DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY

[HokieRaven5]

Or maybe the affiliates want more of that time back for local news and other local content? I'm not really sure what angle the affiliates are taking here.

Probably not. Sinclair has been pushing the FCC for more deregulation, Nexstar has a $6B merger in the works to give them control over somewhere around 80% of all local affiliates, which also requires FCC approval in the process.

So what better way to curry favor with the FCC than to pull the plug on a show that the current Chair of the FCC recently spoke out against.

 

[peder]

That's not what sources are saying, and may just be wishful thinking on your part. ABC/Disney want to get the show back on the air as soon as possible and generally support Kimmel (they've been airing him all this time and, again, he didn't say anything different than he has been for years). I think they will bring him back.

I think it'll come down to the economics of it. If there's a way that keeping Kimmel is best financially for the affiliates and for Disney, then he could stay. But....

Probably not. Sinclair has been pushing the FCC for more deregulation, Nexstar has a $6B merger in the works to give them control over somewhere around 80% of all local affiliates, which also requires FCC approval in the process.

So what better way to curry favor with the FCC than to pull the plug on a show that the current Chair of the FCC recently spoke out against.

This is basically just saying that Kimmel has no shot here, right? Affiliates have all the leverage and the relationships and $DIS is not the type of company that likes to draw attention to itself in these ways? I don't see a path forward for Kimmel with the Disney Company.

However, very bullish for Kimmel getting a Spotify deal once Jimmy gets out of his noncompete. But there just won't be any relationship in the future between Disney and Kimmel. Hell, we're making an assumption that Kimmel even wants to come back, and he might tell Disney to shove it where the sun don't shine.

$DIS stock down slightly today while the broader market is up. Not a big movement in the stock... I don't think anyone's thinking this will lead to major blowback for $DIS either way?

 

[BrianL]

I think it'll come down to the economics of it. If there's a way that keeping Kimmel is best financially for the affiliates and for Disney, then he could stay. But....



This is basically just saying that Kimmel has no shot here, right? Affiliates have all the leverage and the relationships and $DIS is not the type of company that likes to draw attention to itself in these ways? I don't see a path forward for Kimmel with the Disney Company.

However, very bullish for Kimmel getting a Spotify deal once Jimmy gets out of his noncompete. But there just won't be any relationship in the future between Disney and Kimmel. Hell, we're making an assumption that Kimmel even wants to come back, and he might tell Disney to shove it where the sun don't shine.

$DIS stock down slightly today while the broader market is up. Not a big movement in the stock... I don't think anyone's thinking this will lead to major blowback for $DIS either way?

Well, they may or may not get rid of him once the contract is up, and this incident may be a contributing factor, but I think in the short term the show will be back. Nobody's going to want to get into all the legal wrangling that could ensue.

 

[Goofed98]

My understanding of the situation (I'm a project manager, not a lawyer), is that, while Jimmy did say his typical things, in this instance, the potential FCC issue is with spreading inflammatory and intentional lies (the shooter was Maga, his own people killed him!), that there was potential for an FCC fine. They weren't going to lose their license.

I'm not a fan of government overreach, but IF this is a law that has been applied before, then it is a law. Still, wish the FCC would butt out.

This isn't a violation of the First. Kimmel wasn't dragged off in cuffs by the government for what he said. His employer decided that what he said was going to have a negative effect on his business (in this instance, through affiliates). The First Amendment offers no protection from the consequences of your own actions from private industry.

 

[BrianL]

My understanding of the situation (I'm a project manager, not a lawyer), is that, while Jimmy did say his typical things, in this instance, the potential FCC issue is with spreading inflammatory and intentional lies (the shooter was Maga, his own people killed him!), that there was potential for an FCC fine. They weren't going to lose their license.

I'm not a fan of government overreach, but IF this is a law that has been applied before, then it is a law. Still, wish the FCC would butt out.

This isn't a violation of the First. Kimmel wasn't dragged off in cuffs by the government for what he said. His employer decided that what he said was going to have a negative effect on his business (in this instance, through affiliates). The First Amendment offers no protection from the consequences of your own actions from private industry.

