Km411

How many licks does it take? 😂 Seriously, from this discussion it appears there could be many variables: (1) self-identification, (2) physical attraction, (3) frequency, (4) deportment, (5) sexual activity, (6) emotional attraction, (6) perception. And there are others not alluded to here, e.g., anatomical features. I default to self-identification because do we really need more stratifications in our society?

Did some additional AI research on this: Tylenol maintains it never advised pregnant women not to use Tylenol, and the 2017 twitter post was in response to a consumer inquiry and taken out of context. The original post to which Tylenol responded, has long since been deleted. So, not sure how Tylenol can claim it was taken out of context. In any event, its labeling has been consistent (including in 2017)—pregnant or breastfeeding women should ask a health professional before use.

Me, too; sorry to hear he left the forum.

And the best part—no concessions other than “discussions”. Why? Because they were WRONG (and grossly misjudged the situation). The vast majority of Americans, including BTC and BSR, value free speech. This means valuing speech we disagree with. Indeed, those in power today owe it to free speech; they could never have overcome the abuses of the PC/cancel culture dynamics without it. Say what you need to, win over others in the marketplace of ideas, but don’t get lazy and suppress. The ends never justify the means. Never.

Tylenol’s official label in 2017 did not tell pregnant women “do not use” Tylenol, it said pregnant or breastfeeding women should ask a health professional before use. The social media post you refer to was not a change to the product label and, per the company, was in fact taken out of context. Their labeling has been consistent. And it remains the safest among alternatives. You’re free to take medical guidance from social media; I’ll stick with FDA-vetted and approved warning labels pre-dating the current administration.

This is not true; historically, it was recommended, if pregnant, to consult a physician before use. There’s a difference. Tylenol (acetaminophen) has long been considered a safer alternative for use by pregnant women than the alternatives.

As politics continues on its present course, I suspect we’ll hear of more instances of this. It seems inevitable because for many (on both sides) the issues are perceived as incomprehensible and even existential. Unfortunately, this hobby is one of the few escapes from it all.

I don’t know if my mom smoked while she was pregnant, but she smoked in the car with the window barely cracked for most of my childhood. She wondered why I always got car sick. I loved her, but damn.

Let’s be clear, it’s not acetaminophen that causes autism, it’s Tylenol. Why only Tylenol? Because he has a grudge against the CEO of the manufacturer (and because he can’t pronounce acetaminophen) 😆

Honestly, shows like these offer little escape from the drama playing out in the headlines. I need an escape. What’s playing on the Hallmark channel?

It’s not unfortunate for me; I have no vested interest in the fate of broadcast tv or Kimmel’s earnings. I haven’t watched network tv in years. I’m just making an informed observation. I could be wrong, but doubt it. If I’m right, stars will not be made and paid by ABC, NBC, or CBS; their relevance diminishes with every passing hour, and their suppression of free speech only hastens it. It’s baffling (and a bit amusing) that you cling to debunked talking points about ratings even after ABC admitted its rationale was otherwise. While you and I likely have little in common, I bet we share a belief in free speech. I’m astonished you won’t (or can’t) allow for even the possibility the circumstances of the suspension might jeopardize this bedrock of our civil liberties. But perhaps you are aptly named.

He’ll make more on alternative platforms. Broadcast tv is dead for key demographics.

Kimmel doesn’t need ABC or the Sinclair affiliates; Kimmel is the platform. And Sinclair could take a lesson from Kimmel on professionalism, accountability, and moral standards.

After significant public pressure, Disney has allowed Jimmy Kimmel back on air. In a new statement, Disney writes: “Last Wednesday, we made the decision to suspend production on the show to avoid further inflaming a tense situation at an emotional moment for our country. It is a decision we made because we felt some of the comments were ill-timed and thus insensitive. We have spent the last days having thoughtful conversations with Jimmy, and after those conversations, we reached the decision to return the show on Tuesday." Wait, I thought the show was suspended because of poor ratings?!

Not mentioned in connection with ratings decline is the fact that Kimmel has 20.8M subscribers on his YouTube channel. Sure, it’s promo for the broadcast show, but these platforms are where the younger demographic lives. Will these cancellations hasten the demise of broadcast tv?

Kimmel’s not the victim, we (including you) are. You can’t see it yet, but you will. It’s sad.

Love this.

The sad truth is that all who believe they are being legitimized and vindicated by these tactics ultimately will be subjugated by them. The ends never justify the means. Never.

I hope that SNL is not careful and that they continue to hold up the mirror for as long as possible.

If he’d been cancelled for failed ratings, your point would be relevant. But you know that’s not true; he was canceled to suppress dissent. You might think that’s ok, if he doesn’t share your values. The problem you have is this works both ways. This will hit home for you (and likely sooner than you think), but I suspect by then it will be too late. That’s the point.

If only it were limited to healthcare….

Adding to some those mentioned here, BBC World News and Ground News (a news aggregator that measures bias).

I thought your reference to the “market” was the market for viewership, not program mismanagement, given your reference to Fallon being the least political (as if to say that Colbert’s political satire was driving away viewership). I’ve not been challenging the decision to cancel, only the statements that Colbert is culturally irrelevant, etc, because it’s just not true. That Fallon is the least political has nothing to do with viewership market forces when Colbert’s viewership is higher. That was my point. Respectfully.

Not in his case. Fallon’s ratings have been lower than Colbert’s. He might have been renewed for a variety of reasons (cheaper production, etc) but it’s not the market driving it.

Q1 2025 ratings were 2.4M. No denying a decline in ratings but “culturally irrelevant” is just silly.