Is this ok?

[Yeziknoradio]

A radio station in Toronto Canada decided recently to air a song that *seems* to be upsetting the gay community.

Is it wise to do that?

Here's the article:

"Gay fans tune out"

http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2008/10/23/7172061-sun.html

 

[TomT]

In the U.S., yes. We have the first amendment down here. While the liberal elites don't like that, and probably will try to muzzle broadcasters with the fairness doctrine after the election, we can say just about anything on the radio so long as it isn't obscene or libelous.

Canadians don't have free speech, especially if you stray into areas protected by these liberal elites. Do a Google search on the problems that the Maclean's magazine ran into with the homosexuals. Not to mention various other protected groups that one is not supposed to criticize.

 

[mleach]

In the U.S., yes. We have the first amendment down here. While the liberal elites don't like that, and probably will try to muzzle broadcasters with the fairness doctrine after the election, we can say just about anything on the radio so long as it isn't obscene or libelous.

I agree with you !!

However I can think of a few conservative groups in the US that aren't exactly pro-free speech/ first amendment either. Take the anti-gay group Exodus International for example. They have ties to Colorado's Focus On The Family and many other churches around the US. Last year in a town not far from me, a young man was a big fan of the Chicago Bears football team so on his license plate he had the words " Luv Bears". Exodus took that plate and claimed the man was using his license plate to "promote the disgusting gay bear and cub lifestyle...words like Bears shouldn't be allowed to be used on a license plate..think of the children ". Funny thing was this young man had no idea about the conection between the word "bear" and "gay" and chances are few would either, that is until Exodus came along. Anyway, he had to change his license plate. I would say his right to free speech was violated.

 

[4dude]

People shouldnt be so sensitive!!

 

[Yeziknoradio]

I mean, I'm not gay, but here's what I really do not get...

The idea is to have PEOPLE of a select target group listening.

Gay or straight has nothing to do with their ability to turn on the radio and tune in.

Why would Virgin radio (Toronto) risk reducing the number of PEOPLE tuning into their radio station.

Isn't the bottom line being distracted?

I have no idea if it's a half a percent or 10 percent of ratings or what, but it IS a listenership they HAVE along with everyone else.

Their sexual prefrence has nothing to do with their ability to listen and remember to fill out a diary.
They just might pay attention to the ads aired too.

WHY scare them away?

What if that now means that instead of having a 4 share, the station now has a 3.9 or 3.8?

I guess that doesn't matter!

I don't know about you guys, but if I had a radio station, I'd want it to show that 4 share, not something lower.

To borrow a stereotype, if I may. The gay person might buy pink paint instead of blue at the paint store, but they'd still go there and shop!
What if that paint store was the main sponsor?

Just wondering...

I could just see it now:

"Hey? We're trying to sell paint here, and you're trying to get some of our potential customers to listen to something else before our ad even airs! WTF?"

 

[1900radio]

In the U.S., yes. We have the first amendment down here. While the liberal elites don't like that, and probably will try to muzzle broadcasters with the fairness doctrine after the election, we can say just about anything on the radio so long as it isn't obscene or libelous.

Canadians don't have free speech, especially if you stray into areas protected by these liberal elites. Do a Google search on the problems that the Maclean's magazine ran into with the homosexuals. Not to mention various other protected groups that one is not supposed to criticize.

You didn't understand the question. "Is this ok?" Not, "Is this legal?"

Keep pissing people off, see what happens. Look at 5 years ago on pop when every song was a dirty rap song (Candyshop, etc). Ratings tanked. Sure it might have looked good in research. That's because there are 2 major flaws in research.
1. If you have decided to stop listening to a station because of the content, you won't be invited to take the callout research.
2. There isn't an option worse than "I don't like this song." Some songs make people completely turn off a station and say "I don't trust you. I don't want my kids exposed to this." Happened somewhat with Katy Perry in the US.

 

[mleach]

People shouldnt be so sensitive!!

Since this situation happened in Canada where gay men & women have equal rights as straights ( if I am wrong please correct me ), I agree with you.

However had Virgin been an AMERICAN station considering......

*In many states it is still very legal to fire someone/deny employment only because they are gay ( I worked in a radio market in Virginia back in the mid 90s and I can recall when we lost two announcers. Not because of poor ratings but they were fired only because they were "found out" to be gay. )

*so many American gay men/women live in fear around the clock/year round that they could end up being the next Matthew Shepherd or Fred Phelps will be "picketing" outside their own home.

*the fear that future state laws will "ban them". With all these states banning gay marriage over the years I would NOT at all be surprised where some state in the future, someplace will put on the ballot "should homosexuality be banned in our state". Of course the problem is if such a thing passes, many things we don't think about will end up being illegal. Two guys ( or two girls ) sharing an apartment together reguardless if they are gay or not? That Wednesday night poker game with the guys? Two guys riding a roller coaster together? Some whackos actually believe all of that equals homosexuality.

*and considering that some people consider being called "gay" an "insult". Bring up the gay factor and some guys will ASAP contact their lawyers and sue.

Nah had this been a US station..I can very much see people being so sensitive.

 

[KFodor]

People shouldnt be so sensitive!!

Since this situation happened in Canada where gay men & women have equal rights as straights ( if I am wrong please correct me ), I agree with you.

However had Virgin been an AMERICAN station considering......

*In many states it is still very legal to fire someone/deny employment only because they are gay ( I worked in a radio market in Virginia back in the mid 90s and I can recall when we lost two announcers. Not because of poor ratings but they were fired only because they were "found out" to be gay. )

*so many American gay men/women live in fear around the clock/year round that they could end up being the next Matthew Shepherd or Fred Phelps will be "picketing" outside their own home.

*the fear that future state laws will "ban them". With all these states banning gay marriage over the years I would NOT at all be surprised where some state in the future, someplace will put on the ballot "should homosexuality be banned in our state". Of course the problem is if such a thing passes, many things we don't think about will end up being illegal. Two guys ( or two girls ) sharing an apartment together reguardless if they are gay or not? That Wednesday night poker game with the guys? Two guys riding a roller coaster together? Some whackos actually believe all of that equals homosexuality.

*and considering that some people consider being called "gay" an "insult". Bring up the gay factor and some guys will ASAP contact their lawyers and sue.

Nah had this been a US station..I can very much see people being so sensitive.

Firing because someone who was gay may have been possible in the U.S. in the 1990's, but I'd be very surprised to see such a thing happen in all but a few areas today.

The company I work for offers health benefits for "domestic partners", so I can't see anyone in that company being terminated for simply "being gay".