he does every night? And I know that there
have been some stipulations, which we'll get into later, offered
(04:20):
what he might do, what he could do perhaps to
get back on the air. And look, I've met him
several times, I've interviewed him. I'm sure you have as well.
I don't. I can't speak for him specifically, but I
would believe that that would be the last thing he
would want to do. What would they what they would
be asking of him?
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Yeah, at this point, how do you go back? We've
had some experience with this it's that moment when there
is a suspension, when there is a pulling, this rises
to a level once you pull somebody off the air
that is very difficult to come back from. So this
is how it all went down. And we were in
the middle, I guess we were having dinner or dinner
was wrapping up. Something else was going on with thoughts.
(04:58):
But yes, we see these breaking news alertstar coming that Yes,
Jimmy Kimmel's show is being put on indefinite, indefinite leave
at this point, and so whatever further notice may come now.
This is because they say robes of comments he made
on Monday Night's show. Today is Thursday. The news about
the suspension came Wednesday, So what happened between Monday and Wednesday, Robes.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
What happened was is, look, there had been some folks
going online saying they were upset about it, but it
didn't rise to any level where ABC or Disney didn't
allow him back on the air Tuesday night. So he
went on as planned with his show on Tuesday night
probably and was preparing to go on as usual for
Wednesday night when this news broke. But what happened was
(05:44):
the FCC chairman went onto a far right podcast and
complained and even threatened ABC News or not ABC News,
but ABC if they didn't take action, some sort of
disciplinary action against for his comments. He then said that
they would have to basically take matters into their own hands,
(06:06):
meaning the FCC.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Yeah, this was the Brendan carrs his name, the FCC chair,
who of course is essentially works for the Trump administration.
Said we can do this the easy way or the
hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct
and take action Frankly on Kimmel, or there's going to
be additional work for the FCC ahead. So he's on
(06:28):
a right wing, a far right podcast. We can do
this the easy way or the hard way. I mean
he's threatening, Okay, I don't want to interpret this.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
That was a direct threat.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Okay, we can do this the easy way or the
hard way, saying Frankly on Kimmel, you have to do something,
take action, or there's going to be work for the
FCC ahead. And they took action. So after that statement,
the first shoot to drop was a company that's not
really on a lot of people's radars. Why were they
so powerful? But there was a reason. Next star is
(07:02):
the first one that came out. This is a media
company owned several I mean a lot. Is this the biggest.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
Local Yes, I think this, and Saint Clair is right
behind them. But next Door, I think has thirty two
ABC affiliates from what I read, and Sinclair has thirty
ABC affiliates. So these are powerful, powerful companies who reacted
very strongly to what the FCC chairman said. But they
specifically reacted to what Jimmy Kimmel said on Monday night. However,
(07:32):
they only made the statement and only made this decision
after the chairman went on that podcast.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
So it said that saw off the whole chain of
events yesterday. So yes, Next Star was the first to
come out and say they were going to be suspending
or what's the word they use. They say they were
going to do free empt for the foreseeable future. They
were the ones. It wasn't Disney and ABC first, it
was Next Star.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Yes, they said, beginning with tonight's show, so this was
immediate next This is their statement. Next Our strongly objects
to recent comments made by mister Kimmel concerning the killing
of Charlie Kirk and will replace the show with other
programming in its ABC affiliated markets. Mister Kimmel's comments about
the death of mister Kirk are offensive and insensitive at
(08:18):
a critical time in our national political discourse, and we
do not believe they reflect the spectrum of opinions, views,
or values of the local communities in which we are located.
Continuing to give mister Kimmel a broadcast platform in the
communities we serve is simply not in the public interest
at the current time, and we have made the difficult
decision to pre empt his show in an effort to
(08:41):
let cooler heads prevail as we move toward the resumption
of respectful, constructive dialogue.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
Ugh, this sounds like money. There were parts of this
that sounded like money. Values of the local communities in
which we are located. That sounds like we're not gonna
let this guy continue to spew in places that might
be pro Trump correct.
Speaker 2 (09:08):
And when you said this sounds about money, yes, Nextstar
owns and operates more than two hundred stations, by the
way nationwide, just thirty two of them are ABC affiliates.
But here's the deal. Next Star has a deal pending
to purchase a company called Tegna. It's a smaller arrival.
The sale would be for six point two billion dollars.
(09:29):
But here's the deal. Next Star needs the FCC to
approve this merger. So Next Star needs to stay in
good graces with the FCC. And a lot of news
organizations have reached out to Nextstar to comment on whether
or not their decision to pre empt Jimmy Kimmel had
(09:51):
anything to do with this pending merger that the FCC
has to approve.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
What response are they getting?
Speaker 2 (09:58):
No comment?
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Okay, I'll see. But this is a playbook we've seen recently.
We have seen this recently from the Trump White House,
and we have seen who is at CBS.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
CBS Latest Game correct, Yes, and so they needed approval
for a merger as well. This is paramount right with CBS.
They needed a They needed to have a merger approved
that the Trump administration, the FCC would have to approve,
and Wohila Stephen Colbert, his show was announced to be
(10:27):
canceled not long after a lawsuit was settled because of
a segment. President Trump did not like that CBS aired
on Sixty Minutes while he was running for president, saying
that they improperly edited Kamala Harris's interview to make her
comment look less like word salad, I believe is what
(10:49):
it was. So there's a lot of this going on,
and this is the most glaring, biggest, most recent example
of potentially what actually is happening behind the scenes that
is creating the these very disruptive changes in late night.
Speaker 1 (11:03):
Look, people are free too if they want to say
it's just a coincidence that this is happening and how
it's happened, and there's nothing untoward going on, and that's fine.
But this will certainly for a lot of people look
or feel a certain way, given that Kimmel has said
a bunch of stuff that the president doesn't like, attacking
the president. This is different. We talk about Charlie Kirk.
(11:24):
We have seen a lot of people get fired, suspend
it in all else, All Girl arrested.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
We had a whole episode on this was it even
yesterday that we dropped about all the names and all
the people, dozens and dozens from school teachers to media
commentators to local news reporters who have all lost their
jobs or been disciplined, even pilots, airline pilots. So we
were amazed at how many people have lost their positions
(11:49):
because of making comments about Charlie Kirk. But we had
no idea this one was coming, okay.
