Author: Morgan

Italy has become the first country in the EU to approve a comprehensive law regulating the use of artificial intelligence, including imposing prison terms on those who use the technology to cause harm, such as generating deepfakes, and limiting child access.

Giorgia Meloni’s rightwing government said the legislation, which aligns with the EU’s landmark AI Act, is a decisive move in influencing how AI is used across Italy.

The aim is to promote “human-centric, transparent and safe AI use” while emphasising “innovation, cybersecurity and privacy protections”.

The bill introduces prison sentences of between one and five years for the illegal spreading of AI-generated or manipulated content if it causes harm.

There will also be harsher penalties for using the technology to commit crimes, including fraud and identity theft, and stricter transparency and human oversight rules governing how the technology is used in workplaces as well as in a range of sectors such as healthcare, education, justice and sport.

In addition, children under the age of 14 will need parental consent to access AI.

When it comes to copyright, the law stipulates that works created with AI assistance are protected if they originate from genuine intellectual effort, while AI-driven text and data mining will only be permitted for non-copyrighted content or scientific research by authorised institutions.

Alessio Butti, undersecretary for digital transformation, said the law “brings innovation back within the perimeter of the public interest, steering AI toward growth, rights and full protection of citizens”.

The government has appointed the Agency for Digital Italy and the National Cybersecurity Agency to enforce the legislation, which received its final approval in the parliament after a year of debate.

Addressing the theme of AI in March last year, Meloni said: “There can and must be an Italian way when it comes to artificial intelligence, an Italian way to develop artificial intelligence and an Italian way to govern artificial intelligence.”

She considered the technology to be “the greatest revolution of our time”, but emphasised that it could only achieve its full potential “if it is developed within a framework of ethical rules that focus on people and their rights and needs”.

The law authorises up to €1bn from a state-backed venture capital fund to support companies active in AI, cybersecurity and telecommunications, although critics argue the sum is small compared with investments being made by the US and China.

The Australian government has announced an Oprah Winfrey-style emissions target for 2035. It has tried to promise (nearly) everyone a prize.

By choosing a target range of a 62% to 70% cut compared with 2005 levels – based on long-awaited advice from the Climate Change Authority and its chair, Matt Kean – it has opted for a political solution.

The range is extraordinarily wide. At the bottom end, it is likely to dampen criticism from business organisations that have argued for less action. At the top end, it nods to a campaign that has argued that the target must include a number that starts with a “7” – that is, in the 70s – if it is to have any claim at being serious about the scale of the problem.

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News email}

The criticism will come anyway. The press releases from some climate organisations condemning the decision started to arrive before Anthony Albanese had finished his opening remarks at Thursday’s press conference.

It is easy to understand why. The reality is the range means the minimum target is 62%. That’s well below what scientists say Australia should do to play its part in keeping alive the goals agreed as part of the 2015 Paris agreement – particularly that the world should keep striving to limit global heating to 1.5C.

That goal appears all-but out of reach – the world is already about 1.3C hotter than pre-industrial times, and the rise isn’t stopping yet. But the commitment stands, and every fraction of a degree of warming will matter. Experts have found Australia should be making at least a cut of 75% by 2035 to play its part – possibly significantly more.

The range is also below what the authority last year described as “ambitious, but achievable” – a 65%-75% cut. An obvious question is: what has happened since then to justify the lower goal?

The answer is complicated, and difficult to quickly pull apart. The government released nine dense reports on Thursday to back-up its commitments and they will take time to work through. But we know the authority was asked to consider not only climate science, but the economics, technological developments, social impacts of the changes required and the international landscape. Kean says it carried out bottom-up modelling to see what was possible.

Its conclusion is basically that there are great opportunities in green development, but also that emissions reductions are difficult: harder than many people realise. There have been some bumps on the road over the past year, including challenges in rolling out large-scale renewable energy. Green hydrogen – a potential replacement for fossil gas – has not kicked on as fast as was hoped.

The authority assumes that renewable energy will continue to surge, and provide up to 93% of electricity by 2035. But it has taken a conservative approach in assessing what would be possible across the economy, from government, business and the community.

Not all experts will agree with this assessment. The Guardian has reported on several independent analyses that have found deeper cuts are technologically and economically possible now. Some, such as those in energy efficiency and electrification, could reduce not only pollution, but household costs.

Some advocates argue much sharper reductions again would be possible if the government treated the climate crisis as the genuine emergency it is – an approach that is sometimes described as moving to a “war footing”. Under this line of thinking, huge amounts of funding, capital and labour could be thrown into green developments and reforestation, guaranteeing people work while forcibly shutting down polluting industries.

