re: ABC pulls 'Jimmy Kimmel Live' off air 'indefintely' over Charlie Kirk comments

quote:

---

Dude, just take the "L"

---

I would gladly, were I to lose

quote:

---

He clearly said that MAGA was trying to push a narrative

---

Yes

quote:

---

and he was going to double down on blaming MAGA

---

for what?

quote:

---

And its been days since, and he still hasnt 'clarified' his comment on any form of social media

---

So?

quote:

---

Kimmel is batshit insane. Hes ate up.

---

Yes

quote:

---

He fully intended to say that a white kid, raised in Mormon Utah, from Repub gun-owning parents, was "one of them".

---

Are you a mind reader? Because he definitely never said that, He could have.

quote:

---

Just accept it. And move on. You missed on this one. It happens

---

Seems kinda weak for you to claim victory when you haven't even landed a point, nor refuted anything relative to the argument. Reeks of insecurity.

quote:

---

The right was calling the kid a tranny commie from the moment the bullet struck Kirk.

---

Kimmel's comments are specifically "over the weekend". I'm not sure why you want to broaden the timeline here.

quote:

---

because he says they are trying to point fingers anduse the murder to score points on the left

That is the "new low" he is talking about

---

That's been established since the beginning of this controversy. And something that I posted in the first post you responded to. "He believed that the right was pointing fingers and scoring political points."

I pointed that out to establish that Kimmel didn't believe that the right was correcting the record (something that the right was in fact doing). A point that confused you greatly for some reason.

And if Kimmel didn't believe they were correcting the record, he believed that the shooter might have been MAGA.

quote:

---

nope, all part of the same bit.

---

The bit references "new lows". You're taking the two different lows and combining them into one large low. That's not what Kimmel said. Maybe that's what you hear but that's not what he said.

The fact is that there are different ways to interpret the meaning of his statement. Given the events surrounding the weekend, his description of those events and his personal politics, people are free to draw their own conclusions.

Here’s a pretty good article on what yall are arguing about. If you’d just accept that it was a poorly worded statement that obviously can be interpreted in multiple ways, you’d save yourselves some time arguing about it.

quote:

---

The overwhelming read on this has been: Jimmy Kimmel said, or at least strongly suggested, that Robinson was MAGA. That’s been the contention of countless conservatives and plenty of not-so-conservatives. And the facts about Robinson released by authorities so far suggest the suspect was not, in fact, MAGA (according to The New York Times, his mother told prosecutors that her son had recently shifted toward the political left and had become “more pro-gay and trans-rights oriented,” among other details about the suspect).

But let’s take a close look at this section: “….the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them….”

As part of a sentence, this is so blurry that your eyes cross trying to get it. Kimmel doesn’t actually say “this kid” was “one of them.” You could read it a different way: Robinson wasn’t MAGA, and therefore MAGA is out there trying to characterize him as something else. Or even: Who knows if Robinson was or wasn’t MAGA, either way MAGA is trying to score points based on his politics.

Kimmel himself would seem to be of this opinion. In Hollywood Reporter‘s latest story detailing how the suspension went down behind the scenes, Kimmel is said to have been “defending what he said [as] being grossly mischaracterized by a certain group of people.”

That said, it’s also reasonable to read the comment the way most are taking it. The snarky tone. The use of “desperately.” Kimmel’s well-established anti-MAGA stance. The debate around the killer’s motives, which have seen others on the left attempt to insist he’s a conservative. All this context make it natural to assume Kimmel simply meant, “Hey, we all know this kid is MAGA and now MAGA is out there trying to convince everyone he isn’t.” That was, admittedly, the whole vibe (and was how I took it). Yet its clunky wording make this line into a Rorschach test the more you look at it. There is some element of presumption — a bit of connective tissue formed in the mind of the reader — which converts it from the exact words he said into the inflammatory conclusion that has been widely reached.

Now. Do these alternative possible meanings change anything?

Not really.

In an essay I wrote in January about Elon Musk’s viral so-called “Nazi salute,” I pointed out that communications experts agree that being understood properly is the responsibility of the speaker. That if you’re widely misinterpreted for something you said or did, it’s not your audience’s fault, it’s your fault. Same goes here. If a tidal wave of angry people assume Kimmel meant one thing and it causes a huge network headache, even if it wasn’t what he intended, the man still made a poor choice of words if a reasonable person could view it the “wrong” way. Hopefully, this is a mistake that won’t spell the end of Kimmel’s career. If he was going to blow out of late night by saying something hugely controversial on air, Kimmel would surely have preferred to say something that was perfectly clear.

---

Hollywood Reporter Article

The story of what happened came out yesterday. You guys are using Wednesday Info. Kimmel was in contract negotiations that weren’t going his way because of the shows viewership. He made those comments on purpose, he said it and meant it then when ABC told him to tamp it down he gave them the finger so they suspended him. There’s zero ambiguity about what he said and meant anymore. You guys are arguing over a settled point.

quote:

---

There’s zero ambiguity about what he said and meant anymore.

---

Lmao there clearly is ambiguity if you understand the english language.

Wrong again, the full story is out, you just don’t know about it yet.

quote:

---

the full story is out

---

I mean yeah, but that wont stop you from insisting he meant the shooter was maga.

The “political points” comment itself tells me he was being mean spirited, had zero respect for anything Charlie Kirk or the shooting and that he vastly underestimated how genuinely upset people are about losing him. Even those that didn’t really know him became upset the more they learned.

change one word and what Kimmel said is actually true

quote:

---

We hit some new lows over the weekend with the Leftists gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said during his show’s Monday monologue.

---

quote:

---

change one word and what Kimmel said is actually true

quote:
We hit some new lows over the weekend with the Leftists gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said during his show’s Monday monologue.

---

Both are true. Both sides were trying to claim the shooter was anything other than one of them.