Speaker 1 (11:56):
And so with all this talking, you might have seen
it by now, but we searched to make sure we
weren't missing something. We've been talking about the comments this time,
and yeah, I think it is different rode with Charlie Kirk.
And given where we are in the heated rhetoric that
anything that came out of Kimmel's mouth about Charlie Kirk
that sounded any way critical of anybody was gonna get
different attention. I think this would probably rise us to
(12:18):
the level.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
For that reason, we weren't really talking about it Tuesday, though.
I have to say, here's the thing.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
I don't watch his show. I mean, I'm just not
late night We don't.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
Not that we don't watch the show, but we still
also are constantly scouring news reports. I didn't see some
big uproar until the FCC chairman went on that podcast.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
So what exactly did Kimmel say? We will just give
it to you verbatim, without any context necessary or commentary,
I should say, but here is the actual quote that
got him in trouble.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
We hit some new lows over the weekend, with the
Maga gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered
Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and
doing everything they can to score political points from it.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
Okay, that's yeah. I mean, we've crossed the line to
where you can't it's one thing, right, it's one thing.
Or it seemed as if you shouldn't speak ill of
the dead, you shouldn't say anything negative about him, you
shouldn't be critical of him. But now it feels in
some of the arguments being made that you're not even
allowed you need to mourn hard enough, like people seem
(13:27):
to Now the standard seems to be going down to
where it's not just that you have to be quiet
if you're critical. Now if you speak, we need to
hear that you are mourning for him. It seems like
there's a shift in how you're supposed to talk about
Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (13:44):
Now, I think it's fair to point out, and I'm
not saying that this somehow negates anything that Kimmel said
if it offended you, but on September tenth, two days
after Charlie Kirk was killed, or within days, Kimmel did
put out a statement saying that this type of retribution
or gun violence is horrific. His heart and his prayers
(14:07):
were going out to Kirk's wife and his family. So
he did put out a statement very much in line
with warning Charlie Kirk condemning any kind of political motivated
violence in any way, shape or form. So he was
on record doing and saying the right thing.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
A lot of people are. They were initially on record,
and then a lot of what we have seen This
is not directly at Kimmel necessarily, but a lot of
what we've seen is we went back to the same
rhetoric the next day. In the next day when the
articles started coming out and say, hey, why are we
mourning him? This is what he said. He was a deplorable, right,
we started seeing that. But yeah, it wasn't initial. I
think a lot of people you just said it got
(14:46):
on record.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
And maybe that's exactly what it was for. I don't know.
I don't want to imply that somehow it was manipulative,
but I.
Speaker 1 (14:54):
Think it was sincere when he said it. Why this
wrote again, We keep asking why this particular the quote
rose to the level and maybe it didn't. It only
did because the SECC chairman rose it to the level.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
And perhaps it was the straw that brought the Campbell's
back for the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
This was the opening to go after Kimmel. Finally we
got him on this Kirk thing. To that point, did
you see what the President said about Jimmy Kimmel, Well
you could probably imagine what his comments were. We're going
to share that with you in the moment. We'll also
share what the President said a couple of days ago
in which he seemed to accurately predict what was going
(15:32):
to happen and why we were told in the immediate
aftermath of this news coming out by a friend of ours,
a media executive who called and said she was scared.
Will give you all the recent examples for why someone
in this industry, the media industry, would say that. All right,
(16:00):
we continue now with this late night bombshell. Another one,
the second one we've gotten in recent months. First it
was Colbert, now it is Kimmel. Colbert. Of course they
cut because they said it was costing too much money
at the time, right, it was an expensive show, going
to have to move on. This one was different. Robes.
Kimmel is being suspended indefinitely his show. All of those employees,
(16:23):
they were there, the show was ready to go. The
celebrities were.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Even Vanda Sykes actually put something up online because she
said she had full face makeup on because she was
about to go on set to be a guest on
Jimmy Kimmel Live. So people, the staff Jimmy Kimmel was
even reported seeing leaving the building early because his show
was canceled. Everybody was there at the studio in Los
Angeles ready to go on air when they all got
(16:49):
this news that the show was not going to go
on and it might not ever.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Ever come back. That is want to think that the
ABC Late Night Show and the CBS Late Night Show
in the matter of months gone. These are institutions.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
Kay Kimmel is I mean, wouldn't you say he is
the biggest star employee of ABC or at least I
mean he has to be. He hosts the Oscars. I
mean they would fly us out to LA to do
big interviews with him. It was a big deal when
Kimmel would sit down with us and he was a
member of the family, but he was that regarded. He
was just at the Emmys and was hobnobbing with everyone
(17:25):
there in Hollywood. He was royalty at ABC.
Speaker 1 (17:28):
No, you said it right. No, it was important to
note he is the face of ABC everything because people say, well,
how can you justify some of the big salaries they
make in late night when he's down to a million viewers.
I mean he's yeah, the shows have been losing late
night viewers. He makes that because he is the public faith,
He is the ambassador. He is. He can do anything
(17:50):
for the network, need me here, neem me there, and
even show up. But ohs his thing, hosts that thing.
This is a big deal, more so than this guy.
Speaker 2 (17:57):
Yeah, more so than anyone at ABC News and sold.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Than just his late night show. What he means to
that network for them to make this move is a
really big deal. And I guess, no surprise the reaction
we got from the President fairly.
Speaker 2 (18:10):
Soon, pretty quickly. Yeah, he jumped on truth social and
he said this great news for America. The ratings challenged.
Jimmy Kimmel's show is canceled. Canceled is an all caps
congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do
what had to be done. Kimmel has zero in all
caps talent and worse ratings than even Colbert. If that's possible.
(18:32):
That leaves Jimmy and Seth two total losers on fake
News NBC. Their ratings are also horrible. Do it NBC?
Three exclamation points? President DJT so, given deals that are being.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
Done, lawsuits that Trump is winning, given all that. If
you're an NBC executive, you're whatever executive you hear the President,
the White House, the administration has a problem with something
on your air? Are you not shaking in your boots?
Who's going to take a stand and.