Where these expert positions primarily differ is on what is socially possible. Put another way, what pace of change is the public prepared to put up with before there is pushback that would disrupt the entire project and elect a Coalition government hell-bent on abolishing the climate policies Labor has introduced?

There is pretty decent evidence that a majority of Australians say they would support stronger climate action. They said so at this year’s federal election. There is not clear evidence to suggest most people see the challenge as being equivalent to Australia being at war. The authority has previously argued that trying to make more than a 75% cut could lead to “significant and costly economic and social upheaval”.

The picture is further complicated by the shaky international picture. Four years ago, after the election of Joe Biden in the US, major developed economies were more or less pulling in the same direction on climate, albeit not fast enough. Australia under Scott Morrison was an outlier at the bottom of the pack.

That is no longer the case. The UK is in a political mess, but still has an ambitious goal – equivalent to a 78% cut on Australia’s 2005 baseline. But Europe is internally split as it argues over whether it lands on its collective 2035 goal. Japan, Canada and New Zealand all have weaker 2035 targets than Australia. The US under Donald Trump has abandoned the field.

None of this is justification for Australia setting a 62% target. The scientific evidence is that countries such as Australia should be aiming for net zero as soon as they can. The Paris agreement committed the country to aim for its “highest possible ambition”.

Almost uniquely on the international stage, Albanese could decide to dedicate his prime ministership to making the case for a rapid change on climate. He has a stonking majority and a progressive crossbench that wants deeper cuts. If not now, when?

But the prime minister is famously cautious. He has less to say on climate than some of his predecessors, and leaves the heavy-lifting to his minister, Chris Bowen. He has no real plan to stop supporting new and expanded fossil fuel developments that add to local pollution and contribute far more overseas.

Rather than have the PM promote the national climate risk assessment – a remarkable document laying out a shocking picture of what lies ahead – the government timed its release on Monday for while he was out of the country.

The reality is the 2035 target is just a very broad goal. What matters now is the policies that come in behind it. Kean said on Thursday he was hopeful the government could “overachieve” on its target range.

That alone sets a test. Will the government aim for 62% and be satisfied with being better than the opposition? Or will it back measures that could reach 70% – or more?

The Albanese government insists its new 2035 emissions reduction target of 62% to 70% represents the “maximum level of ambition”, as climate campaigners warn it falls short of what Australia should be doing to combat global heating.

The climate change minister, Chris Bowen, said a 2035 target above 70% on 2005 levels was “not achievable” as he claimed the government’s new goal was aligned with the global aim of limiting temperature rise to 1.5C.

The government unveiled its long-awaited 2035 emissions target on Thursday alongside a high-level plan to reach net zero by 2050, including specific pathways for six sectors of the economy.

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News email}

It also announced $8bn worth of measures to spur the green energy transition and published treasury modelling that suggested cutting emissions 65% could grow the economy $2trn by 2050.

The announcement prompted immediate political blowout, with the Liberals rejecting the “economy-wrecking” 2035 target and the Greens labelling Labor’s target range as a “betrayal” of the planet.

“We think we’ve got the sweet spot,” the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, said.

“There will be criticism from some who say it’s too high, there’s some who will say that it’s too low.”

The chosen range of 62% to 70% below 2005 levels was based on the final advice from the Matt Kean-led Climate Change Authority, which was handed to Bowen last Friday and considered at cabinet on Thursday.

Comparing the % emission reduction targets announced by each country for 2035, set to a 2005 baseline year

The recommended range was lower than the authority’s preliminary advice from April 2024, which suggested a target between 65% to 75% was ambitious but achievable.

In the final report, the authority put the ceiling at 70%.

“The authority finds that an emissions reduction target of 62–70% from 2005 levels represents Australia’s highest possible ambition taking account of the matters set out under the relevant legislation, is achievable, and is in Australia’s national and economic interest,” it found.

“While some analysis suggests it would be technically possible for Australia to achieve even more, our analysis finds that doing so would involve higher delivery risks and may require policies with considerably higher near-term social, environmental or economic impacts.”

The report said even reaching the lower-end of the range would not be easy, requiring, among other changes, a halving of current emissions levels, a six-fold increase in storage capacity, quadrupling of wind capacity and electric vehicles accounting for half of new cars sold between now and 2035.

Climate campaigners had argued the target range must include 75% to be credible, a level of ambition supported by an Andrew Forrest-backed coalition of businesses.