Well, he didn't really say that, though it is what people inferred. I agree that it was a poorly worded statement. It is telling though that there are many intentional lies being told on TV, and yet they aren't being targeted by the current FCC. Also a violation of the first ammendemnt does not require arrest, it can be anything that attempt to prohibit or abridge speech no matter how mild or severe the punishment is.

 

[Ashlotte]

My understanding of the situation (I'm a project manager, not a lawyer), is that, while Jimmy did say his typical things, in this instance, the potential FCC issue is with spreading inflammatory and intentional lies (the shooter was Maga, his own people killed him!), that there was potential for an FCC fine. They weren't going to lose their license.

Brian Kilmeade on FOX said homeless people should be killed by involuntary lethal injection and nothing happened to him. That's not inflammatory? The FCC doesn't seem to care about that, an actual call for killing people.

 

[BrianL]

Just a note, the FCC does not regulate Cable television, only the public airwaves.

 

[Ashlotte]

Just a note, the FCC does not regulate Cable television, only the public airwaves.

Interesting. I was not aware of that. Good to know.

 

[BrianL]

Interesting. I was not aware of that. Good to know.

Cable lines are privately owned by the companies that provide the service. Now that doesn't mean there is zero government oversight regarding business practices, etc. but it would not be under the purview of the FCC.

 

[HokieRaven5]

Just a note, the FCC does not regulate Cable television, only the public airwaves.

Yep, which is why of the longer running cartoons South Park has the ability to be inflammatory, while The Simpsons has to be a little more reserved.

 

[irlandaise]

Just a note, the FCC does not regulate Cable television, only the public airwaves.

Correct. And the FCC can only revoke or refuse to renew licenses of individual television and radio stations, not networks. However, individual stations can be held responsible for network programming they aired.

 

[Fullchaos]

$DIS stock down slightly today while the broader market is up. Not a big movement in the stock... I don't think anyone's thinking this will lead to major blowback for $DIS either way?

Honestly, the news cycle changes so quickly, I can't see this really causing any long term issues. The biggest problem they'll face is that they need to replace the show with something that generate advertising revenue similar to Kimmel (and possibly some additional black friday promotions for Disney+,Hulu,Etc).

While this may have short term impacts to Disney's Q4 numbers, it probably doesn't have a lot of long term effects. In all likelihood, you could probably just buy the dip if you enjoy the generally meandering trajectory of the stock.

 

[peder]

The biggest problem they'll face is that they need to replace the show with something that generate advertising revenue similar to Kimmel

And that's the million dollar question, no? If they had something that would perform at least comparably to Kimmel, they would have replaced him years ago, because he's been terrible ratingswise and has not delivered the Under 40 crowd at all. He's basically invisible to them (until this week, of course).

Are there any people in the Mr. Beast sphere that could fill a show during that hour? Any other famous streamers or their underlings that could helm an evening show with fresh gags?

 

[Obi-J Kenobi]

It's not about Disney controlling the US Government, but rather about the US Government controlling Disney. Only ONE of those things is being attempted.

Precisely. That's why zoning laws exist. Tax laws exist. Public health laws exist. Like Covid-19 mandates shutting down DLR for 11-12 months. Do you remember when the government told TWDC it couldn't operate DLR for nearly 1 year? There are motor vehicle / highway rules WDW property. FAA rules on WDW property. There are 2A restrictions that apply to private security for TWDC corporate leaders that don't apply to public law enforcement. Etc. Etc. Federal, state and local governments can curtail freedoms. This is well known and a legal fact that every person and business knows or should know.

If the people don't like the curtailment of freedom(s), they can vote out elected officials in this country, unlike the C.C.P. and the U.A.E. Furthermore, TWDC can lobby for change with elected officials and legisltation, like TWDC said it would do for the Florida educational bill that was passed some years back.