Speaker 2 (19:04):
Say no, no, No one has taken a stand?
Speaker 1 (19:07):
Damn Harvard, did they did?
Speaker 2 (19:10):
You're right Columbia, Columbia absolutely folded, ABC folded, CBS folded.
In terms of lawsuits, and you don't want again.
Speaker 1 (19:20):
We're not in that position. We hate to say, I mean,
I don't know what are you do in that position?
You got shareholders, you got people you have to answer to,
You have all these things coming at you. You're going
to take a stand against the President of the United
States who had no problem suing any and everybody.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
There's no way any of these major networks are going
to take a moral stand when it costs them financially.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
What did you say it was? Was it Monday?
Speaker 2 (19:41):
I thought it was Tuesday. It was predicted, it was
the day before, the day before Trump actually predicted what
happened last night. Trump said, the word is, and it's
a strong word at that Jimmy Kimmel is next in
all caps to go in the untalented Late Night sweepstakes,
(20:03):
and shortly thereafter Fallon will be gone. So he said
he had strong word that Jimmy Kimmel is next to go,
and the next day Jimmy, sorry, Jimmy Kimmel is gone.
Speaker 1 (20:15):
Good big coincidence, he said plenty of times before, has
he not publicly Falon needs to go, Kimmel needs to go,
needs to go.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
This is just me making a logical I'm a logical deduction.
If you look at it. Monday night, Kimmel says the
statement that offended some folks, and it was it was
being talked about online. And then on Tuesday, the FCC
chairman goes in and starts lambback, sorry, sorry. Then President
(20:43):
Trump says something and predicts that something's going to happen
on Wednesday. The FCC chairman then goes on to this
right wing podcast and threatens everyone involved with the show.
Late with Jimmy, with Jimmy, I keep want to say,
Jimmy fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, Sorry with Jimmy Kimmel, and then
(21:05):
Jimmy kill fam. I can't talk. Jimmy Kimmel is gone.
So I just like if you look at it from
Monday to Tuesday to Wednesday, the President had some inside information.
He insinuated that he did the word is the strong
word is.
Speaker 1 (21:21):
I mean, it's a yes. There's a hell of a
coincidence that these things would all line up and not
be connected. Yes, here we are that the President Groves
I mentioned that for it was it was the first call.
I think it was the first text we got. It
was a friend of ours, yes, an executive and a
major industry company, And it was the first thing. I'm scared,
(21:45):
like we like genuinely sounding as if like we are
in fear of everything that comes out of your now
mouth and how you say it. We were watching Jake Tavers.
Speaker 2 (21:55):
I was just oh, yeah, I was just gonna say,
and I was gonna say, I don't know if we
should say who it was, but fine, and it was
Jake tap around CNN. He started to say something, but
he was saying he was repeating something that someone else said,
and I think he suddenly freaked out and realized that
somehow that could be attributed to him. And he's like,
I mean, I didn't say that. I didn't say that,
and he fumbled around the way he was defending himself.
It actually was fear based. I saw fear that he
(22:20):
was afraid somehow what he just repeated was going to
be attributed to him and he was going to lose
his job. And I just thought, oh my god, is
this where we are now? Journalists afraid to say anything?
And look, we're if you're an anchor in your journalist
you are not supposed to give your opinion. And I
understand that we all fall in those lines. But even now,
repeating something that someone else said was a cause for concern.
Speaker 1 (22:43):
See in my concern that the bar is now, you're
not mourning him passionately enough. It's not just the matter.
It seems that the administration of hate speech, the bar
for hate speech seems to beginning lower, is what I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (23:01):
It's called the I don't like what you said speech.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
That's a problem right now, and it seems to be
a theme theme certainly, And they talk about now naming people,
calling groups terrorists, and talking about what hate speech is
and Jonathan carrl being threatened to you a bad guy.
Maybe I'll come up. You said some bad stuff, like
just being critical, the President said himself.
Speaker 2 (23:21):
And that is a lot of these political reporters' jobs
is to investigate, to be critical, to be skeptical. That
is what we learned to do in journalism school. We yes,
we have to have objectivity, but there has to be
a certain healthy skepticism involved in what we do each
and every day to make sure we're not tools of
an administration that just give you things to tell the people.
(23:42):
That is our actual role to question, to be skeptical.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
But that criticism is now and it seems in many
times being taken as hate speech mean speech coming after
US left wing media just by asking a question of
the administration, that is, do you get nervous?
Speaker 2 (24:07):
That's deeply concerning.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
We sit here and we're careful about what we say.
I make some eyes sometimes at you, and we look
and are we good? Because you have to have in
the back of your mind anything that comes out of
your mouth could put you as a target.
Speaker 2 (24:21):
Well, look, doing this podcast, I mean I would never
we have more license than we ever had before in
our careers to say what we think based on perspective
and experience without taking any political sides. This is certainly
an assault on journalism and journalists.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Other examples of it, you know them all just sued
in New York Times for fifteen billion dollars. Sued Wall
Street Journal for ten billion. That was over the Epstein book,
essentially saying I didn't draw.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
That, and the point being the Wall Street Journal, by
the way, is a conservative leaning paper.
Speaker 1 (24:54):
Sued them for ten billion. You mentioned the sixty minutes
went over the Kamala Harris interview. That one was a
multi billion dollar lawsuit, end up selling for sixteen million.
That number might sound familiar because that's the same number
they settled with ABC News over with Trump over.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
George Sea who kept using the word rape instead of
sexual assault.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
You might remember another case the Associated Press. This is
very early, this is my first month or two maybe
of his new administration. They wouldn't use Gulf of America,
kicked him out of covering the zero access zero access.
He has retality if you don't do what I say
or you say something I don't like is and in
anything we say. If he was we were talking to
(25:36):
him right now, he would say, yeah, it's hate speech.
