Jimmy Kimmel's return is not a win
You could think of this administration as running constant tests. How much will the populace take? How far can they push things? Have they ground people down enough to overwhelm resistance?
Think about what they got out of Jimmy Kimmel pulled off the air:
- 20% of stations are no longer airing him
- The president came out and said criticism should be illegal
- They got to do a major power flex by showing they can pull any tv show they want off the airwaves, all just by saying one sentence on a podcast
- All other performers are now essentially on notice to watch it, or they will become a casualty
Tactical retreats that create the illusion of pushback succeeding are a way for them to go three steps forward, one step back - but really, the net is two steps forward.
Letting Kimmel return after outcry serves multiple purposes: it gives the appearance that resistance works, it allows supporters to point to "proof" that free speech still exists, and it masks the more systematic erosion happening at other levels. Meanwhile, Nexstar and Sinclair self-censoring shows how the pressure campaign is working even without direct enforcement.
The continued DOJ prosecution calls and "negative press should be illegal" rhetoric maintains the underlying threat structure. Even if Kimmel is back on air, every journalist and comedian knows the cost of criticism just went up significantly. The chilling effect operates regardless of whether every specific threat is carried out.
This creates a particularly insidious dynamic where critics feel they've "won" small victories while the overall system continues degrading. It's more psychologically sustainable for both the regime and the population than immediate total suppression would be.
Total immediate suppression often triggers more resistance than this stepped approach where people get small "wins" that make them feel the system is still responsive. It's much harder to organize resistance when you can point to Kimmel being back on air, even as the underlying dynamics have shifted dramatically.
The local station response is especially telling because it shows how authoritarian pressure works through intermediaries. The government doesn't need to directly censor when broadcasters will do it preemptively to avoid trouble. That's often more effective than direct state censorship because it appears voluntary and creates internal conflicts within media organizations.
It's a veneer of progress, with an core of erosion.