Bowen said a target above 70% was “not achievable”, arguing the chosen range was the “maximum level of ambition that’s achievable”.

“We’re not going to pretend that some sort of figure over 70 with no evidence, with no modelling, with no advice that’s achievable, is a sensible ambition for this country to go after,” he said.

Echoing comments made to Guardian Australia, Bowen said the government’s target was consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2021 report, which suggested global emissions needed to be 68% lower by 2035 for the world to hit 1.5C target.

The Paris agreement makes clear developed countries such as Australia were expected to take the lead on cutting emissions given they had benefitted from decades of fossil fuel use.

The latest annual climate department forecast put Australia on track to reduce emissions by 51% on 2005 levels by 2035, meaning the Albanese government must substantially accelerate efforts if it wants achieve the new target.

The announcement of the 2035 target follows the release of a landmark report that found no Australian would escape the “cascading, compounding and concurrent” threats of the climate crisis.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Described as a “wake-up call” by Albanese, the national climate risk assessment warned 1.5 million people could be at risk from rising sea levels and heat-related deaths could surge if global heating rose above 2C.

The Greens leader, Larissa Waters, said the target showed Labor had “given up on the science”, a criticism also levelled by the independent senator, David Pocock.

“Labor’s utter failure of a climate target is a betrayal of people and the planet and a win for coal and gas corporations,” Waters said.

Sussan Ley’s shadow cabinet met immediately after Thursday’s announcement and agreed to oppose the new target, including if Labor attempts to enshrine it law.

“The Coalition strongly rejects Labor’s economy-wrecking 2035 emissions reduction target, a fantasy that rests on flawed assumptions and cannot be believed,” the opposition leader said.

The opposition is in the midst of an internal fight over climate policy as a rump of Liberals and Nationals push for the Coalition to dump its commitment to net zero by 2050.

The Climate Council chief executive, Amanda McKenzie said the low-end of the government’s target range was inadequate but 70% was “closer to what’s needed to protect Australians”.

The Australian Conservation Foundation climate and energy program manager, Gavan McFadzean, said the government’s “timid” target fell short of what was required.

Shiva Gounden, head of Pacific at Greenpeace Australia, said the announcement was an “affront” to communities facing the climate crisis.

Simon Sheikh, a founding member of the Business for 75 coalition that backed a 75% target, said the government’s announcement was a “solid step forward”.

The Minerals Council of Australia, which represents some of the nation’s biggest fossil fuel companies, said the target range was a balance between “ambition and pragmatism”, although the upper-end was “highly aspirational”.

The 2035 emissions target was due prior to the May federal election but was delayed to give the climate authority more time to assess the implications of Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

Trump’s withdrawal of the US – the world’s second-largest polluter behind China – from the Paris Agreement has prompted concerns for the global push to net zero.

Josh Tam might still be alive today if he had access to pill checking, his family believe.

The Queenslander died in 2018, at just 22, after taking MDMA at a music festival in New South Wales.

According to the Pennington Institute, more Australians die of drug overdoses than in car accidents.

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News email}

A NSW coronial inquest into Tam’s death, and five other overdose fatalities at NSW music festivals, recommended that the state government fund a drug checking service – a decades-old internationally common practice allowing drug users to voluntarily test their substances at mobile or fixed clinics, after counselling by a health professional – in order to save lives. Participating doctors told the inquest that it served as a warning of new drug threats on the market, many participants discarded their drugs, and no participant was ever told their substance was safe.

In a statement on Thursday, Tam’s parents, John and Julie Tam, and two siblings said that if pill testing had been available “he would have been able to speak to a health professional for the first time in his life who could have guided him to make a safer decision”.

In Tam’s home state of Queensland, the then Labor government opened Australia’s first permanent pill testing clinic in April 2024, at Bowen Hills. The Liberal National party opposition promised to close it, and one year later, after winning government, it did so, slashing its funding. But festival-based pill-testing services continued to operate in Queensland.

Now the LNP is going even further, banning pill testing in the state entirely.

On Thursday the government is expected to pass legislation to end pill testing at festivals and make sure that a plan to reopen the state’s pill testing service – at no cost to the taxpayer – can not go ahead.

The Tam family has issued a plea to the Queensland government not to outlaw pill testing.

“Please for the sake of the lives of our loved ones step aside and allow the experts to lead the way in keeping our loved ones safe,” the family’s statement said.

It’s just 936 days since Queensland became the first state in Australia to permit the harm reduction practice. It followed a successful trial by Canberra’s territorial government.

