Free speech for some.

Things to do, watch, listen to, read, drink and eat
Post Reply
User avatar
Tar Pit
Posts: 1233
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 6:43 am

Free speech for some.

Post by Tar Pit »

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/03/ ... alk-radio/

LOS ANGELES (CBS) — City Council members were one step closer on Wednesday to becoming the first in the nation to adopt a resolution condemning certain types of speech on public airwaves.

Councilmember Jan Perry introduced legislation this week that would call upon media companies to ensure “on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs” on radio and other broadcasts.

Members of Black Media Alliance, National Hispanic Media Coalition, Korean-American Bar Association, and American Indians in Film and Television were on hand to voice their support for the proposal.

The resolution — which was also supported by Councilmember Bernard Parks and Council President Herb Wesson — called attention to the recent uproar over comments by KFI 640 AM talk show hosts John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou.

Kobylt and Chiampou were suspended after they called the late pop singer Whitney Houston a “crack ho” three days after her death in February.

The proposal cites a “long history of racially offensive comments as well as deplorable sexist remarks, particularly towards women and Black, Latino, and Asian communities” at KFI 640 and calls for parent company Clear Channel Communications and other broadcasters to hire a more diverse workforce to offset the trend.

“It is easy to become desensitized to what other groups find intolerable which ultimately fosters an environment where negative comments can go unchecked and corporate guidelines and policies are no longer being enforced,” the resolution reads.

Remarks from syndicated talk show host Rush Limbaugh referring to Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke as a “slut” and a “prostitute” for testifying on Capitol Hill about women’s access to contraception were also cited in the proposal.

Will the new rules also cover film, music, books and the guy standing at the microphone at a college protest?

How about newspapers and web sites? Just like with hate crimes laws. When your new law is used against you is when the fun starts. \:D/
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

Thomas Jefferson

http://www.rebellioustruths.org/
User avatar
Parrotpaul
Posts: 33551
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:14 pm
Has thanked: 1 time

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Parrotpaul »

It'll never fly, Orville.
"I think I may say that of all the men we meet with, nine parts of ten are what they are, good or evil, useful or not, by their education." John Locke
Red
Posts: 17717
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:33 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Red »

Tar Pit wrote:http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/03/ ... alk-radio/

LOS ANGELES (CBS) — City Council members were one step closer on Wednesday to becoming the first in the nation to adopt a resolution condemning certain types of speech on public airwaves.

Councilmember Jan Perry introduced legislation this week that would call upon media companies to ensure “on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs” on radio and other broadcasts.

Members of Black Media Alliance, National Hispanic Media Coalition, Korean-American Bar Association, and American Indians in Film and Television were on hand to voice their support for the proposal.

The resolution — which was also supported by Councilmember Bernard Parks and Council President Herb Wesson — called attention to the recent uproar over comments by KFI 640 AM talk show hosts John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou.

Kobylt and Chiampou were suspended after they called the late pop singer Whitney Houston a “crack ho” three days after her death in February.

The proposal cites a “long history of racially offensive comments as well as deplorable sexist remarks, particularly towards women and Black, Latino, and Asian communities” at KFI 640 and calls for parent company Clear Channel Communications and other broadcasters to hire a more diverse workforce to offset the trend.

“It is easy to become desensitized to what other groups find intolerable which ultimately fosters an environment where negative comments can go unchecked and corporate guidelines and policies are no longer being enforced,” the resolution reads.

Remarks from syndicated talk show host Rush Limbaugh referring to Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke as a “slut” and a “prostitute” for testifying on Capitol Hill about women’s access to contraception were also cited in the proposal.

Will the new rules also cover film, music, books and the guy standing at the microphone at a college protest?

How about newspapers and web sites? Just like with hate crimes laws. When your new law is used against you is when the fun starts. \:D/
What about hollywood and the racist filth they put out in their movies and TV shows? I wish people would march to their offices and tell them to POUND Sand. Rotten Marxists! I am going to get a petition signed to condemn rotten Marxist hypocritical politicians!
Last edited by Red on Thu Mar 22, 2012 7:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Liberalism is like an out-of-control 5 year old at McDonalds. All the talking to and admonishment won't make a difference. They have no concept of right or wrong, they are nothing more than narcissists.
User avatar
Parrotpaul
Posts: 33551
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:14 pm
Has thanked: 1 time

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Parrotpaul »

Red...you really do need to stop reposting complete articles just because you are too lazy to click "post reply." Maybe it's just your contrariness. :shrug:
"I think I may say that of all the men we meet with, nine parts of ten are what they are, good or evil, useful or not, by their education." John Locke
Red
Posts: 17717
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:33 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Red »

Parrotpaul wrote:Red...you really do need to stop reposting complete articles just because you are too lazy to click "post reply." Maybe it's just your contrariness. :shrug:
"lazy"? Let me get this straight, the punks in the city council wants to limit free speech and in the same thread you want to tell me how to respond? Are you kidding me? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
Liberalism is like an out-of-control 5 year old at McDonalds. All the talking to and admonishment won't make a difference. They have no concept of right or wrong, they are nothing more than narcissists.
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 27653
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by John Q. Public »

Red wrote: "lazy"? Let me get this straight, the punks in the city councel wants to limit free speech and in the same thread you want to tell me how to respond? Are you kidding me? :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:
How 'bout if I tell you? Again.