He would actually sit here and make an argument for
the things that are coming out of people's miles or
the Journal of the sixties. He's made it time and
again that what you are saying, I, Donald Trump think
is mean and hateful and I am going to make
you pay for it.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
Yeah, he's starting to designate terrorists and terrorism and this
is a slippery slope. It really is the last thing
we want.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
To leave you all with. And we came upon this today,
a headline from Politico, and this is the headline and
the reason. And I have to tell you when this
article was written, because that makes it very relevant. Or
you said you had chills reading some of this, But
this was after the ABC settlements with George Stephanopoulos that
a lot of us at the time like, oh my god,
(26:23):
is this what's coming down the pike. ABC. No, there
were other major media companies that oh, this is bad
for all of us that you settled with this guy.
You didn't want to fight him, so now you just
caved and gave him sixteen million. The headline from Political
from December after that said this and die quote the
ABC settlement is just the start of Trump's press crackdown.
(26:48):
History shows us what comes next. That's a headline in December.
He goes through this author Joshua Zeites want to give
him credit. Joshua Zeites at Politico went through. He explained
history of seeing this happen before, and it gives you
chills because he thinks, possibly we'll get out of it.
(27:10):
But we are exactly where he predicted we would be.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
Isn't it true? He said this ten He wrote this
ten months ago. Trump's anti press stance is hardly unprecedented.
In fact, presidents from John Adams through Richard Nixon used
blunt legal and military force to mute their critics. In
the period since Watergate, courts and civil society institutions have
discouraged presidents from interfering with independent journalism. But historically speaking,
(27:38):
that period was an anomaly in US history, and now,
as Trump prepares to retake office, it could be coming
to an end.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
Unbelievable. He history teaches us, leaning back while she's reading it. Yeah, sorry,
I was away from a microphone. But history teaches us,
and this guy, this is a prediction and every word
is true.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
Yes. He goes on to write, though America boasts a
rich heritage of hard hitting political reporting, there is a
darker side to the story, that of presidents using the
power of the state to bend reporters and editors to
their will. It's a story of progress and relapse, one
step back for every two steps forward. History suggests that
(28:21):
when presidents crack down on the press, the only check
against executive overreach is popular reaction. The courts are sometimes
but rarely a savior. Only public opinion can protect a
free press.
Speaker 1 (28:36):
Please, folks, I hope you listen to that last. But
he's saying, it's up to us, and historically it has
been up to us. We're waiting for a court decision.
We're waiting. No, it's usually, he says, historically, the public
has to push back on this idea, and the public
every time wins. Is what he's saying. But his last
(28:59):
two beats slants two paragraphs of the air.
Speaker 2 (29:02):
This is crazy.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
This yeah and nuts.
Speaker 2 (29:04):
I have chills again. Just okay, So this is insane again.
Written ten months ago, it is by no means impossible
to imagine a world in which the Trump administration transitions
from using civil cases to bully journalists into silence to
using the Department of Justice. The border and fentanyl crisis
(29:25):
crises certainly provide the veneer of national security interests, and
as was the case from Adams to Lincoln to Wilson
to Truman, and administration need only make a few examples
of opposition journalists to send a chill over the entire profession.
What was true then is likely true now. The courts
(29:48):
won't save independent journalism. It will be up to American
citizens to decide how much they value their First Amendment
rights and how vocal they will be in.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
We are in tough times, but not unprecedented, and it
is up to us. And I know folks roads a
lot of times get caught up and they don't think
they can do anything, and that causes them to feel despair.
And then other folks want to do something that causes
them to act out maybe and maybe join the wrong
club or say the wrong things online. You want to
(30:22):
change the world, to be a part of something. I
promise you, folks. There's somebody walking down the hall from
you at work today that's struggling and you making eye contacts,
smiling and being willing to listen can change the world
for that person. There's somebody sitting next to you at
your cubicle or on the subway that completely disagrees with
every political leaning you have, that has the same concern
(30:44):
that you have about your child getting to a good college.
If we just take a beat, you can change the world, folks,
by just changing the world for one individual that's sitting
next to you. It's okay, we just have to do better.
And whoever this writer is, I love Joshua Zeites. I
want to give him credit for doing this background in
this history. We're gonna be okay.
Speaker 2 (31:05):
We should see if we could get him on the podcast,
because what a brilliant guy to be able to have
had that foresight and to do that.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
Predicted it through history. Wow, predicted. I cannot believe this
was written ten months ago. If you were written it yesterday,
I said, okay, yeah, predicted everything. So Rob, this one
isn't going away. We haven't, at least of this recording
heard from Kimmel.
Speaker 2 (31:27):
No, okay, no, we have not heard anything. And of
course we will be monitoring this situation and we have
a vested interest as does America. We are not a
free people if we don't have a free press. And
with that, thank you so much for listening to us.
I'm Amy Roebuck alongside TJ. Holmes. We'll talk to you soon.
Hey, they're folks. At is Thursday, September the eighteenth, the
last night robok and I got a call from a
media industry executive, a friend of ours, and the first
words she said, I'm scared. And with that, welcome to
this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes. I think there
are a lot of journalists seemingly nervous, running scared, concerned
(00:27):
about what we're seeing. And what we've seen now is
that Jimmy Kimmel is off the air indefinitely for making
comments it seems that the President didn't like.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
For making comments that the President didn't like, but didn't
seem that out of character for Jimmy Kimmel. So I
think that's what surprised a lot of folks who actually
heard what he said or read what he said and
thought that's the response, that his show is canceled indefinitely,
(00:58):
first by a media company and then by ABC and
Disney all together. I think it's not an overstatement to
say jaws collectively drops.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
Oh, this is shocking coming off the heels. What we're
month two months or so away from Stephen Colbert that
big announcement. These two guys, Colbert and Kimmel are two
guys who four or five nights a week go on
a full out on the assault of the White House
and the Trump administration. Their criticism sometimes comes in the
form of jokes, but sometimes it can come in the
(01:30):
form or seem as if they're just making political statements
and not necessarily just for the sake of laughs.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
And look, here's the deal. It makes a lot of
sense that that pisses off a lot of people. And
here's how you combat that. You turn it off. You
watch someone else. You don't add to their ratings, and
certainly their ratings have declined. So that is the consequence
of speaking out or making jokes about a current administration.
(01:56):
This is a long standing format that we've all witnessed
and seen. You don't like it, you don't watch, and
that is powerful. So it's confusing to a lot of folks.