In August, Cameron Francis, CEO of the Loop Australia, which operated Queensland’s Bowen Hills clinic, sparked a showdown with the state government by announcing it would be reopened with private funding.

The Loop ultimately backed down and did not reopen its Bowen Hills site.

On Thursday, Francis said the government refused to meet with the organisation, and also refused to release an independent evaluation of the service conducted by the University of Queensland.

The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) also called for the evaluation to be released earlier this year.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Francis urged the LNP to pause its bid to ban pill testing and “consider the scientific evidence” at a press conference on Thursday.

Francis said the government’s decision would mean more overdose deaths.

“We have no overdose monitoring system in Queensland. We have no early warning system to a local community. So I absolutely think this decision will cost lives,” he said.

“I think the Crisafulli government needs to be accountable for the decision that they’re making.”

The premier, David Crisafulli, told parliament on Wednesday that the pill testing constituted “rolling out the welcome mat when it comes to drugs” and accused those who backed the practice of not believing in “law and order”.

There were 2,272 drug-induced deaths in Australia in 2023, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, with more than three-quarters of them unintentional.

The health minister, Tim Nicholls, was contacted for comment.

In Australia, the National Alcohol and Other Drug Hotline is at 1800 250 015; families and friends can seek help at Family Drug Support Australia at 1300 368 186. In the UK, Action on Addiction is available on 0300 330 0659. In the US, call or text SAMHSA’s National Helpline at 988

There will be no more forced job cuts at the Australian National University, its interim vice-chancellor has announced, however, Julie Bishop will continue in her leadership role and a restructure at the embattled institution will continue.

Addressing an all-staff town hall on Thursday morning, the interim vice-chancellor, Prof Rebekah Brown, became visibly emotional and held back tears before confirming there would no more involuntary redundancies as part of the restructure process, named Renew ANU.

She said the university would still need to make realignments in colleges flagged for restructure, as well as being “really mindful” of expenditure, but a higher than expected uptake in voluntary redundancies had saved about 100 jobs that were facing the axe.

At least 399 redundancies have been taken since the restructure began 12 months ago.

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News email}

The news came just a week after the former vice-chancellor, Prof Genevieve Bell, tendered her resignation, ending a tumultuous two years at the institution marked by redundancies, proposed course closures and allegations of a toxic work culture.

Brown said it was “her job” to take responsibility for the harm caused by the restructure and said management would “be better going forward”.

“We are going to be having a different type of communication,” she said. “At least under my interim leadership, we will do better. I’ll expect better.”

Brown also said an “anonymous donor” had offered a generous philanthropic gift in order to continue the Australian National Dictionary Centre, which had been flagged for closure, for the next two years, and the university had “identified funds” to support the Australian Dictionary of Biography.

It was unclear whether the centre for European studies, the humanities research centre and the ANU school of music, flagged to be rested under the current proposal, would be saved in their current forms.

Jimmy Barnes was among about three dozen high-profile musicians who signed an open letter urging ANU to save the music school on Wednesday.

Under a draft plan released in July, ANU revealed plans to absorb the six-decade-old institution into the school of creative and cultural practice and axe one-on-one instrumental lessons as part of the university’s restructure to cut $250m in costs.

But Brown said performance in some form would return to the music school after committing to conversations with the Canberra Symphony Orchestra.

No Cuts at ANU, a grassroots group of academics opposed to the restructure, said Brown’s statements did not address the “root of the anger” at the university, including the cuts that had already occurred.

“She said the school of music has been saved – but for the students who have already seen their courses cut, their tutorial sizes increased, staff sacked, and their performance subjects axed, how is this saved?” they said.

“Many students in the school of music have already left due to these attacks. What is a ‘saved’ school of music where students and staff have already abandoned ship?”

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Since Bell’s resignation, Bishop, the university’s chancellor, and members of the council have faced pressure over their own roles in ANU’s financial management and associated transparency and governance concerns.

The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU), sectors of the academic community and some politicians, including the Greens and the ACT senator David Pocock, have repeatedly called Bishop’s leadership into question.

Asked at the town hall whether Brown would ask Bishop to stand down if the university was “serious about rebuilding trust”, she replied: “The short answer is no.”

“It’s not the interim or vice-chancellor’s prerogative to ask a chancellor or any member of council to step down,” she said. “I have no aspirations [or] intentions to change the existing leadership team.”

Last week, Bishop said there were “no grounds” for her to stand aside and the university’s financial situation “began a very long time ago”.

