The feed unfiltered and the commentary silenced
We live in a moment where the Charlie Kirk assassination video can surface on social media, travel without friction, and spread without any real ability for people to stop it from showing up in their feeds.
Simultaneously, we are living in a time of effective censorship on the airwaves.
The latest example of this occurred this week with the indefinite suspension of Jimmy Kimmel Live! after host Jimmy Kimmel said “the MAGA gang [is] 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.”
Broadcast TV, unlike social platforms, is the part of our media system that is licensed by the government and bound by rules (IE there are content restrictions on things like obscenity and requirements for programming for public safety, etc.). Even though broadcasters have a fraction of audiences that live on social platforms, they get pulled into federal regulatory frameworks, creating a strange dynamic that is coming to light amidst today’s volatile media environment where the idea of “free speech” is increasingly politicized and scrutinized.
The day after the Kimmel segment aired, Brendan Carr, FCC chairman, told conservative podcast host Benny Johnson on his podcast The Benny Show that Kimmel’s comments were “some of the sickest conduct possible.” He warned that ABC and Disney could face regulatory consequences -- possibly fines or license revocations -- if they did not act.
Almost immediately, Nexstar Media Group announced it would stop airing Jimmy Kimmel Live! on its 32 ABC-affiliated stations. Then ABC, owned by Disney, “preempted” the show indefinitely. Sinclair, another broadcast group, said it would not air the show unless “appropriate steps” were taken -- such as an apology or other corrections.
The regulation of content and tech are intrinsically linked, and I discussed this with former FTC commissioner Alvaro Bedoya this week on the podcast.
We spoke about the need for regulation around the content generated by AI chatbots like ChatGPT, and how the incentives of tech companies to create engaging products are misaligned with public safety, especially the mental health and wellbeing of kids and teenagers.
Alvaro has a hard line view: these bots should not be targeting minors, and if they do, they must adhere to guidelines. He also believes kids shouldn’t be using tools like ChatGPT at all, given the absence of any meaningful regulation at the moment.
Tiktok failed to load.Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser
This is a sensitive and intense moment for the media.
I had spent the last week talking to media executives about coming on the show to talk about how images and videos of political violence move around the social web, and what the rollback of content moderation on platforms really means. But after the Kimmel pause, some of my potential guests who had originally agreed to discuss the subject were suddenly worried about going on record.
We push down in one place, and content pops up in another. The circle is already closed -- surveillance, content distribution and speech regulation are all intertwined. The FCC licenses the airwaves. The FTC is supposed to protect consumers. But in the digital environment, it’s the platforms that are holding all the cards.