FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Join the fight against right wing hate radio!





handfleisch
A major new campaign has started to highlight the monopoly of right wing hate radio on our airwaves. Get informed and sign up now. Turning the US around with the Obama era requires personal efforts of people like you and me. Let's do it, let's work to stop the swiftboating, hatemongering forces that dominate the radio airwaves. Yes We Can!

http://capwiz.com/stopthehate/mlm/signup/

Quote:

Media Matters for America recently released a damning new report documenting the inflammatory smears and hate-fueled speech of radio hosts throughout the country. Day after day, these hosts fill the airwaves with vicious attacks aimed at women, people of color, the poor, the LGBT community, and immigrants.

As part of Media Matters' ongoing effort to expose the incendiary commentary of these hosts, we've decided to highlight the topics and segments of the population they most frequently assail.

>> Sign up at www.WeCanStopTheHate.org for more information on how you can help fight back.

Among the most frequently targeted communities, immigrants figure prominently. The smears run the gamut from claiming undocumented Mexican immigrants "want to reconquer America" to laying the blame for the home-foreclosure crisis at the feet of the undocumented.

Here are just a few examples of the vitriol directed at immigrants from these conservative radio hosts:

* G. Gordon Liddy smeared undocumented Mexican immigrants, claiming they "want to reconquer America, they say"
* Michael Savage: "Illegal aliens" have "raped and disheveled" the Statue of Liberty
* Savage: "We're getting refugees now who have never used a telephone, a toothbrush, or toilet paper. ... [T]hey never assimilate. And then their children become gang-bangers"
* Conservative radio hosts claimed HUD said 5 million illegal immigrants were given subprime mortgages, despite HUD's reported denials
ocalhoun
Yes YES! Join the fight against free speech! There's no time to loose!
handfleisch
ocalhoun wrote:
Yes YES! Join the fight against free speech! There's no time to loose!


Yet another typical, no-content, flaming, dittohead-type post. The forum suffers.
Moonspider
handfleisch wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Yes YES! Join the fight against free speech! There's no time to loose!


Yet another typical, no-content, flaming, dittohead-type post. The forum suffers.


He may have been short with you, but he's right. The campaign you mention is just an attempt to interfere with the free market system. The "Fairness Doctrine" is anything but fair.

Respectfully,
M
handfleisch
Moonspider wrote:


The campaign you mention is just an attempt to interfere with the free market system. The "Fairness Doctrine" is anything but fair.


Free Market extremism has led to the financial bankruptcy, and applied to the airwaves it leads to moral bankruptcy. Think of the Fairness Doctrine as common sense regulation. Given the economic collapse, the economy obviously needed it; given the monopoly of right wing hate speech, the airwaves obviously need it too.
ocalhoun
So you really intend to throw away the constitutional rights of free speech/ free press (mainly) in order to stop the (admittedly exaggerated) criticism of illegal immigrants?

The only control the government should have over radio broadcasts at all is an organizational one; the government should help various stations to find frequencies that don't interfere with one another, and stop at that.

I'm sorry, but financial bankruptcy and moral bankruptcy are things I (and any other person who is responsible and plans for contingencies) can deal with.
Bankruptcy of freedom is something I cannot deal with.
Nick2008
Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press was meant to mean that you can say anything you want personally as long as it doesn't insult someone. I mostly listen to music radio, not the radio with the all the talking, because that gives me a headache. Mad

But if it is true that hosts are insulting people based on gender, religion, color, or race, then that's unacceptable. If you have something bad to say, don't say it; don't think that "Freedom of Speech" means you can go around and insult and attack people. Now if Freedom of Speech means I can walk up to the microphone and start insulting people on race, color, and religion then that's not right.

Too much freedom can make go people nuts.
handfleisch
Moonspider wrote:
The campaign you mention is just an attempt to interfere with the free market system. The "Fairness Doctrine" is anything but fair.

Respectfully,
M


Too bad this campaign has nothing to do with the Fairness Doctrine and everything to do with citizens getting active to make their voice heard, something even Libertarians approve of.
furtasacra
Uh, the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" got done away with partly because it was unenforceable, and it's not coming back.

The only way to counteract the noxious hatred and stupidity of the right wing is to do smart, funny informative radio showcasing a different viewpoint. Like NPR, only entertaining.
ocalhoun
Nick2008 wrote:
Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press was meant to mean that you can say anything you want personally as long as it doesn't insult someone.