I get it that people are upset that Jimmy got taken off the air because he joked or commented about someone getting assassinated. From looking at some of the PP in this thread there are folks who love Jimmy's takes on the current news and cultural zeitgeist stuff.
I do not like to see people lose their jobs. It's tough. Jimmy Kimmel. Bob Chapek. Etc. Etc. Deserved or undeserved. Everyone is talking about Jimmy right now. How about the entire staff? There are people who run the cameras. Set design. Lighting staff. There are caterers. Writers. Hair and makeup people. They all have jobs because of this late-night show. And, I suspect they are not working today because Jimmy decided that joking or commenting about a murder was a 1A right and by golly he thinks its funny to joke and comment about murder. I'm sure there are people who laughed.

My original point was that TWDC has every right to remove Jimmy or leave Jimmy on the air. They can risk affiliate boycotts, advertising boycotts, protests, backlash, government interference (which the legal department can sue -- I am an attorney and I sue people as part of my job duties). Apparently TWDC would rather "fire" (or suspend) their talent. After all, I am one lonely little voice pointing out that TWDC has a history of firing or dismissing folks for showing a lack of humanity. I haven't even brought up terminated business relationships with Johnny Depp or Jon Lasseter.

I'm quite okay with the posters on here who admire and support Jimmy, his jokes and lack of humanity for someone who was recently assassinated. We are all individuals. I don't expect people to laugh at the same jokes I laugh at. Free will. It's a mystery.

 

[peder]

On the note of YouTubers, I think a show based on PrestonPlayz could work. He's aging out of the traditional YouTube space, but he's charismatic and the format could revolve around interviews with celebrities (who are still promoting their shows) while they play each other on games like Mario Kart.

Big opportunity for cross promotion, and gets celebrities in a slightly more vulnerable / accessible format that also works with younger audiences. It wouldn't have to be entirely focused on gaming in this way, but could be a regular segment.

I think there's gotta be other YouTubers like that who are past their peak within that demo and are now looking for new opportunities and different audiences.

 

[Lisa R]

Doesn't TWDC have a history of firing talent for stupid jokes. If I recall correctly Roseanne Barr, James Gunn, Gina Carano and there was that guy who joked about the Holocaust. I cannot remember his name, but I remember reading about TWDC firing that guy from The Mayans (?) for his jokes about killing Jewish folks. Not in my humor wheelhouse, but free speech it is.

I suppose one could argue that every person has the right to free speech and then it's up to the corporation that platforms their speech whether to continue to platform their speech or tell them to find a different platform. I mean, I guess what I am trying to say is that I would hope that TWDC wouldn't platform that fella who rants like a lunatic on YouTube with the Sandy Hook conspiracy theory stuff (which I believe he was sued for), because I am not sure that is (for lack of a better term) a "humanity message" that TWDC has spent decades trying to cultivate wants to platform. And, frankly, I don't spend enough time on YouTube or other SM sites to know who else is talking straight up crazy stuff.

Apparently Charlie Kirk was a podcaster. I never listened. I am not going to pretend that I was familiar with Charlie Kirk. Maybe Jimmy has an axe to grind? Who knows? Jimmy would've probably kept his job if he didn't tell a joke about a toxic topic (i.e. assassinations). Again, like holocaust jokes, not in my wheelhouse. But, everyone has their own sense of humor. I respect that. There are people who defend folks that joke about slavery. Free will. It's a mystery.

And the firing of Gina Carano came back to bite them - because they settled her lawsuit and apologized to her. If they had restricted ALL of their actors from commenting on politics on social media - they would have been fine - but they didn't do that as they never said anything to Pedro Pascal on his political comments.

Honestly -I remember a time when actors rarely made their politics known (smartly - I might add - why alienate half of your audience?) and when comedians like Johnny Carson joked about politics - they made fun of all sides in a fun way - not in a partisan or political one. I think ABC was looking for an excuse to dump Kimmel as his ratings have been in the dumpster for a long time and they took the opportunity.

 

[BrianL]

Precisely. That's why zoning laws exist. Tax laws exist. Public health laws exist. Like Covid-19 mandates shutting down DLR for 11-12 months. Do you remember when the government told TWDC it couldn't operate DLR for nearly 1 year? There are motor vehicle / highway rules WDW property. FAA rules on WDW property. There are 2A restrictions that apply to private security for TWDC corporate leaders that don't apply to public law enforcement. Etc. Etc. Federal, state and local governments can curtail freedoms. This is well known and a legal fact that every person and business knows or should know.

I'm quite okay with the posters on here who admire and support Jimmy, his jokes and lack of humanity for someone who was recently assassinated. We are all individuals. I don't expect people to laugh at the same jokes I laugh at. Free will. It's a mystery.

While the government has some leeway to curtail certain freedoms, they cannot infringe on constitutionally protected rights. You are talking about a lot of stuff that is not the same thing.

Think what you will of Jimmy, but he has shown nothing but humanity toward the victim in this case. It's the actions of others surrounding the matter that he was being critical of. I admire that Jimmy speaks his mind and calls out our government on their behavior. I actually don't think he's that funny nor do I watch his show regularly outside of the ocassional clip on YouTube.

 

[Fullchaos]

And that's the million dollar question, no? If they had something that would perform at least comparably to Kimmel, they would have replaced him years ago, because he's been terrible ratingswise and has not delivered the Under 40 crowd at all. He's basically invisible to them (until this week, of course).

Are there any people in the Mr. Beast sphere that could fill a show during that hour? Any other famous streamers or their underlings that could helm an evening show with fresh gags?

Possibly, but I think the end of Colbert and the general line up in the late night hour is indicating there's limited runway here. There's more competition from cable and now more windows (why should I wait if I can just stream whoever on youtube / max / disney+). I'm sure they'll find someone to fill in, but I think that position is gradually fading in importance (you're not the next Letterman, Leno, etc).

I imagine Disney thinks it has bigger fish to fry. Remember, it's not just Sinclair looking for government approval right now, Disney also needs it from the DOJ for the merger of Hulu with Fubo.

 

[peder]

Possibly, but I think the end of Colbert and the general line up in the late night hour is indicating there's limited runway here. There's more competition from cable and now more windows (why should I wait if I can just stream whoever on youtube / max / disney+). I'm sure they'll find someone to fill in, but I think that position is gradually fading in importance (you're not the next Letterman, Leno, etc).

Definitely, it's 100% fading in importance. But so is the entirety of linear TV except for a few things like live news and sports yet they still seem committed to the model, so surely they'll try something at some point to reinvent / freshen up their lineup? A while back Disney merged the Hulu + ABC teams so that they weren't two separate entities creating different types of shows; at the time, I took that as a sign that ABC's linear model was going to be tweaked potentially pretty substantially at some point.

I imagine Disney thinks it has bigger fish to fry. Remember, it's not just Sinclair looking for government approval right now, Disney also needs it from the DOJ for the merger of Hulu with Fubo.

Oof, great point. All the more reason to think that Kimmel is not coming back.

 

[Obi-J Kenobi]

they cannot infringe on constitutionally protected rights.

First you brought up government control over TWDC. So I give you all sorts of examples how the government controls and doesn't control TWDC. Also, I brought up a 2A (constitutionally protected) infringement and you failed to note that.

Now, your reply moves to constitutionally protected rights for TWDC. Citizen United without question expanded free speech rights for corporations. But, corporations do not have coequal 1A rights as persons. In other words there are some commercial speech and political speech that is protected, but then there are infringements on 1A rights. Copyright laws. Trademark laws. FCC regulations. Laws that band deceptive practices (i.e. misleading or false information). SEC rules. Banking rules. Lots of industries have to face infringements upon 1A free speech rights.

Example: If ABC network talent says "F-word Donald Trump" or "F-word Gavin Newsome" on broadcast television as political speech, does TWDC get to tell the FCC that you cannot infringe 1A free speech rights or do you think the FCC can say that violates our rules?

You can get the last word in, because you admire Jimmy and that's your choice and I don't care.