Hacker News Reader

Comment by suzdude | Hacker News Reader

Correct, you did. You omitted the quote. If you choose to add meaning, or put words in Mr. Kimmel's mouth, that is your decision.

In any case, if you think such a statement is objectionable, then you would conclude many statements made by the current president would prevent any network from putting him on air, correct?

View on HN

Yeah, when the president starts a television network, gets a broadcast license from the FCC (under which he must meet “public interest” requirements), spins up a late night program, and then begins deliberately spreading misinformation to score political points, then yes, threaten to revoke his license.

Why are you are ignoring the question? You are creating a hypothetical to ignore it.

Under your view, the networks, as they stand, should never have allowed him on the airwaves to begin with.

How’s the state of Fox’s license look to you? Or have they never ever spread misinformation for political purposes?

Have they ever spread information for political purposes?

How many examples are you looking for, and for what time period? I could probably list a few dozen examples scoped to just the last 24 hours. Looking further back this is a pretty well known example https://apnews.com/article/fox-news-dominion-lawsuit-trial-t...

You do realize I questioned if Fox ever spread anything else than misinformation.

The president of the USA is a de facto “public interest” position. The burden of acting and speaking in the public interest is the whole dang job.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com