Direct from the constitution:
Quote:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Would you please point out in that quote the part about not insulting anyone?
You have a right to insult people if you want to. Yes it is rude, and usually immoral, but it IS legal and should stay so.
Quote:

But if it is true that hosts are insulting people based on gender, religion, color, or race, then that's unacceptable. If you have something bad to say, don't say it; don't think that "Freedom of Speech" means you can go around and insult and attack people.
Quote:

Insult, yes. Attack no. Read it.

Now if Freedom of Speech means I can walk up to the microphone and start insulting people on race, color, and religion then that's not right.

If you want a country where freedom of speech and press is restricted in the name of political correctness, go to Canada. If you want the land of the free, stay here.
Moonspider
handfleisch wrote:
Moonspider wrote:
The campaign you mention is just an attempt to interfere with the free market system. The "Fairness Doctrine" is anything but fair.

Respectfully,
M


Too bad this campaign has nothing to do with the Fairness Doctrine and everything to do with citizens getting active to make their voice heard, something even Libertarians approve of.


True, I didn't see any mention of the "Fairness Doctrine." But I did see this:

About NCLR wrote:
NCLR is also challenging the nation’s media to:Ensure that if such spokespeople are given airtime, that their affiliations are made clear to viewers and that opposing points of view are given equal time.


Encouraging self-regulation, I suppose. Media outlets have a right to to do that, if they so choose. But they won't do so if it hurts revenue.

Respectfully,
M
liljp617
I'm going to join the fight against Frihost political discussion.

It's become fairly annoying from both sides (in terms of the threads made).
fx-trading-education
All these "hate" campaigns are quite usual when a country fails, specially economicaly.
Remember for instance that Hitler started to rise up when there was a great economical depression in Germany.

So now that US has economical problems, some people need to find others to blame. Then for them it is ok to blame anybody different for any reason (gender, color, nationality, religion, political opinion...). It is the optimal situation for all extremism.

After, it is up to each of the citizens to react in his proper way to such kind of campaigns.
But no reaction can be quite a bad solution.
Remember that Hitler was democraticly elected...
Futile
ocalhoun wrote:
Nick2008 wrote:
Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press was meant to mean that you can say anything you want personally as long as it doesn't insult someone.

Direct from the constitution:
Quote:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Would you please point out in that quote the part about not insulting anyone?
You have a right to insult people if you want to. Yes it is rude, and usually immoral, but it IS legal and should stay so.
Quote:

But if it is true that hosts are insulting people based on gender, religion, color, or race, then that's unacceptable. If you have something bad to say, don't say it; don't think that "Freedom of Speech" means you can go around and insult and attack people.
Quote:

Insult, yes. Attack no. Read it.

Now if Freedom of Speech means I can walk up to the microphone and start insulting people on race, color, and religion then that's not right.

If you want a country where freedom of speech and press is restricted in the name of political correctness, go to Canada. If you want the land of the free, stay here.


I agree with you 100% here ocalhoun. I may be wrong here and excuse me if I am but I really don't think that Nick2008 ment insult. I really think he ment to say slander. In which case you are no longer cover by your right to freedom of speech. Everyone has rights and are allowed to excerise them to their fullest extent, but when those rights infringe on someone elses you lose those rights.

fx-trading-education wrote:
All these "hate" campaigns are quite usual when a country fails, specially economicaly.
Remember for instance that Hitler started to rise up when there was a great economical depression in Germany.

So now that US has economical problems, some people need to find others to blame. Then for them it is ok to blame anybody different for any reason (gender, color, nationality, religion, political opinion...). It is the optimal situation for all extremism.

After, it is up to each of the citizens to react in his proper way to such kind of campaigns.
But no reaction can be quite a bad solution.
Remember that Hitler was democraticly elected...


Interesting point and nice observation. History has other examples of this too if you take the time to look.
Bikerman
Well, it may sound nit-picking, but I have to point out that slander is not prohibited by criminal law. It is a civil matter, not a criminal matter. You are free to say what you like, but if you lie and defame another person then that person is free to seek recompense for the damage caused.
Futile
Bikerman wrote:
Well, it may sound nit-picking, but I have to point out that slander is not prohibited by criminal law. It is a civil matter, not a criminal matter. You are free to say what you like, but if you lie and defame another person then that person is free to seek recompense for the damage caused.


Thanks Biker for the explanation and clarification. And no you are not nit-picking. There is a far cry between nit-picking and graciously correcting and enlightening.
jwellsy
Will left wing hate speech still be allowed?
furtasacra
jwellsy wrote:
Will left wing hate speech still be allowed?


Of course it will. Left-wing "hate speech" consists almost entirely of pointing out the stupidity, inaccuracy, errors and self-contradictions uttered by wingnuts.