I think, why there needs to be an extra step.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
This is.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
They aren't journalists.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
Correct me here though, robe is this the biggest, most
shocking example we've seen of someone of their being consequences
for someone speaking out in a way After the death
of Charlie Kirk, Where is there is there a bigger,
more shocking This is.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
The biggest one. And look, I think when it comes
to a news organization, journalists, even the analysts or commentators
they have on their program, I can understand being held
to a significantly higher standard without a doubt, of course.
But I think I was mostly shocked because this is
a late night comedian who has who continuously and nightly
(02:51):
rails on the President as part of his shtick. And
yes he is serious. Sometimes he is making a stand
and taking a stand, But we do live in the
United States of America, where we have First Amendment rights. However,
we are all beholden, regardless of who you are, to
parent companies who have financial interests, who have other goals,
and other folks that they have to answer to. But
(03:13):
mostly this does come down to ratings, money, etc. And
so I think a lot of that is playing into this,
but it is deeply concerning.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
It has to do with federal regulators. All of those
companies you name who talk about ratings and money and whatnot,
they also have to be they have to answer to
the federal government about what they do. And as we've
seen from the President and the administration, they're not fraid
at all to go after media companies for doing something
they don't like, and sometimes, and we've also seen these
(03:43):
companies are willing to just pay to make the headache
go away. We mention indefinitely grow there's a possibility, and
I think some would say in likelihood that Jimmy Kimmel
is never coming back to Jimmy Kimmel Live and that
show will never go back on the air.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
I think that that is the most likely scenario, and
I'm sure Jimmy Kimmel is very aware of that as well,
because once you are taken off the air like this
in such a major way, what would be the reasoning?
How could he emerge and still be able to do
what he does every night? And I know that there
have been some stipulations, which we'll get into later, offered
(04:20):
what he might do, what he could do perhaps to
get back on the air. And look, I've met him
several times, I've interviewed him. I'm sure you have as well.
I don't. I can't speak for him specifically, but I
would believe that that would be the last thing he
would want to do. What would they what they would
be asking of him?
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Yeah, at this point, how do you go back? We've
had some experience with this it's that moment when there
is a suspension, when there is a pulling, this rises
to a level once you pull somebody off the air
that is very difficult to come back from. So this
is how it all went down. And we were in
the middle, I guess we were having dinner or dinner
was wrapping up. Something else was going on with thoughts.
(04:58):
But yes, we see these breaking news alertstar coming that Yes,
Jimmy Kimmel's show is being put on indefinite, indefinite leave
at this point, and so whatever further notice may come now.
This is because they say robes of comments he made
on Monday Night's show. Today is Thursday. The news about
the suspension came Wednesday, So what happened between Monday and Wednesday, Robes.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
What happened was is, look, there had been some folks
going online saying they were upset about it, but it
didn't rise to any level where ABC or Disney didn't
allow him back on the air Tuesday night. So he
went on as planned with his show on Tuesday night
probably and was preparing to go on as usual for
Wednesday night when this news broke. But what happened was
(05:44):
the FCC chairman went onto a far right podcast and
complained and even threatened ABC News or not ABC News,
but ABC if they didn't take action, some sort of
disciplinary action against for his comments. He then said that
they would have to basically take matters into their own hands,
(06:06):
meaning the FCC.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Yeah, this was the Brendan carrs his name, the FCC chair,
who of course is essentially works for the Trump administration.
Said we can do this the easy way or the
hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct
and take action Frankly on Kimmel, or there's going to
be additional work for the FCC ahead. So he's on
(06:28):
a right wing, a far right podcast. We can do
this the easy way or the hard way. I mean
he's threatening, Okay, I don't want to interpret this.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
That was a direct threat.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Okay, we can do this the easy way or the
hard way, saying Frankly on Kimmel, you have to do something,
take action, or there's going to be work for the
FCC ahead. And they took action. So after that statement,
the first shoot to drop was a company that's not
really on a lot of people's radars. Why were they
so powerful? But there was a reason. Next star is
(07:02):
the first one that came out. This is a media
company owned several I mean a lot. Is this the biggest.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
Local Yes, I think this, and Saint Clair is right
behind them. But next Door, I think has thirty two
ABC affiliates from what I read, and Sinclair has thirty
ABC affiliates. So these are powerful, powerful companies who reacted
very strongly to what the FCC chairman said. But they
specifically reacted to what Jimmy Kimmel said on Monday night. However,
(07:32):
they only made the statement and only made this decision
after the chairman went on that podcast.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
So it said that saw off the whole chain of
events yesterday. So yes, Next Star was the first to
come out and say they were going to be suspending
or what's the word they use. They say they were
going to do free empt for the foreseeable future. They
were the ones. It wasn't Disney and ABC first, it
was Next Star.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Yes, they said, beginning with tonight's show, so this was
immediate next This is their statement. Next Our strongly objects
to recent comments made by mister Kimmel concerning the killing
of Charlie Kirk and will replace the show with other
programming in its ABC affiliated markets. Mister Kimmel's comments about
the death of mister Kirk are offensive and insensitive at
(08:18):
a critical time in our national political discourse, and we
do not believe they reflect the spectrum of opinions, views,
or values of the local communities in which we are located.
Continuing to give mister Kimmel a broadcast platform in the
communities we serve is simply not in the public interest
at the current time, and we have made the difficult
decision to pre empt his show in an effort to
(08:41):
let cooler heads prevail as we move toward the resumption
of respectful, constructive dialogue.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
Ugh, this sounds like money. There were parts of this
that sounded like money. Values of the local communities in
which we are located. That sounds like we're not gonna
let this guy continue to spew in places that might
be pro Trump correct.
Speaker 2 (09:08):
And when you said this sounds about money, yes, Nextstar
owns and operates more than two hundred stations, by the
way nationwide, just thirty two of them are ABC affiliates.
But here's the deal. Next Star has a deal pending
to purchase a company called Tegna. It's a smaller arrival.
The sale would be for six point two billion dollars.
(09:29):
But here's the deal. Next Star needs the FCC to
approve this merger. So Next Star needs to stay in
good graces with the FCC. And a lot of news
organizations have reached out to Nextstar to comment on whether
or not their decision to pre empt Jimmy Kimmel had
(09:51):
anything to do with this pending merger that the FCC
has to approve.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
What response are they getting?
