Talk Radio Ethics

[FredLeonard]

I have to say, people who suddenly get in high dudgeon over someone else's supposedly politically incorrect statements remind me of people who beat up gays because they can't deal with their own tendencies.

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."

 

[Avid Listener]

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

Regardless of how the relationship is structured, at the end of the day it doesn't make a dime's worth of difference. It's all based on contracts, and all contracts can have similar clauses.

 

[FredLeonard]

Regardless of how the relationship is structured, at the end of the day it doesn't make a dime's worth of difference. It's all based on contracts, and all contracts can have similar clauses.

Except for "stars" in syndication and a handful of major markets, air talent does not have contracts. It's all employment at will. People in radio get fired for any reason or no reason at all. Ironically, this includes talk show hosts who are anti-union on the air.

 

[Ravens]

I have to say, people who suddenly get in high dudgeon over someone else's supposedly politically incorrect statements remind me of people who beat up gays because they can't deal with their own tendencies.

A few weeks ago I came across a blog that detailed the "offensive" content on a dinky little rock station on a daily basis. For over 5 years. This guy sat and listened to the station's morning show every single day for 5 years and detailed everything he thought was bad.

Sometimes it's just that these people are outright psychopaths. It's probably not any more complex than that.

 

[FredLeonard]

A few weeks ago I came across a blog that detailed the "offensive" content on a dinky little rock station on a daily basis. For over 5 years. This guy sat and listened to the station's morning show every single day for 5 years and detailed everything he thought was bad.

Sometimes it's just that these people are outright psychopaths. It's probably not any more complex than that.

Right! OK, maybe not psychopaths but people who need a life. Remember that lawyer in Florida who used to monitor Howard Stern - the whole show - every day so he could file complaints with the FCC. A small percentage of the hundreds of complaints resulted in actual fines but it was enough to force Howard out of terrestrial radio to avoid the aggravation.

Some people are just not content to change the station or turn off the radio. They have to make sure that nobody else can listen to whatever they don't like, too.

 

[Ravens]

Right! OK, maybe not psychopaths but people who need a life. Remember that lawyer in Florida who used to monitor Howard Stern - the whole show - every day so he could file complaints with the FCC. A small percentage of the hundreds of complaints resulted in actual fines but it was enough to force Howard out of terrestrial radio to avoid the aggravation.

Some people are just not content to change the station or turn off the radio. They have to make sure that nobody else can listen to whatever they don't like, too.

That level of devotion to destroying a career is a mental illness. Telling someone like that to "get a life" is like trying to talk Jeffrey Dahmer out of eating your liver.

 

[FredLeonard]

I agree with, Ravens, I just don't think it rises to the level of psychopathy. Obsession, maybe. These people, at least some of them, seem to think they are protecting the world from some bad influence - Howard talking dirty or a "hypothetical" host spreading hate. They are not interested in anybody's career.

The related issue is these people must think that bigotry is very attractive to people. If somebody says thinks like the hypothetical examples in this thread, everybody will but into it. Everybody except the obsessive person trying to stamp out this "evil." OK, add "delusion" to obsession; such people think they are so much smarter than everybody else who will be taken in by "bad speech."

 

[Ravens]

I agree with, Ravens, I just don't think it rises to the level of psychopathy. Obsession, maybe. These people, at least some of them, seem to think they are protecting the world from some bad influence - Howard talking dirty or a "hypothetical" host spreading hate. They are not interested in anybody's career.

The related issue is these people must think that bigotry is very attractive to people. If somebody says thinks like the hypothetical examples in this thread, everybody will but into it. Everybody except the obsessive person trying to stamp out this "evil." OK, add "delusion" to obsession; such people think they are so much smarter than everybody else who will be taken in by "bad speech."

And sometimes it's just someone making off color jokes. No one really believes Stern is "racist" or "sexist". The amount of work needed to dig up that level of personal information on someone takes a pretty disturbed mind. Sitting and listening to a show you "hate" for 20 hours a week is just insane.

 

[FredLeonard]

Howard has been called both "racist" and "sexist" - "sexist," more frequently. You can't know what anyone really believes unless you read minds.

People have careers because a lot of people like them or at least like listening to them. If a person says something that causes at least some people to not like them anymore, they forfeit their career. Nobody is entitled to a career. People only have a career if they attract - or at least do not repel - listeners.

You really need to look up the definitions of some of the words you use like "psychopath" and "insane."

One person's insanity is another's commitment. People who monitor shows do it for a cause.

 

[Ravens]

You really need to look up the definitions of some of the words you use like "psychopath" and "insane."

One person's insanity is another's commitment. People who monitor shows do it for a cause.

When that cause is solely to destroy another person's career, that's a psychopath.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

When that cause is solely to destroy another person's career, that's a psychopath.

But here-in lies the dilemma: My behavior may look to you like it is solely to destroy another persons career.... but I may see my behavior to be the dictates of a religious belief.

Is it unacceptable to to destroy another person's career because I am a known psychopath, but it is totally acceptable to destroy another person's career when I am simply obeying the dictates of my religious belief? And what if I become one of those people we see everywhere today who have melded their religious understandings into their political understandings. Heaven help us!!!! How should we deal with those people?

