[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Dancin' oldies sends Sebastian to the beach

My view's in the middle.

No question for me that Stern's views should be protected by the First and
hands-off to governmental action, as long as it's not over the existing FCC
indecency line. Incredible tastlessness and horrible hurtfulness like his
Columbine statements don't cross that line.

But... it is also the First Amendment right of members of the public not
only to turn off the dial, but also to use their bully pulpits to do things
like point out the sick statements, rail against them vocally, and boycott
advertisers and station owners' products.

You get one side of the First Amendment, the side that lets Stern spout
garbage on the air, the other side's rights under it come right along as a
package deal.

Can't agree with your abortion analogy either. I'm pro-choice, but if you
think it's murder, advocating its criminalization is part of the First
Amendment deal as well -- and, in fact, advocating its criminalization is
exactly what one should expect those holding such views to do.

- -- Doug Broda

At 08:38 PM 5/7/99 -0400, Eric Jacobs wrote:

>I feel a need to point out that as broadcasters,what you personally call
>"misogynist racism" is someone else's favorite radio show (not mine),
>and as such,a little tolerance might be in order. Remember First
>Amendment,tuning knobs and off switches? I'm not defending this guy,I've
>never heard him. However,much like the rabid anti-Stern mania on this
>list-he is "selling" a product people want, one that delivers results
>for advertisers-why attack him? You don't like him? OK,don't listen.To
>paraphrase PT Barnum:"No one ever went broke underestimating the
>American public" Seen on a bumper sticker: "hate abortion? don't have