Opinion | Kimmel’s YouTube win should rattle traditional broadcasters

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

When Disney announced last week that it would end the suspension of Jimmy Kimmel’s show after several days of protest, subscription cancellations and boycotts, defenders of the First Amendment (on all points of the political spectrum) rejoiced.

That victory came with an asterisk, however, after Sinclair Broadcast Group and Nexstar Media Group initially doubled down on their decisions to preempt the show across the roughly 70 ABC affiliate stations they own between them — nearly a quarter of the network’s reach. Both companies agreed to begin airing the show again Friday, three days after the network itself had. (ABC is a subsidiary of the Walt Disney Co.)

But just when it seemed like the power of media consolidation would trump the will of the public, audiences had the last laugh on YouTube. The record-breaking 21 million (and counting) views that Kimmel’s Tuesday monologue has drawn on the platform should rattle traditional broadcasters like Sinclair and Nexstar because it confirms YouTube’s power in redefining how Americans consume television.

In today’s media landscape, where viewers have unprecedented autonomy to watch whatever they want, Kimmel’s return was essentially an open-book test — one that Sinclair and Nexstar initially failed. The two companies should consider whether their stubbornness could contribute to their own obsolescence.

Both might be relieved that Kimmel’s Wednesday and Thursday monologues — currently under 8 million and 2 million views on YouTube, respectively — aren’t climbing as quickly as Tuesday’s. But that’s unsurprising; Tuesday’s show was nothing less than a historical event, and that urgency is difficult to recapture. It doesn’t negate the fact that the dynamics of television are not in Sinclair and Nexstar’s favor.

Their older counterparts were traditionally more likely to watch live television and broadcast networks, but even that is changing. As the New York Times noted over the summer, “since 2023, viewers over 65 are the fastest-growing age group for watching YouTube off a television set.” In other words, Americans who might have tuned into Sinclair or Nexstar stations to watch the return of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” had to go to YouTube. Will that audience return?

But Sinclair and Nexstar didn’t just risk the loss of viewers; their decision put them squarely in the crosshairs of new critics. Before ABC removed Kimmel from the air over his comments on the political fallout of Charlie Kirk’s murder, the average TV viewer likely had no idea there was any separation between station ownership and the network. Now many of them do, and they’d like to know why a high-profile show wasn’t on their television for much of last week.

Analyses of the ensuing conflict, including what to make of FCC Chairman Brendan Carr’s threats of fines and license revocation if Kimmel wasn’t pulled, have drawn attention to questionable explanations. Nexstar has openly courted the Trump administration and FCC’s support as it attempts a merger that would give it control of a staggering 265 local TV stations totaling 80% of American households, more than double the current 39% ownership limit. Sinclair, meanwhile, is similarly petitioning the FCC for deregulation of the rules regarding broadcast ownership.

And so, to an extent, reinstating Kimmel may have been a smart play on the part of ABC and Disney, because the move allowed them to pass the buck and the blame.

Anyone with a passing knowledge of the history of censorship in America knows how loaded the notion of community standards is, but its application here is particularly puzzling. How can a company be so certain of the “interests” of separate communities across the country? Better yet, how do the members of those communities feel about their standards being determined by corporate offices in New York, Chicago and Irving, Texas?