Right-wingers consider all of the following hate speech:

* Making fun of John McCain for not knowing how many homes he owns
* Making fun of Sarah Palin and George Bush for their well-documented inability to speak in coherent sentences
* Airing Sarah Palin's disastrous, embarrassing, cringe-inducing interviews with Katie Couric
* Factually reporting GOP attempts to suppress voter registration and voter turnout in poor and predominantly non-white districts
* Calling Rush Limbaugh an obese drug addict
* I'm not even going to go into Larry Craig and Mark Foley.

Bottom line: if the truth hurts, you're either a jerk or an idiot, and screaming that the media is being unfair because they reported it makes you look even worse.
Voodoocat
I am always amused at the hypocrisy of the Left: while they claim that the media is controlled by Right wing hate mongers, their own media is full of vile and hateful lies, innuendo, and half truths. You don't agree? Take these quotes from today's DailyKos, a stongly left leaning (and popular) website:

1. Over the past eight years, Dick Cheney has spent most of his vice presidency holed-up in some undisclosed location, dreaming up new ways to trash the Constitution.

2. So I sat down, ready to do a recap of his final interviews as the vice president, when I realized that what was coming out of his mouth was pointless, best described in a line from "Mr. Deeds":

I'm sorry, all I heard was, blah, blah, blah, I'm a dirty ******.

3. So instead of wading through the sewage that passes for deep thoughts from Dick

It seems that left wing hate speech may be the real problem.
liljp617
Voodoocat wrote:
I am always amused at the hypocrisy of the Left: while they claim that the media is controlled by Right wing hate mongers, their own media is full of vile and hateful lies, innuendo, and half truths. You don't agree? Take these quotes from today's DailyKos, a stongly left leaning (and popular) website:

1. Over the past eight years, Dick Cheney has spent most of his vice presidency holed-up in some undisclosed location, dreaming up new ways to trash the Constitution.

2. So I sat down, ready to do a recap of his final interviews as the vice president, when I realized that what was coming out of his mouth was pointless, best described in a line from "Mr. Deeds":

I'm sorry, all I heard was, blah, blah, blah, I'm a dirty ******.

3. So instead of wading through the sewage that passes for deep thoughts from Dick

It seems that left wing hate speech may be the real problem.


At least they stay truthful in those quotes Smile
handfleisch
Voodoocat wrote:
I am always amused at the hypocrisy of the Left: while they claim that the media is controlled by Right wing hate mongers, their own media is full of vile and hateful lies, innuendo, and half truths. You don't agree? Take these quotes from today's DailyKos, a stongly left leaning (and popular) website:

1. Over the past eight years, Dick Cheney has spent most of his vice presidency holed-up in some undisclosed location, dreaming up new ways to trash the Constitution.

2. So I sat down, ready to do a recap of his final interviews as the vice president, when I realized that what was coming out of his mouth was pointless, best described in a line from "Mr. Deeds":

I'm sorry, all I heard was, blah, blah, blah, I'm a dirty ******.

3. So instead of wading through the sewage that passes for deep thoughts from Dick

It seems that left wing hate speech may be the real problem.


I'm always amused at how far people can be off target. This thread is about about talk shows on the radio being monopolized by right wing hate; you quote a few lines off a blog. You aimed for the side of a barn and got your foot.
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:
Voodoocat wrote:
I am always amused at the hypocrisy of the Left: while they claim that the media is controlled by Right wing hate mongers, their own media is full of vile and hateful lies, innuendo, and half truths. You don't agree? Take these quotes from today's DailyKos, a stongly left leaning (and popular) website:

1. Over the past eight years, Dick Cheney has spent most of his vice presidency holed-up in some undisclosed location, dreaming up new ways to trash the Constitution.

2. So I sat down, ready to do a recap of his final interviews as the vice president, when I realized that what was coming out of his mouth was pointless, best described in a line from "Mr. Deeds":

I'm sorry, all I heard was, blah, blah, blah, I'm a dirty ******.

3. So instead of wading through the sewage that passes for deep thoughts from Dick

It seems that left wing hate speech may be the real problem.


I'm always amused at how far people can be off target. This thread is about about talk shows on the radio being monopolized by right wing hate; you quote a few lines off a blog. You aimed for the side of a barn and got your foot.

