Jimmy Kimmel says his interview with James Talarico, the Democratic Senate nominee in Texas, will not air on broadcast television because President Donald Trump’s Federal Communications Commission has created a climate of intimidation around political programming.

The comedian told viewers Wednesday that he still plans to record the conversation Thursday. Instead of appearing on ABC affiliates through “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” however, the interview will be posted on YouTube, safely beyond the FCC pressure facing local television stations.

Kimmel explained that the decision was intended to protect ABC affiliates, particularly stations carrying his program in Texas. Those broadcasters depend on federal licenses, giving Trump appointed regulators a powerful lever for punishing editorial choices that upset the president.

For more than two decades, Kimmel has interviewed Americans seeking public office without this kind of government intrusion. His guest list has included candidates from both major parties, including Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign, when apparently political interviews were still allowed without presidential permission slips.

“Now that he’s president, his FCC has threatened me, threatened our show, threatened our network, ABC, our affiliates, our local stations, based on simple, traditional editorial decisions, guest bookings it would seem they don’t like,” Kimmel said.

FCC Chair Brendan Carr, a Trump appointee, has threatened daytime and late night talk programs with federal action if they interview Democratic candidates without providing a Republican response. That interpretation tears through decades of regulatory practice that gave entertainment and news adjacent programs broad editorial discretion.

The old understanding was straightforward. Federal regulators managed access to publicly owned airwaves, while broadcasters made their own decisions about guests, interviews, comedy, and political coverage without checking whether the White House might throw a tantrum.

That tradition now appears inconvenient for an unpopular president confronting energized Democratic candidates. Rather than tolerate speech Trump dislikes, Carr’s FCC is wielding government authority like a political club, while dressing the intimidation up as neutral concern about broadcast rules.

Kimmel is not the first host whose interview with Talarico was pushed away from television. In February, “Late Show” host Stephen Colbert said CBS attorneys feared FCC retaliation and stopped him from airing a conversation with Talarico during the Democratic primary.

The interview went to YouTube instead and attracted millions of views, likely reaching a much larger audience than it would have received on television. Talarico later defeated Rep. Jasmine Crockett for the Democratic nomination, making the censorship attempt look both authoritarian and spectacularly ineffective.

Kimmel has become a central target of Trump’s campaign against media criticism. Last year, the FCC helped drive an effort to remove him from television after conservatives distorted a joke he made about reactions to the death of extreme right wing activist Charlie Kirk.

Trump has transformed an agency responsible for regulating public airwaves into something resembling a personal grievance department. The FCC’s job is not to protect the president from comedians, unfavorable interviews, skeptical journalists, or the devastating discovery that other Americans have opinions.

Over the weekend, Trump threatened to report NBC journalist Kristen Welker to the FCC after she described his weakening influence among Republican voters. Carr has also suggested using federal pressure against stations reporting on supposedly “fake polls” that show political trouble for Republicans.

That is not ordinary media criticism. It is an effort to make broadcasters fear government consequences whenever reporting, polling, or programming displeases the president and his allies, which is precisely how official intimidation chills protected speech without requiring an explicit ban.

The strategy also reveals the fragility beneath Trump’s strongman performance. A president confident in his ideas would answer critics, defend his record, and let voters judge competing arguments instead of ordering federal regulators to hover over television stations.

Kimmel’s interview will still reach the public, and the administration may once again amplify the material it hoped to suppress. But the broader threat remains serious, because local affiliates cannot casually ignore regulators who hold power over licenses, operations, and corporate approvals.

Trump wants a media system where praise flows freely and criticism carries a regulatory price. Moving Talarico’s interview online may protect stations for now, but Americans should not accept a government that treats basic editorial independence as an offense requiring federal discipline.