Jimmy Kimmel Responds To Trump Supporters Calling Him A “Hypocrite” For Crass ‘Man Show’ Humor

New York Post - Apr 16th, 2025

In a recent Rolling Stone interview, late-night host Jimmy Kimmel shared candid thoughts about his career, personal life, and politics. He did not shy away from critiquing public figures, labeling Elon Musk as "a very bad person," Tucker Carlson as "a complete phony," and Donald Trump as "vindictive." Kimmel also addressed criticism from Trump supporters who use his past work on Comedy Central's The Man Show to call him a hypocrite. He acknowledged their point but noted the irony, highlighting that many critics were likely fans of the show. Kimmel expressed that humor is subjective and rejected cancel culture, emphasizing that there is no clear line in comedy as reactions vary from person to person.

Kimmel also reflected on his emotional nature, admitting to moments of vulnerability, such as tearing up during a monologue about Trump and crying on the last episode of The Man Show. He finds humor in these instances but also some embarrassment. Despite his established status in late-night television, Kimmel revealed that retirement has been on his mind, acknowledging that he won't continue his show indefinitely. His reflections on his career, combined with his willingness to critique others and himself, underscore his impact on the comedic landscape and his recognition of evolving cultural expectations.

Donald Trump Elon Musk Comedy Tucker Carlson Cancel Culture Jimmy Kimmel The Man Show Late Night Television

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.8

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a compelling look into Jimmy Kimmel's perspectives on his career, comedy, and cultural issues. It is timely and relevant, addressing ongoing debates about cancel culture and the role of public figures. The story is largely accurate, but it would benefit from direct access to the original interview and additional perspectives to ensure balance and transparency. While the article is clear and engaging, its impact is somewhat limited by its focus on a single individual's views without broader context. Overall, it effectively captures Kimmel's candidness but could enhance its depth and reliability with more comprehensive sourcing and diverse viewpoints.

Accuracy

The story is largely accurate, as it captures the essence of Jimmy Kimmel's interview with Rolling Stone. The main claims, such as Kimmel's comments on public figures like Elon Musk, Tucker Carlson, and Donald Trump, align with the interview's context. Kimmel's reflections on his past work and current views on comedy and cancel culture are also in line with his public persona. However, some statements, like the exact wording of Kimmel's quotes, need verification from the original interview to ensure precision. Overall, the story presents verifiable information but requires access to the primary source for full confirmation.

Balance

The article predominantly presents Jimmy Kimmel's perspective, focusing on his views and experiences. While it accurately conveys his opinions, it lacks counterpoints or perspectives from the individuals or groups he critiques, such as Trump supporters or those he labels as part of cancel culture. This results in a somewhat one-sided narrative. Including responses or views from the mentioned public figures or groups would provide a more balanced perspective and enhance the article's depth.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and clearly presents Jimmy Kimmel's views and statements. The language is straightforward, making it easy for readers to follow the narrative. The tone is neutral, focusing on reporting Kimmel's statements without editorializing. However, the lack of direct quotes from the interview can lead to ambiguity in understanding the precise context of certain claims. Overall, the article is clear and comprehensible, but it could benefit from more detailed quotations and context.

Source quality

The article references a reputable source, Rolling Stone, known for its in-depth interviews and cultural commentary. However, it does not directly quote or link to the original interview, which would strengthen the credibility of the claims made. The reliance on a single source without additional corroboration or context limits the breadth of information. Providing access to the original interview or supplementary sources would improve the overall reliability.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency in terms of providing direct access to the original Rolling Stone interview or explaining how the information was obtained. It does not disclose any potential biases or conflicts of interest that might affect the reporting. Greater transparency about the methodology and context of the interview would enhance the reader's understanding of the basis for the claims made. Including links to the source material or an explanation of the interview process would improve transparency.