Nexstar, Sinclair Reject Jimmy Kimmel’s Return to ABC

Nexstar and Sinclair's Decision to Preempt Kimmel’s Show

Nexstar Media Group and Sinclair Broadcast Group, two of the largest owners of local broadcast TV stations in the U.S., have decided to continue preempting ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” in favor of local news programming. Both companies have cited host Jimmy Kimmel’s recent comments as the primary reason for their decision, labeling them as “ill-timed and insensitive” during a period of heightened national discourse. Nexstar, which owns 32 ABC-affiliated stations, stated that their decision would stand until there is assurance from all parties involved regarding fostering an environment of respectful and constructive dialogue. Similarly, Sinclair, operating nearly 40 ABC affiliates, echoed these sentiments and stated that ongoing discussions with ABC would determine the potential return of Kimmel’s show to their networks.

ABC and Disney’s Response to the Controversy

ABC’s parent company, Disney, announced the return of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” following a brief suspension stemming from Kimmel’s controversial remarks. Disney stated that the suspension was implemented to avoid escalating tensions during a sensitive time for the country. The company emphasized that thoughtful conversations with Kimmel influenced their decision to bring him back on air. However, this decision has not alleviated friction with local affiliates like Nexstar and Sinclair, who continue to replace the program with alternative content. Discussions between ABC and these affiliates remain ongoing, with the future of Kimmel’s broadcast on these stations uncertain. Disney has also highlighted that viewers can access Kimmel’s show through its streaming platforms, bypassing local station preemptions.

Broader Implications and FCC Concerns

The controversy surrounding Jimmy Kimmel’s remarks has sparked broader discussions about the role of broadcast networks in shaping public opinion. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr publicly criticized Kimmel’s comments, suggesting they could potentially mislead the public on significant political events. He further hinted at the possibility of regulatory scrutiny, including a review of broadcasting licenses if networks are found to deviate from their obligation to operate in the public interest. This has intensified the debate between free speech advocates and those calling for greater accountability in media content. The situation underscores the challenges faced by broadcasters in balancing editorial independence with regulatory responsibilities, particularly during politically charged times.