The ACT division secretary of the NTEU, Dr Lachlan Clohesy, said “every university staff member” facing job cuts around the nation could “take heart” from ANU’s decision.

He said Brown deserved credit for “reading the room accurately” on the issue but the university’s restructure process had “broken the university” and “damaged” its people.

Almost 30 staff at the ANU’s humanities school had stopped work after an internal report warned of psychological hazards in their workplace related to the restructure.

Alan Jones faces 25 charges of indecent assault and two of sexual touching relating to nine complainants after prosecutors revealed two alleged victims would no longer be part of the case against the veteran broadcaster.

Jones was on Thursday expected to make his first appearance in court this year to be committed to stand trial on 44 charges of indecent assault against 11 victims aged 17 and older.

But the former 2GB and Sky News Australia broadcaster was not required to appear during the brief mention at Downing Centre local court, during which the court heard 17 of the charges against the broadcaster had been dropped and two complainants were no longer part of the case.

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News email}

“There has been a very significant development in Mr Jones’s case,” his lawyer Bryan Wrench told the court.

“There are no charges relating to the suggest aggravated indecent assault … no aggravation or indeed that Mr Jones had these complainants under his authority,” Wrench told deputy chief magistrate Sharon Freund.

Wrench said his client entered pleas of not guilty on all of the “downgraded” charges. Jones would face trial in a local court before a magistrate, rather than in the district court before a judge and jury, the court heard on Thursday.

Wrench asked for an eight-week adjournment to talk with the DPP about what he called “unresolved” and “ongoing” disclosure issues, including alleged leaks to the media.

On Monday, new allegations emerged against Jones. Wrench said 23 minutes after he was notified by the DPP about those developments, the media had been notified. He called the disclosure of fresh charges and other material being disseminated to media outlets, including the Australian, “extraordinary”.

After initially calling the amount of adjournment time “extraordinary”, Freund conceded to the request, with the case set down to return to court on 11 November, and the trial set for 2026.

The court heard the DPP estimated the trial would take six weeks, while Wrench suggested the hearings could take up to five months.

“We’re not set up to deal with a three-month trial,” the magistrate said, later adding the case was a “massive drain on already stretched resources”.

In a statement, the DPP confirmed it “made a decision to proceed with 27 charges of indecent assault and sexual touching against Alan Jones” and that the charges would proceed in the local court.

The 84-year-old Jones was originally charged with committing a range of offences in various places across NSW between 2001 and 2019.

Police set up Strike Force Bonnefin in March 2024 to investigate alleged indecent assaults and sexual touching incidents allegedly involving Jones, after they were raised by the Sydney Morning Herald’s investigative reporter Kate McClymont.

Jones has previously denied all wrongdoing and said he was planning legal action against Nine newspapers for the “demonstrably false” allegations.

He last appeared in court in December when it was suggested he would face a jury trial on the charges.

“I am certainly not guilty, and I’ll be presenting my case to a jury, as you heard this morning,” he said at the time.

“I want you to understand … these allegations are all either baseless or they distort the truth. And you should know that, prior to my arrest, I was given no opportunity by police to answer any of these allegations.”

US pop star Chappell Roan will headline next year’s Laneway festival in Australia and New Zealand – another coup for the festival, which was headlined by Charli xcx this year.

In exclusive appearances for Laneway, this will be Roan’s first New Zealand show ever, and her first Australian shows since her global ascension in 2024. The 27-year-old artist will perform the full 90-minute production that pulled the biggest crowd at Reading and Leeds festival last month, complete with fantasy castle stage set, an all-female band and gothic fairytale costumes heavily indebted to drag.

The scale of these shows will be in stark contrast to 2023, when the artist toured small venues on Australia’s east coast after the release of her debut album, The Rise and Fall of a Midwest Princess. Hits including Pink Pony Club, Good Luck Babe and the recent The Giver have seen Roan graduate from camp cult favourite to bona fide superstar, headlining Coachella and Lollapalooza, and drawing record crowds with shows that are high on energy, sex and maximalist theatrics.

“Charli xcx may have inaugurated a Brat summer,” wrote Kitty Empire in 2024, “but Chappell Roan picked up that lime-green sequined baton and tossed it sky high, celebrating the liberation in hedonistic femme fun.”

