When it comes to advertisers avoiding controversial shows, it’s not just Rush From today’s TRI Newsletter: Premiere Networks is circulating a list of 98 advertisers who want to avoid “environments likely to stir negative sentiments.” The list includes carmakers (Ford, GM, Toyota), insurance companies (Allstate, Geico, Prudential, State Farm) and restaurants (McDonald’s, Subway). As you’ll see in the note below, those “environments” go beyond the Rush Limbaugh show…. “To all Traffic Managers: The information below applies to your Premiere Radio Networks commercial inventory…They’ve specifically asked that you schedule their commercials in dayparts or programs free of content that you know are deemed to be offensive or controversial (for example, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Tom Leykis, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity).’
The good news is that, as of Saturday, the Rush Limbaugh Show has lost 98 major advertisers (now the number is north of 140). That would seem a victory for those of us who despise talking heads who traffic in racism, sexism, and misogyny…and it certainly is. That said, we shouldn’t be satisfied until Limbaugh’s reduced to managing a Dairy Queen in West Palm Beach.
There’s another side to the argument that those of us supporting the boycott of Limbaugh need to be conscious of. There’s the temptation on the part of Conservatives to view the boycott as a witch hunt against Limbaugh. That’s true only in the sense that enough people are demanding that vile, despicable hate speech such as Limbaugh’s verbal assault on Sandra Fluke shouldn’t be supported by advertisers looking to attract our business. The boycott isn’t about Limbaugh advocating Conservative views; it’s about his three-day long insult-filled rant directed at Ms. Fluke. It’s about demanding a basic standard of decency and decorum in public speech. It’s about not having free reign to refer to an innocent woman as a “slut” and a “prostitute.” Conservative views: Constitutionally-guaranteed free speech. Vile, misogynistic hate speech: no Constitutionally-guaranteed right to that.
Limbaugh’s defenders don’t see it that way, which is where the problem could potentially begin. Some view the boycott of Limbaugh as an attack against their hero for his Conservative views. They’re quite capable of attempting to use the same tactics against a Liberal with a radio or TV show. Whether of not they’d be successful is an open question, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility.
Live by the sword, die by the sword….
We should be very careful not to make this about Limbaugh’s views, odious and abhorrent though they may be. The 1st Amendment guarantees him the right to speak his mind and express his views. There’s also an implied and very basic standard of decency that Americans have every right to expect from those with a public forum. Boycotting Limbaugh for his vile hate speech is appropriate; boycotting him for his views is another matter altogether. We need to be careful to keep the two separate and distinct.
We have every right to expect better from a talking head like Limbaugh, and that’s what the boycott is and should be about. We shouldn’t forget, though, that the very tactics applied by those of us on the Left can be used by those on the opposite end of the ideological spectrum. It may not be right or reasonable, but it can happen. With that in mind, we should not lose sight of the need to tread carefully.