Speaker 2 (09:58):
No comment?
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Okay, I'll see. But this is a playbook we've seen recently.
We have seen this recently from the Trump White House,
and we have seen who is at CBS.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
CBS Latest Game correct, Yes, and so they needed approval
for a merger as well. This is paramount right with CBS.
They needed a They needed to have a merger approved
that the Trump administration, the FCC would have to approve,
and Wohila Stephen Colbert, his show was announced to be
(10:27):
canceled not long after a lawsuit was settled because of
a segment. President Trump did not like that CBS aired
on Sixty Minutes while he was running for president, saying
that they improperly edited Kamala Harris's interview to make her
comment look less like word salad, I believe is what
(10:49):
it was. So there's a lot of this going on,
and this is the most glaring, biggest, most recent example
of potentially what actually is happening behind the scenes that
is creating the these very disruptive changes in late night.
Speaker 1 (11:03):
Look, people are free too if they want to say
it's just a coincidence that this is happening and how
it's happened, and there's nothing untoward going on, and that's fine.
But this will certainly for a lot of people look
or feel a certain way, given that Kimmel has said
a bunch of stuff that the president doesn't like, attacking
the president. This is different. We talk about Charlie Kirk.
(11:24):
We have seen a lot of people get fired, suspend
it in all else, All Girl arrested.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
We had a whole episode on this was it even
yesterday that we dropped about all the names and all
the people, dozens and dozens from school teachers to media
commentators to local news reporters who have all lost their
jobs or been disciplined, even pilots, airline pilots. So we
were amazed at how many people have lost their positions
(11:49):
because of making comments about Charlie Kirk. But we had
no idea this one was coming, okay.
Speaker 1 (11:56):
And so with all this talking, you might have seen
it by now, but we searched to make sure we
weren't missing something. We've been talking about the comments this time,
and yeah, I think it is different rode with Charlie Kirk.
And given where we are in the heated rhetoric that
anything that came out of Kimmel's mouth about Charlie Kirk
that sounded any way critical of anybody was gonna get
different attention. I think this would probably rise us to
(12:18):
the level.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
For that reason, we weren't really talking about it Tuesday, though.
I have to say, here's the thing.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
I don't watch his show. I mean, I'm just not
late night We don't.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
Not that we don't watch the show, but we still
also are constantly scouring news reports. I didn't see some
big uproar until the FCC chairman went on that podcast.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
So what exactly did Kimmel say? We will just give
it to you verbatim, without any context necessary or commentary,
I should say, but here is the actual quote that
got him in trouble.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
We hit some new lows over the weekend, with the
Maga gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered
Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and
doing everything they can to score political points from it.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
Okay, that's yeah. I mean, we've crossed the line to
where you can't it's one thing, right, it's one thing.
Or it seemed as if you shouldn't speak ill of
the dead, you shouldn't say anything negative about him, you
shouldn't be critical of him. But now it feels in
some of the arguments being made that you're not even
allowed you need to mourn hard enough, like people seem
(13:27):
to Now the standard seems to be going down to
where it's not just that you have to be quiet
if you're critical. Now if you speak, we need to
hear that you are mourning for him. It seems like
there's a shift in how you're supposed to talk about
Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (13:44):
Now, I think it's fair to point out, and I'm
not saying that this somehow negates anything that Kimmel said
if it offended you, but on September tenth, two days
after Charlie Kirk was killed, or within days, Kimmel did
put out a statement saying that this type of retribution
or gun violence is horrific. His heart and his prayers
(14:07):
were going out to Kirk's wife and his family. So
he did put out a statement very much in line
with warning Charlie Kirk condemning any kind of political motivated
violence in any way, shape or form. So he was
on record doing and saying the right thing.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
A lot of people are. They were initially on record,
and then a lot of what we have seen This
is not directly at Kimmel necessarily, but a lot of
what we've seen is we went back to the same
rhetoric the next day. In the next day when the
articles started coming out and say, hey, why are we
mourning him? This is what he said. He was a deplorable, right,
we started seeing that. But yeah, it wasn't initial. I
think a lot of people you just said it got
(14:46):
on record.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
And maybe that's exactly what it was for. I don't know.
I don't want to imply that somehow it was manipulative,
but I.
Speaker 1 (14:54):
Think it was sincere when he said it. Why this
wrote again, We keep asking why this particular the quote
rose to the level and maybe it didn't. It only
did because the SECC chairman rose it to the level.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
And perhaps it was the straw that brought the Campbell's
back for the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
This was the opening to go after Kimmel. Finally we
got him on this Kirk thing. To that point, did
you see what the President said about Jimmy Kimmel, Well
you could probably imagine what his comments were. We're going
to share that with you in the moment. We'll also
share what the President said a couple of days ago
in which he seemed to accurately predict what was going
(15:32):
to happen and why we were told in the immediate
aftermath of this news coming out by a friend of ours,
a media executive who called and said she was scared.
Will give you all the recent examples for why someone
in this industry, the media industry, would say that. All right,
(16:00):
we continue now with this late night bombshell. Another one,
the second one we've gotten in recent months. First it
was Colbert, now it is Kimmel. Colbert. Of course they
cut because they said it was costing too much money
at the time, right, it was an expensive show, going
to have to move on. This one was different. Robes.
Kimmel is being suspended indefinitely his show. All of those employees,
(16:23):
they were there, the show was ready to go. The
celebrities were.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Even Vanda Sykes actually put something up online because she
said she had full face makeup on because she was
about to go on set to be a guest on
Jimmy Kimmel Live. So people, the staff Jimmy Kimmel was
even reported seeing leaving the building early because his show
was canceled. Everybody was there at the studio in Los
Angeles ready to go on air when they all got
(16:49):
this news that the show was not going to go
on and it might not ever.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Ever come back. That is want to think that the
ABC Late Night Show and the CBS Late Night Show
in the matter of months gone. These are institutions.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
Kay Kimmel is I mean, wouldn't you say he is
the biggest star employee of ABC or at least I
mean he has to be. He hosts the Oscars. I
mean they would fly us out to LA to do
big interviews with him. It was a big deal when
Kimmel would sit down with us and he was a
member of the family, but he was that regarded. He
was just at the Emmys and was hobnobbing with everyone
(17:25):
there in Hollywood. He was royalty at ABC.
