CHRONICALLY ONLINE
Why couldn’t it have been Stephen Colbert?
The president is waging war against late-night TV, but Jimmy Kimmel has won a battle Colbert could not.
The president is waging war against late-night TV, but Jimmy Kimmel has won a battle Colbert could not.


Who would have thought that there would be a time when Jimmy Kimmel — one of the most Wonderbread, inoffensive (depending on who you ask and how far back you’re looking) presences in Hollywood — would be the face of the anti-censorship movement in the mid-2020s?
We’re talking about the guy whom I’ve complained about for hosting the Oscars four times, because I kind of laughed sometimes in between the mild misogyny during each ceremony. Where was this reaction when “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” got canceled following a snide comment about CBS breaking bad with the Trump administration?
Kimmel’s status as a free-speech crusader is a result of Disney-controlled ABC temporarily suspending “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” after the host joked about Trump and other prolific conservatives’ public reactions to the assassination of far-right political commentator and podcaster Charlie Kirk.
After explicitly condemning any celebration regarding Kirk’s death, Kimmel pointed his criticism away from the podcaster, taking jabs at those attempting to reject the circumstances of his death to support their agendas.
“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,” Kimmel said during the Sept. 15 monologue, “and doing everything they can to score political points from it.”
Kimmel also took some direct hits at Trump, pointing out the president’s lack of visible remorse at Kirk’s death before criticizing Trump’s followers for attempting to capitalize on the assassination in the hopes of galvanizing fellow conservatives during a monologue on Sept. 16.
On Truth Social, Trump accused Kimmel of scheming on behalf of the Democratic Party and asked ABC why it would put itself in “jeopardy by playing 99% positive Democrat GARBAGE.”
Despite being hilariously hyperbolic, this statement is terrifying when, considering the only true threat to ABC’s ratings comes from Trump as opposed to outcries from working-class, American citizens, the jeopardy ABC did face would only be from Trump himself.
The production of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” was suspended by ABC on Sept. 17. ABC issued a wet-blanket statement on the suspension, condemning Kimmel’s comments as insensitive and accusing him of making light of Kirk’s death.
I mean, come on, at least be accurate in what you’re lying about. Kimmel never said anything lighthearted about Kirk’s death, only poking fun at the big guy and his cronies — And if this column ever gets taken off the internet, you know why!
They followed up their whopper with something that would be funny if it wasn’t terrifying: justifying their actions as “an effort to let cooler heads prevail as we move toward the resumption of respectful, constructive dialogue.”
Nothing says “cooler heads” like suspending a show so popular that it has become ubiquitous in American culture. However, this wasn’t the end: Trump poked the bellies of several celebrities with devoted fanbases of young, liberal women — the worst thing anyone can do when policing opinions.
Stars like Olivia Rodrigo and Pedro Pascal took to their social media to support Kimmel and condemn the suspension, mobilizing their troops to join the boycott of Disney-owned properties, including ABC.
Apparently, Disney couldn’t bear to lose their pocket money, and Tuesday night, Kimmel returned to his show to deliver an almost 20-minute monologue complete with more remorse and guilt than Trump has yet shown about Kirk’s death. Three days passed, and Kimmel had risen.
What scared me about this situation wasn’t just Trump’s blatant and arrogant wielding of presidential power to violate the First Amendment — and ABC rolling over at the first sign of trouble — but also the fact that Kimmel is one of the least provocative late-night hosts out there.
If Jimmy Fallon weren’t around, Kimmel would be the most family-friendly yukster on air — and it took a nearly instant and highly powered tidal wave of backlash to bring back one of late night’s golden boys.
Trump may be stupid, but he’s not an idiot. Late-night television — especially thanks to social media making viral clips out of a late-night taping — is a direct route to the average, working-class American. These pre-planned, little anecdotal cuts of celebrity life become reality to people who don’t have time to do their research.
Furthermore, hosts are figureheads of productions created by small armies of people, including writers with their ears to the ground. Late-night shows don’t generate, they synthesize; they reflect what their audiences can relate to rather than sway the public in a certain direction.
By targeting a medium that echoes the majority voice of its viewers — especially when that majority is anti-Trump — the president is following through on a promise made after the more provocative Stephen Colbert was taken off air by Paramount.
“The word is, and it’s a strong word at that, Jimmy Kimmel is NEXT to go in the untalented late-night sweepstakes and, shortly thereafter, Fallon will be gone,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post July 22. “These are people with absolutely no talent, who were paid millions of dollars for, in all cases, destroying what used to be great television. It’s really good to see them go, and I hope I played a major part in it!”
Strange times call for strange bedfellows, and though I think Colbert deserves to be back on air significantly more than Kimmel, it’s in my best interest to back his return to television. That being said, I will continue to tune in to the beautiful and more youthful Seth Meyers.
Anna Jordan is a junior writing about pop culture controversies in her column, “Chronically Online,” which runs every other Thursday. She is also an arts and entertainment editor at the Daily Trojan.
We are the only independent newspaper here at USC, run at every level by students. That means we aren’t tied down by any other interests but those of readers like you: the students, faculty, staff and South Central residents that together make up the USC community.
Independence is a double-edged sword: We have a unique lens into the University’s actions and policies, and can hold powerful figures accountable when others cannot. But that also means our budget is severely limited. We’re already spread thin as we compensate the writers, photographers, artists, designers and editors whose incredible work you see in our paper; as we work to revamp and expand our digital presence, we now have additional staff making podcasts, videos, webpages, our first ever magazine and social media content, who are at risk of being unable to receive the support they deserve.
We are therefore indebted to readers like you, who, by supporting us, help keep our paper independent, free and widely accessible.
Please consider supporting us. Even $1 goes a long way in supporting our work; if you are able, you can also support us with monthly, or even annual, donations. Thank you.
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept settingsDo Not AcceptWe may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.
Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.
These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.
Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refusing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.
We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.
We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.
These cookies collect information that is used either in aggregate form to help us understand how our website is being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are, or to help us customize our website and application for you in order to enhance your experience.
If you do not want that we track your visit to our site you can disable tracking in your browser here:
We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.
Google Webfont Settings:
Google Map Settings:
Google reCaptcha Settings:
Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:
The following cookies are also needed - You can choose if you want to allow them:
