Inside James Dolan’s all-out revenge on Maggie Gray, WFAN

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

https://nypost.com/2018/10/22/inside-james-dolans-all-out-revenge-on-maggie-gray-wfan/

Its in relation to Maggie Gray's rants. In the article they try to look at Maggie Gray as a Jemele Hill person though.

James Dolan and Madison Square Garden have gone nuclear in their revenge against WFAN and its parent company, Entercom, The Post has learned.

In retaliation for a summer rant by WFAN host Maggie Gray, Dolan’s MSG has ordered all of its businesses across the country to shut down working with Entercom and banned Knicks and Rangers players, as well as MSG broadcasters and personnel, from appearing on the station, according to officials involved in the decision.

In Gray’s summer rant, she called Dolan a “vile piece of trash,” among other things. The Dolan takedown was brought on because Dolan, with his band, JD and the Straight Shot, released a song called, “I Should’ve Known,” perceived to be about producer Harvey Weinstein, his longtime friend, who has been accused of raping and sexually harassing dozens of women. Gray thought it was hypocritical in light of the Garden having been found liable for a hostile work environment in the Anucha Browne Sanders sexual harassment suit in 2007.

Last week, Gray apologized on-air for the rant’s personal nature, but not for its content. It was too little, too late for the Garden.

 

[TheBigA]

Whatever happened to free speech?

It's one thing to sue someone for defamation. It's another to use the words of one employee to blacklist an entire company.

Interesting that at least in NYC, the Knicks and the Rangers, the two main teams that play at MSG, are carried on WEPN, not WFAN.

There is a case going before the Supreme Court this year that deals the retaliation of a company against the free speech of an individual: Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck,

 

[CTListener]

Whatever happened to free speech?

Interesting that at least in NYC, the Knicks and the Rangers, the two main teams that play at MSG, are carried on WEPN, not WFAN.,

And WFAN talks about the Rangers only slightly more than it talks about the Red Bulls and New York City FC, which is to say very, very little. Yankees and Mets in the warm weather, Giants, Jets and Knicks (and general NFL and NBA talk) in the cold. Not having Knicks personnel available to interview might hurt the station in February and March when the NFL season is over and baseball hasn't started, but I'm sure there'll be a lot of Giants/Jets post-mortems and Yankees/Mets hot stove/spring training talking points to keep the audience entertained.

 

[TheBigA]

Not having Knicks personnel available to interview might hurt the station in February and March when the NFL season is over and baseball hasn't started, but I'm sure there'll be a lot of Giants/Jets post-mortems and Yankees/Mets hot stove/spring training talking points to keep the audience entertained.

This might be settled by then. Then again the way the Knicks have been playing, the Fan would do better talking about college basketball.

 

[CTListener]

This might be settled by then. Then again the way the Knicks have been playing, the Fan would do better talking about college basketball.

Surely you jest. As in Boston, the only way to get sports radio listeners in New York to listen to anything involving college sports is to make it all about beating the spread, because college sports are barely a blip on the radar -- and radio -- in those two cities except among those who like to bet on them.

 

[TheBigA]

Surely you jest.

We're talking about the Knicks, not the Celtics. MSG should be paying radio stations for coverage of the Knicks.

 

[umfan]

Whatever happened to free speech?

It's one thing to sue someone for defamation. It's another to use the words of one employee to blacklist an entire company.

Interesting that at least in NYC, the Knicks and the Rangers, the two main teams that play at MSG, are carried on WEPN, not WFAN.

There is a case going before the Supreme Court this year that deals the retaliation of a company against the free speech of an individual: Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck,

Where is the freedom for a citizen, and his businesses, to decline to associate with another person or business because of what they said somehow not legal? The First Amendment only assures freedom from reprisal for speech by the government. Last time I checked, Mr. Dolan was not the government. If Entercom is foolish enough to allow one of their employees to rant about the owner of multiple professional sports franchises in a market where they have a station covering professional sports, than they have a real management problem.

As is common with your posts, you have offered something not germane to the topic at hand to try to further your POV.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Community_Access_Corp._v._Halleck

This case would have no applicability to the topic raised by the OP. In the case you referenced, the criticism was leveled at the platform upon which the content aired. No ruling in that case could compel someone like Mr Dolan from withholding employees of his organization from a completely separate organization as a result of not liking what was said.

 

[CTListener]

Where is the freedom for a citizen, and his businesses, to decline to associate with another person or business because of what they said somehow not legal? The First Amendment only assures freedom from reprisal for speech by the government. Last time I checked, Mr. Dolan was not the government. If Entercom is foolish enough to allow one of their employees to rant about the owner of multiple professional sports franchises in a market where they have a station covering professional sports, than they have a real management problem.

As is common with your posts, you have offered something not germane to the topic at hand to try to further your POV.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Community_Access_Corp._v._Halleck

This case would have no applicability to the topic raised by the OP. In the case you referenced, the criticism was leveled at the platform upon which the content aired. No ruling in that case could compel someone like Mr Dolan from withholding employees of his organization from a completely separate organization as a result of not liking what was said.

Being on the other side of the ideological divide from you, I almost never agree with you on issues like this, but this time I must, and enthusiastically. I worked for a newspaper in the South many years ago that would not allow a local chiropractor to advertise in its pages, strictly because the publisher thought chiropractic was quackery. We were the only daily paper within 25 miles, and the nearest weekly was a dozen miles east and not even sold in our town. Our paper was essentially denying the chiropractor the only effective method he had to promote his services. But nothing said we couldn't do it, and he never took the paper to court over it. (Which would have been laughable. What would his complaint have been? "This nasty old publisher refused to take the money I offered him to run my ad"?) Private businesspeople can do business with, or refuse to do business with, whomever they wish to, just as long as the discrimination isn't based on race, religion or sexual orientation, right?

 

[TheBigA]

Where is the freedom for a citizen, and his businesses, to decline to associate with another person or business because of what they said somehow not legal?

As I said, he could sue the individual for defamation. That's not what he chose to do. How is the entire company responsible? Unless they directed her to say what she said, it is solely her responsibility.

This case would have no applicability to the topic raised by the OP.

There are some who are using this Supreme Court case as a test case for social media sites deleting comments made by conservatives.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/16/sup...cide-fb-twitter-power-to-regulate-speech.html

I agree it's a stretch, but that's what some are saying.

 

[TheBigA]

This isn't the first time one of Entercom's sports talk stations has had to deal with comments made by one of its hosts. Last January, WEEI Boston suspended Alex Reimer for comments he made about Tom Brady's daughter.

https://deadspin.com/tom-brady-cuts-weei-interview-short-because-host-called-1822507880

The host was "indefinitely suspended" and a company apology was given. Neither has happened here yet. Brady said he didn't want the host to be fired. In fact, Reimer still appears on WEEI.

 

[Don CT]

I wonder if Dolan likes watching horrible sports teams. I doubt he cares as the Knicks make money by just existing.