When Is Free Speech Truly Free? A Tale of Two Controversies; Why Free Speech Protects Kimmel but Silences Barr

Jimmy Kimmel on 'Jimmy Kimmel Live!' and Roseanne Barr. Credit: Randy Holmes/ABC via Getty and Jordan Strauss/AP

By Taniesa L. Sullivan | The Weekly Ledger News | Op-Ed | Published September 22, 2025

In the world of entertainment, free speech seems to have a different definition depending on who is speaking. Recently, more than 400 celebrities, including the likes of Jennifer Aniston, Tom Hanks, Selena Gomez, and Meryl Streep, rallied behind Jimmy Kimmel after ABC pulled his late-night show following controversial remarks. The ACLU published a letter defending Kimmel’s constitutional right to free expression, emphasizing that no artist should face retaliation from government pressure or corporate forces for their speech.

Kimmel’s comments, while undeniably provocative and controversial, were met with broad support from Hollywood, reflecting a principle that even difficult or uncomfortable speech deserves protection.

Contrast this with the case of Roseanne Barr. In 2018, ABC abruptly canceled her hit sitcom Roseanne following a racist tweet about Valerie Jarrett, a former senior adviser to President Obama. Despite Barr’s apology, the network deemed her comments “abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values,” and her show — a ratings powerhouse that had generated tens of millions in advertising revenue — was taken off the air immediately.

Here’s the question: Where were the celebrities and the public defenders of free speech in Barr’s case? If speech is protected for one, shouldn’t it be protected for all — even when it offends or challenges societal norms?

Yes, both Kimmel and Barr made statements that many considered inappropriate. Yet the public reaction and corporate response were drastically different, raising a troubling question about selective advocacy for free speech. When is free speech truly free, and when is it conditional based on popularity, political alignment, or the nature of the offense?

Free speech is a cornerstone of democracy, but it cannot exist only when convenient. Whether one agrees with the commentary or not, the principle should remain consistent: everyone is entitled to express themselves without fear of disproportionate professional or social retribution. If it’s okay for Jimmy Kimmel to speak out, then why was it not okay for Roseanne Barr?

This is more than a Hollywood debate — it’s a cultural mirror. As citizens, audiences, and consumers of media, we must ask ourselves: are we truly defending free speech, or only the speech we like? And more importantly, when will free speech be applied equally, without favoritism or hypocrisy?

The answer to that question matters — not just for celebrities, but for all of us.