Conor McGregor's appearance on Jimmy Fallon's Tonight Show earlier this week (Wednesday, 17 June) was meant to be a victory lap. The former UFC champion appeared on the US programme as part of a media blitz ahead of his highly-publicised return to the octagon, discussing his comeback and future plans in front of a mainstream American audience.
While many MMA fans were eager to hear about his return to fighting, many also criticised the appearance. In November 2024, a jury in a civil case at Dublin's High Court found McGregor civilly liable for assaulting Nikita Hand, who accused him of raping her in a hotel back in 2018. McGregor has consistently denied the allegation and appealed the verdict, but the Court of Appeal in Dublin dismissed this on all grounds in July 2025.
This left some viewers asking a different question: why was McGregor being welcomed onto one of America's biggest entertainment shows in the first place?
Across social media, particularly X, some viewers criticised Jimmy Fallon and NBC for inviting McGregor onto the programme and arguing that his appearance felt jarringly disconnected from the public controversy that has surrounded him in recent years.
Related: Best streaming services
Some fans described the booking as inappropriate, while others wondered what message the appearance sent to women watching at home. But the reactions didn't come out of nowhere.
What to Read Next
The case has attracted international attention and dominated headlines for months. That context inevitably followed McGregor onto The Tonight Show. Yet, viewers tuning in were not presented with a difficult interview about accountability. Instead, they saw McGregor sitting opposite one of TV's most famous hosts, discussing his comeback.
Public figures who have become embroiled in controversy do not always disappear from public life. They remain newsworthy, they give interviews, they promote projects and continue to exist in the public sphere.
But there is a significant difference between appearing in a news interview and appearing on a chat show. Some could argue that The Tonight Show isn't designed to challenge its guests, but it is meant to entertain viewers. That's why celebrities go there - to tell funny stories, promote upcoming work, lift the lid on their life away from the spotlight and enjoy a warm reception from both host and audience.
The format itself creates a sense of normality - and that's precisely the issue viewers have picked up on. To survivors of sexual violence, seeing a figure associated with such a high-profile civil case welcomed back into the fold of mainstream entertainment can feel deeply upsetting and unsettling.
It can create the impression that public scrutiny is temporary and that enough fame can eventually smooth over almost anything - while survivors can struggle with life-changing trauma for many years.
Related: Best LEGO sets
This may not be the intention of broadcasters, of course, but intention and impact isn't always the same thing. TV remains one of the most powerful forms of cultural validation available to public figures. Appearing on a major late-night show places someone in front of millions of viewers, signalling they remain part of the mainstream conversation.
But this isn't a debate unique to McGregor. Similar questions have emerged whenever controversial figures are invited onto high-profile TV shows. Every broadcaster has to decide where the line sits between reflecting public interest and appearing to rehabilitate a public image.
There is no easy answer. McGregor remains one of the biggest names in combat sports. His return to the UFC is undeniably newsworthy. Many viewers tuned in specifically because of his appearance and still celebrate him. But the strength of the reaction to The Tonight Show still demonstrates that another considerable group of viewers felt differently.
For them, the appearance wasn't just another celebrity interview. It was a reminder of how quickly public conversations can move on, even when some people are still living with the consequences.
Whether broadcasters agree with that criticism is ultimately their decision. Ignoring it, however, is becoming increasingly difficult.
