“AND ONCE AGAIN, THEY BLAME THE REVENUE”: Disney CEO Bob Iger and Entertainment Co-Chair Dana Walden Point to Plummeting Ratings and Weak Ad Revenue as the Real Reason Behind ABC’s Shocking Suspension of ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ After Host’s Remarks on Charlie Kirk’s Death”
It was a Tuesday night, and the lights of Hollywood glowed as millions tuned in to “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” expecting the usual blend of comedy and commentary. But what they witnessed was something altogether different—a moment of clarity, candor, and cultural critique that would reverberate far beyond the walls of the studio.
“He’s just a normal person like everyone else,” Jimmy Kimmel affirmed, referencing the recently assassinated conservative firebrand Charlie Kirk. “Don’t try to worship Charlie Kirk like a god.”
With those words, Kimmel didn’t just weigh in on a controversy; he challenged an entire culture—a culture that has, in recent years, blurred the lines between public figures and deities, between politics and personal faith. The internet exploded. Clips of Kimmel’s monologue were shared by fans and critics alike, sparking fierce debate about hero worship, political tribalism, and the meaning of leadership in America.
The Spark: Charlie Kirk’s Legacy and the Rise of Political Celebrity
Charlie Kirk was no stranger to controversy. As the founder of Turning Point USA, he built his reputation on confrontation, media savvy, and unapologetic conservatism. To his supporters, Kirk was more than a commentator—he was a movement, a symbol, an icon. His death, sudden and violent, was mourned with vigils, tributes, and hashtags.
But as the tributes poured in, a new kind of rhetoric began to emerge—one that went beyond remembrance and entered the realm of reverence. Social media feeds filled with posts likening Kirk to a martyr, a prophet, even a saint. Some called for statues, others for holidays in his honor.
It was against this backdrop that Jimmy Kimmel delivered his now-famous rebuke, urging Americans to resist the temptation to elevate political figures to the status of gods.
The Anatomy of Celebrity Worship: Why We Idolize Public Figures
To understand the power—and danger—of Kimmel’s words, it is necessary to examine the roots of celebrity worship in American culture. From movie stars to athletes to politicians, the United States has always been a nation of icons. But in recent years, the line between admiration and adulation has grown perilously thin.
Psychologists call it the “cult of personality”—a phenomenon in which public figures are imbued with superhuman qualities, their flaws erased, their virtues exaggerated. In the political arena, this tendency can be especially toxic, distorting public debate and undermining democratic values.
“Celebrity worship is a form of psychological projection,” explains Dr. Susan Miller, a professor of media studies at UCLA. “We see in our heroes what we wish we saw in ourselves. But when it comes to politics, this can lead to dangerous forms of tribalism and authoritarianism.”
Kimmel’s warning, then, was not just about Charlie Kirk—it was about the future of American democracy itself.
The Media Machine: How Politics Became Entertainment
The rise of political celebrity is inseparable from the evolution of American media. In the age of cable news, social media, and viral video, politicians are not just leaders—they are entertainers, influencers, brands.
Charlie Kirk understood this better than most. His speeches were designed for maximum impact, his tweets crafted for virality. He appeared on podcasts, radio shows, and YouTube channels, cultivating an audience that was loyal, passionate, and, at times, uncritical.
But the media machine is a double-edged sword. It can elevate ordinary people to extraordinary heights, but it can also strip away nuance, complexity, and humanity. The result is a culture in which political figures are worshipped or demonized—rarely understood.
Kimmel’s intervention was, in this sense, a call for a return to reality. “He’s just a normal person like everyone else,” he reminded viewers. “Don’t try to worship Charlie Kirk like a god.”
The Internet Reacts: Outrage, Empathy, and the Echo Chamber
The response to Kimmel’s monologue was immediate and intense. Supporters praised his courage, calling the speech “a breath of fresh air in a suffocating media landscape.” Critics accused him of disrespecting Kirk’s legacy, of trivializing grief, of stoking division.
On Twitter, hashtags like #KimmelTruth and #KirkMartyr trended side by side. Reddit threads dissected every word, while YouTube commentators posted reaction videos, some applauding Kimmel’s candor, others denouncing his “Hollywood elitism.”
But beneath the noise, a deeper conversation began to emerge—a conversation about the nature of heroism, the dangers of idolatry, and the need for humility in public life.
The Psychology of Idolatry: Why We Need Heroes—And Why We Must Resist Worship
Why do we idolize public figures? The answer, psychologists say, lies in the human need for meaning, connection, and belonging. In times of crisis, we look to leaders for guidance, comfort, and hope. But when admiration becomes worship, the consequences can be dire.
