express gazette logo
The Express Gazette
Monday, January 26, 2026

Disney weighs Kimmel return as profits, politics collide

exec: The decision to unsuspend Jimmy Kimmel Live! comes amid complex economics, regulatory scrutiny, and a shifting public stance for Disney.

Culture & Entertainment 4 months ago
Disney weighs Kimmel return as profits, politics collide

Jimmy Kimmel is returning to host Jimmy Kimmel Live! on Tuesday after Disney announced his unsuspension on Monday, a move described by people close to the matter as a difficult balance between corporate risk and late-night programming leverage. The decision ends a weeklong suspension prompted by ill-timed remarks about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. While Iger has faced scrutiny for his handling of the incident and the host’s now-familiar barbs about the Trump administration, the ultimate calculus was as much financial as it was political.

The controversy itself sits inside a broader set of pressures surrounding Disney’s late-night asset and the company’s evolving strategy under CEO Bob Iger, who has been at the helm off and on for about two decades. Disney insiders say the choice to bring Kimmel back reflects the economics of a show that, by some measures, remains profitable for the company even as ratings and ad revenue have cooled. Kimmel’s annual compensation is reported to be around $16 million, and the program employs a large staff of roughly 200 people. In public-facing terms, Disney benefits from a confluence of revenue streams tied to Kimmel, including affiliate fees from ABC stations, online advertising, and sponsorships, as well as the high‑visibility platform the host provides for events like the Oscars.

[Image: ]

Still, the business case is not simple. Even as Disney and the broader broadcast ecosystem contend with a long-term decline in movie theater attendance and volatility in streaming monetization, the company’s own accounting suggests that continuing to operate Kimmel’s show makes financial sense because it contributes to brand building, advertiser interest in other ABC programming, and cross-promotional opportunities. A person close to the deliberations said, in essence, that Kimmel’s leverage is “profit with a cost.” In other words, the show can be profitable rather than simply breaking even, even if its ratings have fallen in recent years and ad sales have softened.

The controversy reverberates beyond Disney’s balance sheet. Federal regulators have flagged potential public-interest concerns about Kimmel’s remarks. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has indicated that Kimmel’s monologue about who bears responsibility for Kirk’s death could raise questions under the rules governing free television and the public interest standard for over-the-air broadcasts. Rival networks’ affiliates, including Nexstar and Sinclair, which carry ABC programming, face their own regulatory and political pressures as they seek to sell ads against content that is increasingly polarizing for national audiences. Nexstar, in particular, is navigating a $6 billion deal to acquire Tegna’s stations that hinges on FCC approval amid a fraught advertising climate.

Beyond the regulatory and financial metrics, Disney’s broader political positioning adds another layer of complexity. Since Iger’s return in 2022, the company has been recalibrating its public stance, seeking to distance itself from what some observers describe as overly progressive content in children’s programming. That recalibration—not unlike similar moves at other media houses—has raised concerns among some audiences in Middle America about the company’s values, with potential knock-on effects on theme-park attendance and the reception of Disney films. Net effect: while Kimmel remains a revenue driver and a brand asset, his show sits at the nexus of a corporate strategy that must balance public perception, regulatory risk, and the evolving economics of a media landscape reshaped by streaming.

Disney did not provide a comment on the decision beyond confirming the move to unsuspend Kimmel and noting that he would resume his duties. In the end, insiders acknowledge that the decision reflects a hard balance between the host’s profitability and the political and regulatory climate surrounding his remarks, a balance that Disney will continue to manage as it pursues future deals in television and beyond.


Sources