Brief article in today's R&R Today email:
Responding To Protests, WLW Takes Down Billboards
Following protests from Hispanic Chamber Cincinnati USA, Clear Channel talker WLW/Cincinnati is
taking down billboards headed “The Big Juan” and depicting a man wearing a sombrero and holding
up his index finger in the gesture for “No. 1.” WLW has long branded itself as “The Big One.” In a
letter sent to the station and to Clear Channel executives, the chamber wrote, “Perhaps someone at
your station believes there was humor in this hateful campaign. But rest assured, this is not funny in
the least.”
There's an even moe detailed version on the R&R website, called "‘Offensive’ WLW Billboards Coming Down":
http://www.radioandrecords.com/RRWebSite/NewsStoryPage.aspx?ContentID=EDDRjiY5j2k=&Version=1
The actual subject should be WHY is there a controversy here? I just don't get it. Unless there's something that's not being reported, I can't fathom why it would be considered even mildly offensive, and CERTAINLY NOT "hateful". Radio billboards and campaigns in other media turn peoples' names and persona into puns all the time. Maybe the sombrero is considered a stereotype? Well, stereotypes (NOT just based on race or ethnic origin) are common in cmpaigns, too. And even if the stereotype here *was* considered offensive, it sure doesn't come across as "hateful." This is really over the edge. I don't think CC should have been bullied on this (unless again, there's more to the story that's not fully explained). But of course they must be jittery with the Imus thing, and maye don't want to take even the slightest chance that it would affect their last-ditch efforts to go private.
Responding To Protests, WLW Takes Down Billboards
Following protests from Hispanic Chamber Cincinnati USA, Clear Channel talker WLW/Cincinnati is
taking down billboards headed “The Big Juan” and depicting a man wearing a sombrero and holding
up his index finger in the gesture for “No. 1.” WLW has long branded itself as “The Big One.” In a
letter sent to the station and to Clear Channel executives, the chamber wrote, “Perhaps someone at
your station believes there was humor in this hateful campaign. But rest assured, this is not funny in
the least.”
There's an even moe detailed version on the R&R website, called "‘Offensive’ WLW Billboards Coming Down":
http://www.radioandrecords.com/RRWebSite/NewsStoryPage.aspx?ContentID=EDDRjiY5j2k=&Version=1
The actual subject should be WHY is there a controversy here? I just don't get it. Unless there's something that's not being reported, I can't fathom why it would be considered even mildly offensive, and CERTAINLY NOT "hateful". Radio billboards and campaigns in other media turn peoples' names and persona into puns all the time. Maybe the sombrero is considered a stereotype? Well, stereotypes (NOT just based on race or ethnic origin) are common in cmpaigns, too. And even if the stereotype here *was* considered offensive, it sure doesn't come across as "hateful." This is really over the edge. I don't think CC should have been bullied on this (unless again, there's more to the story that's not fully explained). But of course they must be jittery with the Imus thing, and maye don't want to take even the slightest chance that it would affect their last-ditch efforts to go private.