Speaker 1 (17:28):
No, you said it right. No, it was important to
note he is the face of ABC everything because people say, well,
how can you justify some of the big salaries they
make in late night when he's down to a million viewers.
I mean he's yeah, the shows have been losing late
night viewers. He makes that because he is the public faith,
He is the ambassador. He is. He can do anything
(17:50):
for the network, need me here, neem me there, and
even show up. But ohs his thing, hosts that thing.
This is a big deal, more so than this guy.
Speaker 2 (17:57):
Yeah, more so than anyone at ABC News and sold.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Than just his late night show. What he means to
that network for them to make this move is a
really big deal. And I guess, no surprise the reaction
we got from the President fairly.
Speaker 2 (18:10):
Soon, pretty quickly. Yeah, he jumped on truth social and
he said this great news for America. The ratings challenged.
Jimmy Kimmel's show is canceled. Canceled is an all caps
congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do
what had to be done. Kimmel has zero in all
caps talent and worse ratings than even Colbert. If that's possible.
(18:32):
That leaves Jimmy and Seth two total losers on fake
News NBC. Their ratings are also horrible. Do it NBC?
Three exclamation points? President DJT so, given deals that are being.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
Done, lawsuits that Trump is winning, given all that. If
you're an NBC executive, you're whatever executive you hear the President,
the White House, the administration has a problem with something
on your air? Are you not shaking in your boots?
Who's going to take a stand and.
Speaker 2 (19:04):
Say no, no, No one has taken a stand?
Speaker 1 (19:07):
Damn Harvard, did they did?
Speaker 2 (19:10):
You're right Columbia, Columbia absolutely folded, ABC folded, CBS folded.
In terms of lawsuits, and you don't want again.
Speaker 1 (19:20):
We're not in that position. We hate to say, I mean,
I don't know what are you do in that position?
You got shareholders, you got people you have to answer to,
You have all these things coming at you. You're going
to take a stand against the President of the United
States who had no problem suing any and everybody.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
There's no way any of these major networks are going
to take a moral stand when it costs them financially.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
What did you say it was? Was it Monday?
Speaker 2 (19:41):
I thought it was Tuesday. It was predicted, it was
the day before, the day before Trump actually predicted what
happened last night. Trump said, the word is, and it's
a strong word at that Jimmy Kimmel is next in
all caps to go in the untalented Late Night sweepstakes,
(20:03):
and shortly thereafter Fallon will be gone. So he said
he had strong word that Jimmy Kimmel is next to go,
and the next day Jimmy, sorry, Jimmy Kimmel is gone.
Speaker 1 (20:15):
Good big coincidence, he said plenty of times before, has
he not publicly Falon needs to go, Kimmel needs to go,
needs to go.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
This is just me making a logical I'm a logical deduction.
If you look at it. Monday night, Kimmel says the
statement that offended some folks, and it was it was
being talked about online. And then on Tuesday, the FCC
chairman goes in and starts lambback, sorry, sorry. Then President
(20:43):
Trump says something and predicts that something's going to happen
on Wednesday. The FCC chairman then goes on to this
right wing podcast and threatens everyone involved with the show.
Late with Jimmy, with Jimmy, I keep want to say,
Jimmy fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, Sorry with Jimmy Kimmel, and then
(21:05):
Jimmy kill fam. I can't talk. Jimmy Kimmel is gone.
So I just like if you look at it from
Monday to Tuesday to Wednesday, the President had some inside information.
He insinuated that he did the word is the strong
word is.
Speaker 1 (21:21):
I mean, it's a yes. There's a hell of a
coincidence that these things would all line up and not
be connected. Yes, here we are that the President Groves
I mentioned that for it was it was the first call.
I think it was the first text we got. It
was a friend of ours, yes, an executive and a
major industry company, And it was the first thing. I'm scared,
(21:45):
like we like genuinely sounding as if like we are
in fear of everything that comes out of your now
mouth and how you say it. We were watching Jake Tavers.
Speaker 2 (21:55):
I was just oh, yeah, I was just gonna say,
and I was gonna say, I don't know if we
should say who it was, but fine, and it was
Jake tap around CNN. He started to say something, but
he was saying he was repeating something that someone else said,
and I think he suddenly freaked out and realized that
somehow that could be attributed to him. And he's like,
I mean, I didn't say that. I didn't say that,
and he fumbled around the way he was defending himself.
It actually was fear based. I saw fear that he
(22:20):
was afraid somehow what he just repeated was going to
be attributed to him and he was going to lose
his job. And I just thought, oh my god, is
this where we are now? Journalists afraid to say anything?
And look, we're if you're an anchor in your journalist
you are not supposed to give your opinion. And I
understand that we all fall in those lines. But even now,
repeating something that someone else said was a cause for concern.
Speaker 1 (22:43):
See in my concern that the bar is now, you're
not mourning him passionately enough. It's not just the matter.
It seems that the administration of hate speech, the bar
for hate speech seems to beginning lower, is what I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (23:01):
It's called the I don't like what you said speech.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
That's a problem right now, and it seems to be
a theme theme certainly, And they talk about now naming people,
calling groups terrorists, and talking about what hate speech is
and Jonathan carrl being threatened to you a bad guy.
Maybe I'll come up. You said some bad stuff, like
just being critical, the President said himself.
Speaker 2 (23:21):
And that is a lot of these political reporters' jobs
is to investigate, to be critical, to be skeptical. That
is what we learned to do in journalism school. We yes,
we have to have objectivity, but there has to be
a certain healthy skepticism involved in what we do each
and every day to make sure we're not tools of
an administration that just give you things to tell the people.
(23:42):
That is our actual role to question, to be skeptical.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
But that criticism is now and it seems in many
times being taken as hate speech mean speech coming after
US left wing media just by asking a question of
the administration, that is, do you get nervous?
Speaker 2 (24:07):
That's deeply concerning.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
We sit here and we're careful about what we say.
I make some eyes sometimes at you, and we look
and are we good? Because you have to have in
the back of your mind anything that comes out of
your mouth could put you as a target.