I am still seething over a recorded political phone call I received one day featuring "the rev" in a drawl appropriate for one of the little rural Appalachian Churches in the mountains north of me. I Googled him by name and found out he is the well educated senior pastor of a mega church down south of "The Gnat Line". (We can have a class in Georgia-speak later. )

So the question that haunts me: Is he a psychopath out to destroy the career of a young politician; Is he a servant of the diety simply obeying the dictates of his religious belief; Is he a pathetic, confused being who has alloyed his religion and his politics to the point we don't know what to do with him?

 

[Ravens]

But here-in lies the dilemma: My behavior may look to you like it is solely to destroy another persons career.... but I may see my behavior to be the dictates of a religious belief.

Is it unacceptable to to destroy another person's career because I am a known psychopath, but it is totally acceptable to destroy another person's career when I am simply obeying the dictates of my religious belief? And what if I become one of those people we see everywhere today who have melded their religious understandings into their political understandings. Heaven help us!!!! How should we deal with those people?

I am still seething over a recorded political phone call I received one day featuring "the rev" in a drawl appropriate for one of the little rural Appalachian Churches in the mountains north of me. I Googled him by name and found out he is the well educated senior pastor of a mega church down south of "The Gnat Line". (We can have a class in Georgia-speak later. )

So the question that haunts me: Is he a psychopath out to destroy the career of a young politician; Is he a servant of the diety simply obeying the dictates of his religious belief; Is he a pathetic, confused being who has alloyed his religion and his politics to the point we don't know what to do with him?

I don't know if I'd put a politician in the same category as a radio host. That politician, if elected, represents everyone in his district or town. The radio host only speaks to people who choose to tune into his station. As much as we'd like sometimes, there is no off switch on a politician.

Having said that, there are certainly psychopaths out there that go way too far trying to take down politicians. I'm sure you remember the guys who got busted taking photos of Thad Cochran's wife in a nursing home. That certainly sounds like the behavior of a psychopath to me.

 

[FredLeonard]

For the record, the Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM-V) defines the clinical diagnosis of "psychopaths" (termed "Anti-Social Personality Disorder") as follows:

A. Significant impairments in personality functioning manifest by:
1. Impairments in self functioning (a or b):
a. Identity: Ego-centrism; self-esteem derived from personal gain, power, or pleasure.
b. Self-direction: Goal-setting based on personal gratification; absence of prosocial internal standards associated with failure to conform to lawful or culturally normative ethical behavior.
AND
2. Impairments in interpersonal functioning (a or b):
a. Empathy: Lack of concern for feelings, needs, or suffering of others; lack of remorse after hurting or mistreating another.
b. Intimacy: Incapacity for mutually intimate relationships, as exploitation is a primary means of relating to others, including by deceit and coercion; use of dominance or intimidation to control others.
B. Pathological personality traits in the following domains:
1. Antagonism, characterized by:
a. Manipulativeness: Frequent use of subterfuge to influence or control others; use of seduction, charm, glibness, or ingratiation to achieve one„s ends.
b. Deceitfulness: Dishonesty and fraudulence; misrepresentation of self; embellishment or fabrication when relating events.
c. Callousness: Lack of concern for feelings or problems of others; lack of guilt or remorse about the negative or harmful effects of one„s actions on others; aggression; sadism.
d. Hostility: Persistent or frequent angry feelings; anger or irritability in response to minor slights and insults; mean, nasty, or vengeful behavior.
2. Disinhibition, characterized by:
a. Irresponsibility: Disregard for – and failure to honor – financial and other obligations or commitments; lack of respect for – and lack of follow through on – agreements and promises.
b. Impulsivity: Acting on the spur of the moment in response to immediate stimuli; acting on a momentary basis without a plan or consideration of outcomes; difficulty establishing and following plans.
c. Risk taking: Engagement in dangerous, risky, and potentially self-damaging activities, unnecessarily and without regard for consequences; boredom proneness and thoughtless initiation of activities tocounter boredom; lack of concern for one's limitations and denial of the reality of personal danger
C. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟s personality trait expression are relatively stable across time and consistent across situations.
D. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟s personality trait expression are not better understood as normative for the individual‟s developmental stage or socio-cultural environment.
E. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟s personality trait expression are not solely due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, medication) or a general medical condition (e.g., severe head trauma).
F. The individual is at least age 18 years.

If you read this, it sounds more like most politicians and CEOs than somebody making complaints about people in radio. Actually it fits a lot of radio air talent more than frequent letter writers and posters.

 

[Ravens]

I get the point you're trying to make, and I'm no professional shrink, but these I've seen these traits in a lot of the types that obsess over radio shows:

. Antagonism, characterized by:
a. Manipulativeness: Frequent use of subterfuge to influence or control others; use of seduction, charm, glibness, or ingratiation to achieve one„s ends.
b. Deceitfulness: Dishonesty and fraudulence; misrepresentation of self; embellishment or fabrication when relating events.
c. Callousness: Lack of concern for feelings or problems of others; lack of guilt or remorse about the negative or harmful effects of one„s actions on others; aggression; sadism.
d. Hostility: Persistent or frequent angry feelings; anger or irritability in response to minor slights and insults; mean, nasty, or vengeful behavior.