"Obviously not the issue"?!? Get a clue. If she was mocking something he said about the issue he had notoriety from, you might have a point, but he wasn't, so you don't. He put his college issues out in the public sphere, companies are dumb to let any controversy over it dictate their choices of where to advertise.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Another Ad Boycott At Fox
- Thread starter TheBigA
- Start date
"Obviously not the issue"?!? Get a clue. If she was mocking something he said about the issue he had notoriety from, you might have a point, but he wasn't, so you don't. He put his college issues out in the public sphere, companies are dumb to let any controversy over it dictate their choices of where to advertise.
It's their money. They have lots of places to put it. They're not going to defend what some TV host says. That's not their business.
As I said, they're not buying ideology, they're buying demographics. But when someone forces them to defend their placement, they leave.
We saw it a few years ago with talk radio. I still see orders that say "Do not air in controversial programming."
Agreed. Your average high-school student would not have such a slickly
organized social media campaign. It strains credulity to think a 17-year old
can do this on his own without professional help.
You should spend some time with a teenager. They're very adept at social media.
Fox News says they're standing behind Laura Ingraham, and call the boycott "intimidation."
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...am-despite-backlash-over-parkland-controversy
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...am-despite-backlash-over-parkland-controversy
Most of these advertisers will quietly come back and advertise on Laura Ingraham's program once will all of this dies down in a few weeks, but the ones that don't will likely also stop advertising on MSNBC and CNN or any other controversial programs. There are advertiser that consider Clark Howard radio and former tv program "controversial" and wont advertise. (Clark Howard is the least controversial person I know).
Maybe. They didn't return to Rush Limbaugh's radio show. But I'm sure if they do, someone will point it out.
Many advertisers buy seasonally, during Sean Hannity’s boycott many advertisers that said they were dropping Hannity’s program weren’t buying time at that moment. It’s likely current Ingraham advertisers that were drop is far lower than the reported 11.
G
Groove1670
Guest
The average cable network has what...3 to 5 million viewers (peak). Do the the other 250 (rough number - non viewing) million residents of our nation really care. Office Depot is right around the corner from my office. Now if there was a local supply place, I would go there.
...oh and none of the advertisers leading the boycott are going to place a buy with me.
I'm sure you're right...and I'm sure that same metric could be applied to the hundreds of millions who don't listen to conservative talk radio.
Which is why such boycotts don't bother the advertisers one bit.
They do it because it's highly rated, not because it's controversial. Most aren't making advertising decisions based on ideology. Those that are, you're right.
And yes, it's small potatoes for the corporation.
I doubt it even rises to that level.
http://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/geraldo-rivera-calls-laura-ingrahams-comments-indefensible/361023
Update Geraldo comes forward on the Laura ingraham rant.
Update Geraldo comes forward on the Laura ingraham rant.
http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/112659/ingraham-returns-complains-about-censorship
Here is an update on Laura Ingraham fiasco
Here is an update on Laura Ingraham fiasco
It's not a free speech issue. The first amendment doesn't apply to advertisers.
Depends...there are usually consequences to any action. If someone attacked her appearance, she would likely sue.
let's be honest about freedom of speech, it means we are free to say anything about political or religious or any other views, therefore our freedoms mean we won't go to jail for calling someone a offensive slur, badmouthing the president or anything that gets you arrested in countries where freedom of speech doesn't exist. as long as you don't make threats of committing actual crimes, then your free to speak what ever you want without the fear of being arrested. but if you say something conroversial that could risk your job or friends or life, then you faces the consequences of that, but at the same time, you won't have to worry about jail time unless your comments are crime related.
moral of the story is, freedom of speech only prevents you from going to jail, not losing your job, not losing friends/family, or becoming a social pariah or risk you getting murdered by someone due to a disagreement on what you say in front of them.
so therefore, Laura still has the right to say what ever, but it can come with a price, cause freedom isn't really free.
- Status