... Its known as providing a counterpoint. There are nuts on both sides on the line.
deanhills
[quote="handfleisch"] I don't think the rightists are good for the country, but as long as they do not destruct anything, and follow the law, perhaps they have the right to a voice? One does not have to listen to them anyway. You just channel into a radio frequency that is compatible with where you want to be. Mostly I like radio for musc, and rarely listen to anybody. When I listen to someone, I prefer to see the body that goes with it, so TV is better, and again, one has a choice with TV too, to select the channel that you are comfortable with.
deanhills
I don't think the rightists are good for the country, but as long as they do not destruct anything, and follow the law, perhaps they have the right to a voice? One does not have to listen to them anyway. You just channel into a radio frequency that is compatible with where you want to be. Mostly I like radio for musc, and rarely listen to anybody. When I listen to someone, I prefer to see the body that goes with it, so TV is better, and again, one has a choice with TV too, to select the channel that you are comfortable with.

Good remark about Canadians being politically correct. For example, something I have been fascinated with, with the US, is that one advertiser can criticize another advertiser in his advertisement. I found that impolite but quite intriguing as it is done as a matter of course, along OK to do lines. People can be quite outspoken about the shortcomings of one another on the air, even by name, and sometimes past the point of rudeness. Politicians are almost keehauled and baptized by fire when they are elected. I guess that toughens people up in a way?
furtasacra
I see none of the right wing trolls are trying to take me on, or take issue with what I said earlier, so I will amend my statement to say "If the truth hurts, you're a Dittohead."

Now I'm a troll. Hee hee!
handfleisch
furtasacra wrote:
I see none of the right wing trolls are trying to take me on, or take issue with what I said earlier, so I will amend my statement to say "If the truth hurts, you're a Dittohead."


Yeah, funny ain't it.

Especially now that know-nothing king Limbaugh has admitted he wants to Obama fail, and so legions of dittoheads are now working against their president & commander in chief who is trying to create bipartisan effort to lead the country through times of crisis. Shows you what creeps these wingnuts are.
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:
furtasacra wrote:
I see none of the right wing trolls are trying to take me on, or take issue with what I said earlier, so I will amend my statement to say "If the truth hurts, you're a Dittohead."


Yeah, funny ain't it.

Especially now that know-nothing king Limbaugh has admitted he wants to Obama fail, and so legions of dittoheads are now working against their president & commander in chief who is trying to create bipartisan effort to lead the country through times of crisis. Shows you what creeps these wingnuts are.


Its a free country, so working against the leader is acceptable, and could even be abstractly commendable in many situations.

I'm looking forward to seeing Obama battle it out with senior military leadership over gays in the military though. When Clinton tried that, the semi-mutiny of the entire military leadership caused him to back down and instate 'don't ask, don't tell' instead.
I expect that they'll have to give in this time, but I also expect to see the full power of bureaucratic delaying tactics used.
davidfromoz
First of all, I find right wing radio in USA to be hysterically funny. Its just so over the top that its hard not to enjoy listening to it. Right after 9/11 I did find it a bit frightening when they were advocating some rather extreme responses. My favorite one is Sean Hannity because he is intelligent and thought provoking.

I don't think the link is advocating restricting their right to say it. Simply encouraging people to fight the sentiment. I think it should be OK to say "foreigners are messing up the country", but it must also be OK for people to call the radio station and say they won't listen because its being said or to be armed with good responses to their friends who repeat what Russ said on his show today.

The whole thing seems like a healthy discussion to me.

cheers,
david

ps. disclaimer: I'm not an American so perhaps its none of my business anyway.
pps. I love this forum because of the varied views and generally reasoned discussion Smile
handfleisch
davidfromoz wrote:
First of all, I find right wing radio in USA to be hysterically funny. Its just so over the top that its hard not to enjoy listening to it. Right after 9/11 I did find it a bit frightening when they were advocating some rather extreme responses. My favorite one is Sean Hannity because he is intelligent and thought provoking.

I don't think the link is advocating restricting their right to say it. Simply encouraging people to fight the sentiment. I think it should be OK to say "foreigners are messing up the country", but it must also be OK for people to call the radio station and say they won't listen because its being said or to be armed with good responses to their friends who repeat what Russ said on his show today.

The whole thing seems like a healthy discussion to me.

cheers,
david

ps. disclaimer: I'm not an American so perhaps its none of my business anyway.
pps. I love this forum because of the varied views and generally reasoned discussion Smile


I think your reaction is fair and understandable; as an outsider you find these radio wingnuts funny, and about as real as the World Wrestling Federation is to the Olympics. But as an insider, I can tell you that their effect is not funny; Limbaugh and the rightwing radio collective are a huge force in such things as creating an actual fear in the American people that Saddam was going to personally attack the US with WMD if not nukes, which led to the historic tragedy that is the Iraq occupation.

