Jimmy Kimmel’s mocking remarks about Donald Trump’s grief after Charlie Kirk’s assassination have ignited a firestorm.
But this is about more than one comedian — it’s about how freedom of speech has turned into a demand for emotional performance, and how public debate is losing sight of responsibility.
When Jimmy Kimmel joked that Donald Trump’s grief “is not how an adult grieves the murder of someone he calls a friend. This is how a four-year-old mourns a goldfish,” the audience laughed, but the backlash came fast and hard. Kimmel was swiftly pulled off the air, and for many, this marked a turning point.
Critics argued that his remarks were cruel, mocking genuine human grief over the murder of a public figure. Supporters defended him, claiming it was just a joke and was protected under freedom of speech.
But this controversy goes deeper than a single comment. It highlights how the concept of freedom of speech is being stretched, sometimes misused, as a shield for abuse, ridicule, and dehumanization.
Freedom of speech is not a license to abuse
I wrote an article about Freedom of speech seven years ago, and I feel that I have a responsibility to repeat myself because this is so important. This is what I wrote:
“Freedom of speech is NOT a license to abuse — it is a responsibility.”
Concepts of freedom of speech can be found in early human rights documents. England’s Bill of Rights (1680) legally established the constitutional right of freedom of speech in Parliament, which is still in effect.
The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, adopted during the French Revolution in 1789, specifically affirmed freedom of speech as an inalienable right. Article 11 states:
“The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law.”
This principle is crucial. Freedom of speech was never meant to protect cruelty, slander, or targeted emotional harm. It was meant to protect debate, dissent, and the free exchange of ideas. Rights come with duties. Speech comes with consequences.
A pattern of public shaming
This is not the first time the media have been accused of demanding emotional performances and punishing anyone who doesn’t meet the script.
When Princess Diana died in 1997, Queen Elizabeth was heavily criticized by the press for not showing enough visible grief. Headlines branded her as cold and emotionless, forcing her to make a public display of mourning just to silence the criticism.
The same pattern can be seen now:
If you don’t grieve the “right way,” or if someone mocks how you grieve, it becomes a public scandal. Public emotions are staged, judged, and weaponized. And comedians, who once pushed boundaries, now risk being used as tools in that system. (Is this part of the Matrix system I wrote about in my previous article?).
The line between humor and harm
Comedy has always been about testing limits. But there’s a difference between punching up and punching down, between provoking thought and ridiculing someone’s suffering.
Mocking grief is not clever social commentary. It’s cruelty. And when it becomes normalized, it contributes to a culture where empathy is seen as weakness and cruelty is seen as courage.
Freedom of speech should protect the right to speak the truth, not the right to hurt for entertainment.
A responsibility, not a weapon
This is the lesson the Kimmel controversy should teach us.
Speech is powerful. It shapes societies, moves crowds, inspires revolutions, or sparks hatred.
We must remember: Freedom of speech is not just a right. It is a responsibility.
Because if freedom becomes a weapon, it will eventually destroy the very societies built to protect it.
“We’re not just standing at a crossroad. We’re standing on the threshold of a new era. Those who dare to seize the future will shape it. Those who hesitate will live in the shadow of those who didn’t.”
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.
Ket Garden
Shiny bull 