Please stop using the Quote function when there's no reason to!
Don't look at me, I just work here.
User avatar
Tar Pit
Posts: 1233
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 6:43 am

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Tar Pit »

It's 8:58 =D> Time for Rush. :thumbsup:
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

Thomas Jefferson

http://www.rebellioustruths.org/
User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by GOODave »

I'll move the global comments over to the global thread, as to the article, I really do not understand how the Los Angeles Councilperson (don't want to be sexist in this public forum) can keep a straight face when fostering such a resolution.

Anyone with a 50+ IQ will know immediately to challenge it on first amendment grounds and it will get thrown out as a violation of free speech...

I'm well aware that the FCC has, in the past, severely restricted free speech over the radio waves and they got upbraided by other government agencies (principally the President) so they loosened their sphincters quite a bit in later years. I'm also aware that the network censors still have their red pencils to excise certain scenes from TV shows based on inappropriate language and, ahem, physical representations and the like.

But how do [you, or you, or you over there, or you up there, et al] constitutionally rationalize abridging uncivility (as I've recently heard it called)?

I'm saying it cannot be done (the rationalizing, that is).
User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 28017
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 55 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Wabash »

Parrotpaul wrote:It'll never fly, Orville.
I agree. Free speech means having to listen to dialogue one finds unpleasant and uncomfortable.
Stay loose, and be a little afraid.

quando omni flunkus, mortati
Red
Posts: 17717
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:33 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Red »

John Q. Public wrote: How 'bout if I tell you? Again.

Please stop using the Quote function when there's no reason to!
That's better. Okay. I will be looking for others and will promptly warn them also. :thumbsup:
Liberalism is like an out-of-control 5 year old at McDonalds. All the talking to and admonishment won't make a difference. They have no concept of right or wrong, they are nothing more than narcissists.
Red
Posts: 17717
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:33 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Red »

Tar Pit wrote:It's 8:58 =D> Time for Rush. :thumbsup:
I like John Philips at KABC at this time. I weaned off of Rush, however KABC is forcing me back with the hiring of that IDIOT Geraldo.
Last edited by Red on Thu Mar 22, 2012 8:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Liberalism is like an out-of-control 5 year old at McDonalds. All the talking to and admonishment won't make a difference. They have no concept of right or wrong, they are nothing more than narcissists.
User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by GOODave »

Wabash wrote: I agree. Free speech means having to listen to dialogue one finds unpleasant and uncomfortable.
No it doesn't mean that at all.

Free speech means whomever is DELIVERING that unpleasant and uncomfortable dialogue gets to PRESENT it ... if I find it offensive, there is nothing in the world (never mind the Constitution) that compels me to stay around and read/listen to it.

Nothing at all.
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 27653
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by John Q. Public »

You guys did notice it's only a "resolution" right?
Don't look at me, I just work here.
User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 27653
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by John Q. Public »

Red wrote: That's better. Okay. I will be looking for others and will promptly warn them also. :thumbsup:
I'd appreciate it. It's really annoying.
Don't look at me, I just work here.
Red
Posts: 17717
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:33 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Red »

Parrotpaul wrote: When did you retire?
Hijacking another thread? Do you mind not hijacking threads? It is really annoying.
Liberalism is like an out-of-control 5 year old at McDonalds. All the talking to and admonishment won't make a difference. They have no concept of right or wrong, they are nothing more than narcissists.
User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by GOODave »

John Q. Public wrote:You guys did notice it's only a "resolution" right?
I don't think it's the enforcability that's under question.

IT's the nature of the resolution, itself. Did you read that last part where the "proposal" also includes a recommendation about who KABC should hire?

Further, even though a resolution, what will be the impact on KABC if they decide to ignore it? Will it mean KABC Reporters will be barred from council meetings, or simply that council members, themselves, won't listen to KABC? Is there ANY untoward consequence for the general public not heeding a council resolution?

I think there are, which only strengthens my initial revulsion at their proposed resolution.
MDDad
Posts: 12385
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 26 times

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by MDDad »

GOODave wrote: No it doesn't mean that at all.

Free speech means whomever is DELIVERING that unpleasant and uncomfortable dialogue gets to PRESENT it ... if I find it offensive, there is nothing in the world (never mind the Constitution) that compels me to stay around and read/listen to it.

Nothing at all.
I don't understand how what two clowns say on their radio show is a city council issue. If it is an issue at all, it is a federal one. Can we assume that the city council is devoting time to this because all of the city's other more pressing problems have been solved?


Red wrote:I am going to get a petition signed to condemn rotten Marxist hypocritical politicians!
Yeah, that'll fly. Can't wait to see you in front of Target getting signatures.
Red
Posts: 17717
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:33 pm

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Red »

MDDad wrote: I don't understand how what two clowns say on their radio show is a city council issue. If it is an issue at all, it is a federal one. Can we assume that the city council is devoting time to this because all of the city's other more pressing problems have been solved?




Yeah, that'll fly. Can't wait to see you in front of Target getting signatures.
:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:

Of course, I would be careful which Target to stand in front of!

Oh BTW, are they done bankrupting the city of LA?
Liberalism is like an out-of-control 5 year old at McDonalds. All the talking to and admonishment won't make a difference. They have no concept of right or wrong, they are nothing more than narcissists.
User avatar
Tar Pit
Posts: 1233
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 6:43 am

Re: Free speech for some.

Post by Tar Pit »

The John and Ken show on KFI 640am 2-6 rips on the public sector unions all day long. They give out the phone numbers of public employees managers and elected officials so their listeners can call and complain to them. This resolution is a shot over the bow at John and Ken and their pot banging about Governor Brown tax ballot initiatives. The public sector unions are pulling the strings on this one. :-"
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

Thomas Jefferson

http://www.rebellioustruths.org/
Post Reply