In other words, many Americans don't laugh at them, they believe them, are influenced by them and take action because of them -- it's as if TV wrestling became an Olympic sport.
ocalhoun
^They're allowed to try and influence people. If you don't like it, then go out and start your own left-wing radio show and try to influence them back the other way.

(In fact, I think that might be something you'd be very good at... I think we've found your true calling, handfleisch!)
davidfromoz
I have first hand seen the not funny side of right wing radio.

I did not feel the least bit nervous as an Aussie in USA after 9/11. But I was very afraid for my wife who is Taiwanese and very obviously a foreigner. Living in white rural USA where people were very upset and uncertain how to respond to 9/11 made me afraid for her. At that time I was travelling quite a bit, and listened to radio in my car for 2 hours a day or so. The anti foreigner debate was intense (as was the discussion of a widespread nuclear response). -by the way, in the end my fears were unfounded.

But as ocalhoun says, even if we don't like it, we have to accept it or curtail everybody's right to speak their mind. I don't think that would be a good idea.

This is why its vitally important that people who don't agree with what they say, speak up. When a very democratic country has the nuclear option, and a population that could basically vote for its use, it important that the population is educated, reasonable and responsible. I happen to strongly disagree with most of what right wing radio says. So when my good friends wife started talking about nuking the whole Middle East, I spoke up in a large group that had some sympathy for her idea. It was rather uncomfortable, but in the long run, it was the right thing to do and had a positive outcome (in the long run!).

I think thats all the link is asking. Its asking for people to tell the radio station and everybody they know that they disagree with the message. Thats a good thing.

cheers,
david

ps. handfleisch, I nearly invoked the WWF comparison too Smile
atul2242
while i firmly believe in freedom of speech there has to be a balance a presentation of facts rather than thought that would make the listener form their own opinions rather than be led to believing something...
handfleisch
davidfromoz wrote:
even if we don't like it, we have to accept it or curtail everybody's right to speak their mind. I don't think that would be a good idea.

This is why its vitally important that people who don't agree with what they say, speak up. When a very democratic country has the nuclear option, and a population that could basically vote for its use, it important that the population is educated, reasonable and responsible. I happen to strongly disagree with most of what right wing radio says. So when my good friends wife started talking about nuking the whole Middle East, I spoke up in a large group that had some sympathy for her idea. It was rather uncomfortable, but in the long run, it was the right thing to do and had a positive outcome (in the long run!).

I think thats all the link is asking. Its asking for people to tell the radio station and everybody they know that they disagree with the message. Thats a good thing.

cheers,
david

ps. handfleisch, I nearly invoked the WWF comparison too Smile


David, it sounds like you really handled that situation well. I agree that we have to speak up. I also held my ground, in my case with family members who, brainwashed by rightwing radio, thought Saddam was going to kill their families with WMD. I told them Saddam didn't even have any. To this day they are embarrassed that they made such fools by the likes of Limbaugh and his local clones.

But I'm concerned where it's just reasonable people in their living rooms versus a corporate-run campaign of right wing lies and fear-mongering. & I don't believe the choice is to accept it or curtail people's rights. We need to expand people's rights -- to hear more sides of the issues. Here is a graphic of the problem:

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/fcc-ownership-rules-blamed-for-overwhelming-dominance-of-right-wing-talk-radio/
The right wing gets free airplay while progressive forces have to pay right wing owners to play advertisements to get their message out:
Quote:
House Democrats launch radio ads against Republicans who opposed stimulus, health bills

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2009/02/house-democrats.html#more

The cause is not the usual garbage about "It's what people want"; the cause is a cluster-breakdown in the US regulatory system. Just like the financial crisis in the economy, it has led to a right wing monopoly crisis on the airwaves, with less choice, less diversity, less debate, less thought-provoking and more thought-manipulating. There used to be public-interest requirements in running a radio station, regulations about monopoly-control, regulations about local participation and ideas of owners being public trustees. That was all eliminated with great detriment to the USA.

The solution is to increase diversity of ownership to give people more choices and a greater marketplace of ideas.
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:

The right wing gets free airplay while progressive forces have to pay right wing owners to play advertisements to get their message out:

Indeed.
It would seem that the conservatives are as firmly in control of radio as liberals are in control of television.

There will of course be a battle for the control of all types of media, and I'd like to have the beginning of each news or talk show on any medium start off with a statement of established bias, with 'neutral' or 'objective' not being available choices, because no program truly is. That way people can listen to both sides and know what they're hearing and decide better themselves.
Related topics
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.