Similarly, Sully is miffed at people demanding sponsors pull their ads from Rush's show:
It's a free country, but I get queasy with boycotts to target disgusting but free speech....The right way to counter his speech, in my view, is with speech, not threats to his livelihood.I don't understand any problem with sponsors pulling out of anybody's show. It's not Rush Limbaugh's "right" to get millions of dollars from corporations if they don't want to give them to him. Isn't this the "free market" that "conservatives" pretend to fetishize? As with Sarah Palin and Dr. Laura, free speech means freedom from government intervention, it doesn't mean freedom from economic consequences. Companies are as free to decide who whom they give their money to as you and I are to choose who we listen to on the radio.
As for "The right way to counter his speech, in my view, is with speech, not threats to his livelihood", using social media or a cell phone et al to denounce Limbaugh IS countering "with speech"; the results vis-a-vis his livelihood are up to the companies themselves.
All that said, it's hypocritical to pat ourselves on the back for finally standing up to Rush in 2012 after about 20 years of putting up with his shit, especially since once the fuss dies down the sponsors will quietly go back to funding him (how many of them claim to have "erroneously" bought ad time from him "without realizing it" in the first place? I mean, REALLY?) Do we really think his Sandra Fluke stuff is even in his Top 10, if we really looked?
No comments:
Post a Comment