Talk Radio Ethics

[stevensonair]

Hypothetical:

If you managed or programmed a talk station and one of your hosts who was identifiable as involved with your station were to express supportive sentiments towards a truly white supremacist public figure/other broadcaster and his involvement with white nationalist programming or views, even if said host wasn't directly broadcasting such things - but supported them in other venues.. where they also used horrendous language, particularly towards women and minorities..

Would you:

A: Act on the information and discipline or address the matter with the host.

B: Ignore it and assume that no one in your market would find out and it wouldn't affect your business?

Just curious.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

Depends on the format, really. If I'm running a station that staunchly takes positions in one direction or another (or at all regardless of which at any given time), and if it's not on one of my outlets (air or web site), the most I could really do about it is state at the top and bottom of each hour (or however often I decide is necessary) that his view and opinions do not necessarily reflect those of the station. If the station has a specific lean and his positions are against it, or if the station is truly neutral and he's saying those things on on of my outlets, then it's three strikes and he's out.

 

[FredLeonard]

I'm not sure what you're talking about here. The screenshot really doesn't say anything I can see.

Don't be coy. It sounds like you have an opinion here but are hiding behind a hypothetical question. What happened? Who said what? And what is your opinion that motivated you to post?

The reality is hosts get reprimanded, suspended or fired due to complaints. Hosts are pushed to be outrageous and when somebody gets outraged, the host's head rolls.

Your question is vague (and somewhat leading) but it sounds like you are complaining because some host, on his own time, said something "supportive" (not sure what that means in this case) about somebody you really don't like or really disagree with. Apparently those less than condemning comments had nothing to do with what you don't like about this person but you think he or she deserves nothing other than complete condemnation no matter what?

 

[stevensonair]

No, actually, it's my curiosity about what would happen at a cross section of radio stations were it to become known to management that their host spent their off hours calling African-Americans "apes" and saying degrading things about women, maybe says all Muslims "riot and burn stuff" but didn't do it on the air - assuming it was clearly identifiable who the person was, what station they represented, perhaps they even posted a photo of themselves that cross referenced nicely with the station's website.

Is this a problem, or is what people do on their off hours really their own private affair, even if it's obvious who they are? Do they represent the station when they're not on the air and just posting online?

You know as well as I do that providing specifics HERE would be viewed as "harassment."

 

[FredLeonard]

No, actually, it's my curiosity about what would happen at a cross section of radio stations were it to become known to management that their host spent their off hours calling African-Americans "apes" and saying degrading things about women, maybe says all Muslims "riot and burn stuff" but didn't do it on the air - assuming it was clearly identifiable who the person was, what station they represented, perhaps they even posted a photo of themselves that cross referenced nicely with the station's website.

Is this a problem, or is what people do on their off hours really their own private affair, even if it's obvious who they are? Do they represent the station when they're not on the air and just posting online?

You know as well as I do that providing specifics HERE would be viewed as "harassment."

Ask Juan Williams. NPR fired him for something he said on Fox News. But it all depends on management and the amount of flack they get.

Harassment? No, reporting.

Are you talking about something that actually happened? And were these statements made in a public setting or medium? Does this have anything to do with your Anthony Cumia post?

Racism or any "ism" is in the mind (maybe the agenda) of the beholder. I don't often agree with Rush but his comment about Donovan McNabb (which got him fired from ESPN) was accurate and valid but its was (falsely) labeled "racist." It's one of those cards people with an ax to grind find easy to use.

And people have gotten fired for a lot less than the "hypothetical" instances you provided.

 

[radiophiler]

Radio talk show hosts are employees and are no different than any other type of employee. Proper HR practice would be to conduct an investigation with the possibility of suspending the employee during the investigation. A decision should only be made after the investigation is completed. Might take just one day, might take much longer to conduct. If the talk show host violated a company policy, the host would face disciplinary measures depending on the gravity of the situation and whether the host had previous infractions. That could include a written warning, time off without pay or firing.

 

[Avid Listener]

Hypothetical:

If you managed or programmed a talk station and one of your hosts who was identifiable as involved with your station were to express supportive sentiments towards a truly white supremacist public figure/other broadcaster and his involvement with white nationalist programming or views, even if said host wasn't directly broadcasting such things - but supported them in other venues.. where they also used horrendous language, particularly towards women and minorities..

Would you:

A: Act on the information and discipline or address the matter with the host.

B: Ignore it and assume that no one in your market would find out and it wouldn't affect your business?

Just curious.

A genuinely non-biased station, that truly tolerated all points of view, and that took the First Amendment seriously would no more censor someone who was a European-American chauvinist than they would censor an African-American chauvinist or "La Raza" chauvinist.

What sort of different responses would you get if your premise was "If you managed or programmed a talk station and one of your hosts who was identifiable as involved with your station were to express supportive sentiments towards a truly black supremacist public figure/other broadcaster and his involvement with black nationalist programming or views, even if said host wasn't directly broadcasting such things - but supported them in other venues.. where they also used horrendous language, particularly towards women and others..."?

