Have any sponsors pulled ads from Jimmy Kimmel Live after viewer complaints or social media campaigns?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Yes — in the September 2025 controversy over Jimmy Kimmel’s comments about the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, some local broadcasters preempted his show and a handful of advertisers and groups paused or reconsidered ad placements, but major national brands largely stayed publicly quiet and no wide advertiser exodus is documented in the available reporting [1] [2] [3]. ABC briefly pulled the show and several large groups — Nexstar and Sinclair affiliates — preempted it; reporting by iSpot cited by Business Insider also shows the program carried ads for more than 200 brands and generated just under $70 million in revenue year-to-date, underscoring why marketers were cautious [4] [1] [2].
1. Broadcasters, not national sponsors, led the immediate reaction
When the dispute escalated in mid‑September 2025, it was two major station groups — Nexstar and Sinclair — that publicly refused to air Jimmy Kimmel Live! on some ABC affiliates, with Nexstar announcing an indefinite preemption of the program [1]. That move was framed as a programming decision by local broadcasters asserting community standards, not as an advertiser boycott; Nexstar said Kimmel “is simply not in the public interest at the current time” [1]. Marketplace reported consumers were boycotting Nexstar and Sinclair for their preemptions, and later that those groups resumed airing the show, indicating the broadcaster action was the dominant, visible commercial disruption [2].
2. Advertisers publicly cautious; concrete brand pullouts limited in reporting
Coverage from Adweek and Marketplace shows marketers and media buyers went into a holding pattern rather than openly mass‑pulling ads. Adweek contacted several top brands that regularly advertise around Kimmel but found none had publicly commented at the time of reporting; the piece described marketers as “staying quiet” amid concerns over regulatory pressure from the FCC [3]. Marketplace reported “some groups that advertise with Nexstar and Sinclair are pausing their ads,” but it did not enumerate a long list of major national brands that permanently dumped advertising from Kimmel’s show [2]. Business Insider’s reporting that iSpot measured more than 200 advertisers and roughly $70 million in year‑to‑date ad revenue underscores why many marketers were reluctant to take visible, sweeping action [4].
3. Regulatory pressure and politics changed the dynamics
The escalation involved not only viewers and social campaigns but also explicit regulatory rhetoric: FCC chair Brendan Carr publicly criticized Kimmel and suggested potential regulatory consequences, which critics characterized as jawboning and a First Amendment risk [5]. That official pressure altered the risk calculus for broadcasters and advertisers, pushing some station groups to preempt the show and making marketers more cautious about public statements [1] [5] [3].
4. Outcomes: temporary suspension, resumed broadcasting, and few confirmed advertiser losses
ABC pulled Kimmel from the air temporarily and then resumed the program; affiliates like Sinclair and Nexstar later resumed broadcasts as well, indicating the disruption was transient at the network and carriage level [4] [5] [2]. Available reporting documents some advertisers or “groups” pausing ads with certain broadcaster partners, but none of the cited pieces presents a comprehensive list of nationwide sponsors who permanently cut ties with the show — major brands were described as quietly assessing the situation rather than publicly defecting [2] [3] [4].
5. Context and competing narratives
Conservative outlets and some columnists framed the station preemptions and advertiser pauses as a successful backlash against perceived media bias; other outlets and free‑speech advocates portrayed the broadcaster and regulatory pressure as evidence of creeping censorship and corporate capitulation. The Washington Post, CNN and The Guardian emphasize Kimmel’s reinstatement and later contract extension with ABC — signaling institutional support from Disney despite the controversy — while conservative outlets and local station statements highlight community standards and regulatory concerns [6] [7] [8] [1] [9].
6. What the sources don’t say and remaining limits
Available sources do not provide a definitive list of all national advertisers who permanently pulled ads from Jimmy Kimmel Live!; reporting shows some pauses and cautious behavior but not a widescale advertiser exodus [2] [3]. Financial details from iSpot cited by Business Insider give scale (200+ brands, ~ $70 million YTD) but do not tie specific brands to individual pause decisions [4]. That leaves open questions about smaller local advertisers, programmatic ad buying adjustments, and any behind‑the‑scenes negotiations between Disney, agencies and clients — those specifics are not found in current reporting [4] [3].
Bottom line: the most visible commercial actions were broadcaster preemptions and some ad pauses; national advertisers largely stayed publicly silent and a sweeping, well‑documented loss of sponsors is not supported by the cited coverage [1] [2] [3] [4].