Fox News’ The Five addressed the latest controversy surrounding Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension and swift return to late-night television, with panelists making it clear that they were not upset about Disney and ABC’s decision. In fact, several of the hosts said they were glad Kimmel was back—not because they supported him or found his comedy compelling, but because his reinstatement removes the possibility of him blaming political opponents for his eventual downfall. The consensus was that Kimmel’s problems lie less in his suspension over remarks about the Charlie Kirk shooting and more in the long-term decline of late-night television as a whole.

Jesse Watters led the criticism by framing Kimmel’s return as insignificant in the broader scheme of things. He acknowledged that the host would likely read a carefully scripted apology, delivered with a hint of insincerity, and then return to his usual routine. Watters argued that such a cycle was predictable and unremarkable. The real question, he suggested, is not whether Kimmel survives this latest controversy but how much longer ABC and Disney will keep him on air at all. Pointing to declining ratings and the heavy costs associated with his reported eight-figure salary, Watters doubted that Kimmel’s tenure would extend beyond the expiration of his contract next May.

Watters cited Nielsen numbers to highlight the downward trajectory of Jimmy Kimmel Live!. In 2015, the show averaged 2.4 million viewers, a figure that has steadily declined over the years. Last quarter, Kimmel averaged only 1.77 million total viewers, and by August, the number dipped to 1.1 million. While he remains competitive in certain demographics and often ranks second to Stephen Colbert’s The Late Show, the erosion in viewership reflects broader challenges for late-night shows. Watters concluded that the format itself is “dying,” and Kimmel’s declining relevance only underscores the struggles networks face in justifying the investment.

Fox News contributor Tyrus added a unique angle, saying he was “glad” that Kimmel returned because it ensured that, when the show ultimately ends, the blame cannot be shifted onto Donald Trump or the FCC. For Tyrus, the suspension had created a narrative opportunity for Kimmel, who could have positioned himself as a victim of political retaliation. By reinstating him quickly, Disney undercut that argument, meaning any future cancellation will likely be attributed to ratings or performance, not political persecution. “What would you rather be canceled for: sucking at your job, or the mean president took your job away?” Tyrus asked, emphasizing that Kimmel’s fate should be determined by his ability to entertain, not politics.

Tyrus elaborated further, arguing that if Kimmel had remained off the air, he and his defenders would have framed his removal as a free speech issue, casting him as a martyr to Trump-era censorship. Now, with his show back on air, that narrative is no longer available. He compared the suspension to a slap on the wrist, warning Kimmel to “act right” but leaving him in position to fail or succeed on his own terms. According to Tyrus, when the end comes, it will not be tied to MAGA politics or FCC intervention but rather to Kimmel’s inability to maintain relevance in a shifting entertainment landscape.

Not all the commentary on The Five came from the right. Co-host Harold Ford Jr., a Democrat, also welcomed Kimmel’s return, though for very different reasons. Ford said he objected to the notion of government pressure influencing a private broadcaster’s programming decisions. He stressed that regardless of whether one agrees with Kimmel’s comments, the principle of protecting speech from government interference must remain intact. For Ford, the issue wasn’t about ratings or comedy quality but the importance of keeping political influence out of broadcast decisions.

The panel’s discussion reflected broader themes about the precarious future of late-night television. Once a cultural cornerstone, the format now struggles to maintain its relevance in an era dominated by streaming services, online clips, and fragmented audiences. Kimmel’s controversies, ratings woes, and expensive contract have become symbols of these challenges. While his reinstatement may have quelled the immediate storm, the long-term outlook remains grim. Even those who said they were “glad” he was back, like Watters and Tyrus, suggested his days were numbered, predicting he would be gone before his contract expires.

Ultimately, the takeaway from Fox’s panel was that Kimmel’s return is less a triumph than a temporary reprieve. For conservatives, it strips him of the ability to cast himself as a victim of political silencing, while for skeptics of government overreach, it reaffirms the importance of free expression. Yet in either case, his real challenge remains his dwindling audience and the declining viability of his format. Whether he exits with a whimper due to low ratings or fights for a renewal next year, the consensus on The Five was clear: Jimmy Kimmel may be back, but the clock is ticking on his late-night reign.