“Idolatry is the enemy of democracy,” says Dr. Miller. “It replaces critical thinking with blind loyalty, dialogue with dogma, citizenship with fandom.”
The phenomenon is not new. From Caesar to Kennedy to Trump, history is replete with examples of leaders who were revered as saviors, only to be undone by the very adulation that sustained them.
Kimmel’s warning was, in this sense, both timely and timeless. “Don’t try to worship Charlie Kirk like a god,” he said. “Remember that he was human—flawed, complex, and, ultimately, mortal.”
The Dangers of Political Idolatry: From Tribalism to Authoritarianism
When political figures are worshipped, democracy suffers. Debate becomes impossible, dissent is silenced, and the public square is transformed into a battlefield of absolutes.
In the wake of Kirk’s death, some supporters called for “unquestioning loyalty” to his ideals, while critics urged a return to critical engagement. The divide was not just political—it was existential.
“Political idolatry is a form of tribalism,” explains Dr. Miller. “It creates in-groups and out-groups, heroes and villains, saints and sinners. The result is polarization, gridlock, and, in extreme cases, violence.”
Kimmel’s speech was a plea for moderation—a reminder that no leader is above scrutiny, and no movement is immune to error.
The Role of Comedy: Truth-Telling in an Age of Outrage
Comedy has long served as a vehicle for social critique, a way to speak truth to power and puncture the pretensions of the mighty. From Mark Twain to Jon Stewart, comedians have wielded humor as a weapon against hypocrisy, injustice, and folly.
Kimmel’s monologue was part of this tradition—a moment of levity in the midst of tragedy, but also a forceful assertion of democratic values. By refusing to sanctify Kirk, Kimmel challenged viewers to think critically, to resist the allure of easy answers and simple heroes.
“Comedy is the last refuge of honesty,” says Dr. Miller. “It allows us to confront uncomfortable truths, to laugh at our own follies, and, sometimes, to change our minds.”
The Legacy of Charlie Kirk: Mourning, Memory, and Meaning
As the nation mourned Kirk’s death, the question of his legacy loomed large. Would he be remembered as a visionary, a provocateur, a martyr, or simply as a man who lived and died in turbulent times?
For his supporters, the answer was clear. Kirk had inspired a generation, challenged the status quo, and given voice to the frustrations of millions. For his critics, the legacy was more complicated—a mix of innovation and division, passion and polarization.
Kimmel’s speech did not seek to erase Kirk’s contributions, but to place them in context. “He’s just a normal person like everyone else,” Kimmel insisted. “Let’s remember him as he was—not as we wish he was.”
The Culture of Grief: Public Mourning in the Social Media Age
The death of a public figure is always a moment of collective reckoning. In the age of social media, grief is no longer private—it is performed, shared, and, at times, commodified.
Vigils for Kirk were livestreamed on Facebook, tributes posted on Instagram, debates waged on Twitter. The rituals of mourning became opportunities for political expression, ideological affirmation, and, sometimes, conflict.
Kimmel’s intervention was a call for restraint—a reminder that grief, like heroism, must be grounded in reality.
The Path Forward: Empathy, Accountability, and the Art of Remembrance
What, then, can we learn from Kimmel’s speech—and from the controversy it sparked? In a culture that prizes spectacle over substance, worship over wisdom, the challenge is to recover the values of empathy, accountability, and humility.
“We must honor our leaders,” Kimmel said, “but we must never worship them. Democracy depends on our ability to question, to debate, to disagree.”
The path forward is not easy. It requires us to resist the temptations of idolatry, to embrace the complexities of public life, to remember that every leader—no matter how celebrated—is, in the end, only human.
Epilogue: Deconstructing the Cult of Personality—A Call to Citizenship
As the furor over Kimmel’s remarks subsides, and as the nation turns its attention to new controversies, the lesson remains. The cult of personality is seductive, but it is also corrosive. It undermines the foundations of democracy, erodes the values of citizenship, and transforms leaders into idols—at great cost to the public good.
Kimmel’s speech was a reminder that, in the end, the health of our democracy depends not on our heroes, but on ourselves. It is we, the people, who must hold our leaders accountable, who must resist the allure of worship, who must insist on the dignity of ordinary humanity.
“He’s just a normal person like everyone else,” Kimmel said. It was a simple truth, but in a culture addicted to spectacle, it was also a radical act.