Or what about if it was "If you managed or programmed a talk station and one of your hosts who was identifiable as involved with your station were to express supportive sentiments towards a truly Hispanic supremacist (ie. Aztalan advocate) public figure/other broadcaster and his involvement with Hispanic nationalist programming or views, even if said host wasn't directly broadcasting such things - but supported them in other venues.. where they also used horrendous language, particularly towards women and gringos.."?

 

[Richard Stefan]

Well what if the person was associated with the black panthers black liberation army, a black muslim extremist group..or a black version of the KKK.......would it apply equally??? I dont think so in 2014 america

 

[FredLeonard]

A genuinely non-biased station, that truly tolerated all points of view, and that took the First Amendment seriously would no more censor someone who was a European-American chauvinist than they would censor an African-American chauvinist or "La Raza" chauvinist.

Too bad there aren't any of those.

Before anybody else says it, this is (hypothetically) not a first amendment issue since no branch of government is involved. If (hypothetically) the FCC got involved and threatened to fine the licensee or revoke the license - or if the CPB tried to withhold funding from a public radio station - in this scenario, then it would be a first amendment issue.

 

[stevensonair]

I think it goes a bit beyond questioning any sort of "racial politics."

When you have someone who doesn't protect their profile and public image enough that they clearly represent their background, their geography, and their employer doesn't do their due diligence, you might wind up with a talk show host who defends the censoring or "creative typing" of the N-word on a forum because "it might get us showing up on Google."

But you'd think they'd have the sense not to post their picture.

 

[frankberry]

If the Host has an employment contract, it will certainly have a 'morality' or 'conduct' clause. It covers employee conduct while at work and during non-working hours.

 

[FredLeonard]

I think it goes a bit beyond questioning any sort of "racial politics."

When you have someone who doesn't protect their profile and public image enough that they clearly represent their background, their geography, and their employer doesn't do their due diligence, you might wind up with a talk show host who defends the censoring or "creative typing" of the N-word on a forum because "it might get us showing up on Google."

But you'd think they'd have the sense not to post their picture.

You've changed the hypothetical here.

It's still not clear what this person said. What is clear you find it egregious. You assume that the employer or the community at large do, too. A lot of people may agree with this guy. The basis of right-wing talk radio's appeal to its core audience is hosts saying the listener wants said but feels "others" are not willing to allow those things to be said or are not willing to hear them.

The kinds of things you say about the host in this hypothetical have also been said about real world hosts, who continued hosting.

 

[stevensonair]

So let's say this individual:

1. Called African-American defenders of Trayvon Martin "apes" that might riot.
2. Referred to a New Jersey mother who appeared at a schoolboard meeting as a "Jewish c_nt"
3. Referred to the widow of James Brady as a "c_nt"
4. In an advice thread on a clingy girlfriend suggested the OP "make sure you let her know you're serious with a well placed backhand." "don't worry about marks, the door did it."
5. Refers to Latina women as "beaners" and "sp_cs"

You know, if I had hired a guy like that, I might advise him to truck on down the highway. Perhaps take up carpentry.

 

[FredLeonard]

C'mon, Dude! "Let's say...." Did anybody who is actually a known radio personality post these statements using his known on-air name?

Since I have seen nothing about this elsewhere, it seems you're the only one who has noticed or it never happened.

 

[Avid Listener]

If the Host has an employment contract, it will certainly have a 'morality' or 'conduct' clause. It covers employee conduct while at work and during non-working hours.

Does an honest political opinion, however unpopular, count as immoral?

 

[Avid Listener]

And as long as I have everyone's attention, do we really need THREE threads on this non-issue?

 

[chrocket87]

While we're at it, can the moderators please nuke this entire thread, as well as the other thread that has been posted by the same user, as it is an unnecessary personal attack against a user of these boards. I do not agree with many of the targeted user's opinions, however there is absolutely no excuse to have these kinds of outings/personal attacks lobbied against him.

 

[BOZ Profit]

The offending posts have been deleted.

There is something called "Report Post" for each and every post. Under each PROFILE BOX on each post you see "Send PM" and a little TRIANGLE with an EXCLAMATION POINT (the "!"). If you CLICK ON the ! you can report that post.

Thanks!

 

[Ravens]

If a host does a good job on the air, that's the only thing that should matter.

And some people need to learn about LIFE ethics before they start lecturing on radio ethics.

 

[gr8oldies]

Many are not employees, they're independent contractors or have their own networks.

Radio talk show hosts are employees and are no different than any other type of employee. Proper HR practice would be to conduct an investigation with the possibility of suspending the employee during the investigation. A decision should only be made after the investigation is completed. Might take just one day, might take much longer to conduct. If the talk show host violated a company policy, the host would face disciplinary measures depending on the gravity of the situation and whether the host had previous infractions. That could include a written warning, time off without pay or firing.