Speaker 2 (24:21):
Well, look, doing this podcast, I mean I would never
we have more license than we ever had before in
our careers to say what we think based on perspective
and experience without taking any political sides. This is certainly
an assault on journalism and journalists.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Other examples of it, you know them all just sued
in New York Times for fifteen billion dollars. Sued Wall
Street Journal for ten billion. That was over the Epstein book,
essentially saying I didn't draw.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
That, and the point being the Wall Street Journal, by
the way, is a conservative leaning paper.
Speaker 1 (24:54):
Sued them for ten billion. You mentioned the sixty minutes
went over the Kamala Harris interview. That one was a
multi billion dollar lawsuit, end up selling for sixteen million.
That number might sound familiar because that's the same number
they settled with ABC News over with Trump over.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
George Sea who kept using the word rape instead of
sexual assault.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
You might remember another case the Associated Press. This is
very early, this is my first month or two maybe
of his new administration. They wouldn't use Gulf of America,
kicked him out of covering the zero access zero access.
He has retality if you don't do what I say
or you say something I don't like is and in
anything we say. If he was we were talking to
(25:36):
him right now, he would say, yeah, it's hate speech.
He would actually sit here and make an argument for
the things that are coming out of people's miles or
the Journal of the sixties. He's made it time and
again that what you are saying, I, Donald Trump think
is mean and hateful and I am going to make
you pay for it.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
Yeah, he's starting to designate terrorists and terrorism and this
is a slippery slope. It really is the last thing
we want.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
To leave you all with. And we came upon this today,
a headline from Politico, and this is the headline and
the reason. And I have to tell you when this
article was written, because that makes it very relevant. Or
you said you had chills reading some of this, But
this was after the ABC settlements with George Stephanopoulos that
a lot of us at the time like, oh my god,
(26:23):
is this what's coming down the pike. ABC. No, there
were other major media companies that oh, this is bad
for all of us that you settled with this guy.
You didn't want to fight him, so now you just
caved and gave him sixteen million. The headline from Political
from December after that said this and die quote the
ABC settlement is just the start of Trump's press crackdown.
(26:48):
History shows us what comes next. That's a headline in December.
He goes through this author Joshua Zeites want to give
him credit. Joshua Zeites at Politico went through. He explained
history of seeing this happen before, and it gives you
chills because he thinks, possibly we'll get out of it.
(27:10):
But we are exactly where he predicted we would be.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
Isn't it true? He said this ten He wrote this
ten months ago. Trump's anti press stance is hardly unprecedented.
In fact, presidents from John Adams through Richard Nixon used
blunt legal and military force to mute their critics. In
the period since Watergate, courts and civil society institutions have
discouraged presidents from interfering with independent journalism. But historically speaking,
(27:38):
that period was an anomaly in US history, and now,
as Trump prepares to retake office, it could be coming
to an end.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
Unbelievable. He history teaches us, leaning back while she's reading it. Yeah, sorry,
I was away from a microphone. But history teaches us,
and this guy, this is a prediction and every word
is true.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
Yes. He goes on to write, though America boasts a
rich heritage of hard hitting political reporting, there is a
darker side to the story, that of presidents using the
power of the state to bend reporters and editors to
their will. It's a story of progress and relapse, one
step back for every two steps forward. History suggests that
(28:21):
when presidents crack down on the press, the only check
against executive overreach is popular reaction. The courts are sometimes
but rarely a savior. Only public opinion can protect a
free press.
Speaker 1 (28:36):
Please, folks, I hope you listen to that last. But
he's saying, it's up to us, and historically it has
been up to us. We're waiting for a court decision.
We're waiting. No, it's usually, he says, historically, the public
has to push back on this idea, and the public
every time wins. Is what he's saying. But his last
(28:59):
two beats slants two paragraphs of the air.
Speaker 2 (29:02):
This is crazy.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
This yeah and nuts.
Speaker 2 (29:04):
I have chills again. Just okay, So this is insane again.
Written ten months ago, it is by no means impossible
to imagine a world in which the Trump administration transitions
from using civil cases to bully journalists into silence to
using the Department of Justice. The border and fentanyl crisis
(29:25):
crises certainly provide the veneer of national security interests, and
as was the case from Adams to Lincoln to Wilson
to Truman, and administration need only make a few examples
of opposition journalists to send a chill over the entire profession.
What was true then is likely true now. The courts
(29:48):
won't save independent journalism. It will be up to American
citizens to decide how much they value their First Amendment
rights and how vocal they will be in.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
We are in tough times, but not unprecedented, and it
is up to us. And I know folks roads a
lot of times get caught up and they don't think
they can do anything, and that causes them to feel despair.
And then other folks want to do something that causes
them to act out maybe and maybe join the wrong
club or say the wrong things online. You want to
(30:22):
change the world, to be a part of something. I
promise you, folks. There's somebody walking down the hall from
you at work today that's struggling and you making eye contacts,
smiling and being willing to listen can change the world
for that person. There's somebody sitting next to you at
your cubicle or on the subway that completely disagrees with
every political leaning you have, that has the same concern
(30:44):
that you have about your child getting to a good college.
If we just take a beat, you can change the world, folks,
by just changing the world for one individual that's sitting
next to you. It's okay, we just have to do better.
And whoever this writer is, I love Joshua Zeites. I
want to give him credit for doing this background in
this history. We're gonna be okay.
Speaker 2 (31:05):
We should see if we could get him on the podcast,
because what a brilliant guy to be able to have
had that foresight and to do that.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
Predicted it through history. Wow, predicted. I cannot believe this
was written ten months ago. If you were written it yesterday,
I said, okay, yeah, predicted everything. So Rob, this one
isn't going away. We haven't, at least of this recording
heard from Kimmel.
Speaker 2 (31:27):
No, okay, no, we have not heard anything. And of
course we will be monitoring this situation and we have
a vested interest as does America. We are not a
free people if we don't have a free press. And
with that, thank you so much for listening to us.
I'm Amy Roebuck alongside TJ. Holmes. We'll talk to you soon.
Hosts And Creators
Lauren Zima
Chris Harrison
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com