Joining Roan on the lineup is breakout indie group Wet Leg, with sideshows yet to be announced. London rockers Wolf Alice, bedroom pop singer Role Model, British singer PinkPantheress and Swedish rappers Yung Lean & Bladee are also on the lineup, exclusive to Laneway. They’re joined by Charli xcx collaborator the Dare, as well as Lucy Dacus, Alex G, Cavetown and Mt. Joy.

Since its debut as a boutique indie festival in Melbourne’s Caledonian Lane in 2005, Laneway has expanded across Australia and into New Zealand, and boasted increasingly starry line-ups, with recent headliners including Stormzy, Fred Again and Haim. But with Charli last year and now Chappell, the festival has entered its supersized era.

Australian acts this year include Teen Jesus and the Jean Teasers, Blusher, Shady Nasty, Armlock, The Belair Lip Bombs, and Djanaba. The festival kicks off in Auckland on 5 February, before heading to Gold Coast (7 February), Sydney (8 February), Melbourne (13 February), Adelaide (14 February) and Perth (15 February).

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Presale registration has opened, with a 24-hour presale beginning at 11am AEST on 23 September, with general sales opening the following day.

Jimmy Kimmel Live! will be suspended “indefinitely” after the late-night host’s comments about the killing of Charlie Kirk, ABC has announced, hours after the Trump-appointed chair of the US broadcast regulator threatened to take away the broadcaster’s license.

The network, which Disney owns, announced on Wednesday night that it would remove Kimmel’s show from its schedule for the foreseeable future.

“Jimmy Kimmel Live! will be preempted indefinitely,” an ABC spokesperson said in a statement. Pre-empting means ABC will broadcast another show in the slot instead.

Donald Trump later called the move “Great news for America” and congratulated ABC for its “courage” in a social media post. “That leaves Jimmy and Seth, two total losers, on Fake News NBC,” he added, in an apparent threat to the shows of NBC late-night hosts Jimmy Fallon and Seth Meyers, after the cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s show.

ABC’s decision to suspend Kimmel came just minutes after one of the biggest owners of TV stations in the US, Nexstar Media, announced it would preempt any episodes of Jimmy Kimmel Live! set to air on the stations it owns across the country due to his comments.

“Nexstar’s owned and partner television stations affiliated with the ABC Television Network will preempt Jimmy Kimmel Live! for the foreseeable future beginning with tonight’s show,” Nexstar said. “Nexstar strongly objects to recent comments made by Mr Kimmel concerning the killing of Charlie Kirk and will replace the show with other programming in its ABC-affiliated markets.”

Before Nexstar took action, the Federal Communications Commission chair, Brendan Carr, had urged local broadcasters to stop airing the show, saying they were “running the possibility of fines or licensed revocation from the FCC” during an appearance on the rightwing commentator Benny Johnson’s podcast.

On Wednesday night Carr thanked Nexstar “for doing the right thing” in a statement on social media.

“Local broadcasters have an obligation to serve the public interest,” he wrote. “While this may be an unprecedented decision, it is important for broadcasters to push back on Disney programming that they determine falls short of community.”

During his Monday monologue, less than a week after Kirk was shot dead while on a speaking tour in Utah, Kimmel said: “We hit some new lows over the weekend with the Maga gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.”

The suspect, Tyler Robinson, has been charged with aggravated murder, felony discharge of firearm and witness tampering, and could face the death penalty.

During his opening monologue for Tuesday night’s show, Kimmel said: “Many in Maga-land are working very hard to capitalize on the murder of Charlie Kirk.” He accused the US vice-president, JD Vance, of blaming the left for Kirk’s death without evidence.

“While our side of the aisle certainly has its crazies, it is a statistical fact that most of the lunatics in American politics today are proud members of the far left,” Vance said while hosting an episode of Kirk’s podcast from the White House.

“And by ‘statistical fact’, he means ‘complete bullshit’,” Kimmel said to applause, citing a study that found far-right groups were the greatest source of domestic terrorism and extremist violence in the US. The Department of Justice has removed the study from its website.

“Here’s a question JD Vance might be able to answer: who wanted to hang the guy who was vice president before you? Was that the liberal left? Or the toothless army who stormed the Capitol on January 6?” he said.

Andrew Alford, the president of Nexstar’s broadcasting division, called Kimmel’s comments “offensive and insensitive at a critical time in our national political discourse”.

“Continuing to give Mr Kimmel a broadcast platform in the communities we serve is simply not in the public interest at the current time, and we have made the difficult decision to preempt his show in an effort to let cooler heads prevail as we move toward the resumption of respectful, constructive dialogue,” Alford said.

Kimmel is yet to issue any statement on the matter.

More details soon …