TOO HOT FOR TV?

June 2000
		Does radio host "Dr. Laura" Schlessinger propagate hate? Should she be able to take her views to television? Keven Bellows, vice president and general manager of Premiere Radio Networks, Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, and Joan Garry, executive director of GLAAD, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, respond to your questions.

Forum introduction Shouldn't the audience decide whether or not the show will succeed? How can Jerry Springer's TV show exist while Dr. Laura's elicits such controversy? Are gay rights groups stepping on rights of religious expression? What about defending freedom of speech? Would similar views on other groups be tolerated? Can there be a meaningful debate on such moral issues?     June 15, 2000: Debating Dr. Laura. July 26, 1999: A look at diversity in television programs. Online Forum: Experts answer viewer questions about diversity on television. Browse the NewsHour's coverage of media issues.     Dr. Laura Schlessinger GLAAD TomPaine.com StopDrLaura.com

Sara Keenan of Santa Cruz, CA asks: I don't always agree with [Dr. Laura], but I respect her dedication to her beliefs. I also respect the beliefs of the spokeswoman from GLAAD, while agreeing and disagreeing with her on various points. But if someone doesn't like Dr. Laura, they don't have to listen to her show. Can't we just let the audience decide?   Keven Bellows responds: Our sentiments, exactly! But I think the problem for the activists is that they know how wildly popular she is (18 million radio listeners), and they are afraid that millions more will make the decision to watch her TV show.   Lucy Dalglish responds: Of course we can. That's the American system. Our system operates on the belief that offensive speech is best countered with more speech. We have to believe that the "truth" will surface. If what Dr. Laura says is an "opinion," and people disagree with her, they can turn the dial. If too many people disagree with her in this way, she will lose advertising support, and it will no longer be financially feasible to run her show. Likewise, if a statement she makes is a statement of "fact," any individual person specifically defamed by her speech can sue. Plus, if she makes a habit of making false statements about specific individuals, her employers will pull her from the air because they won't want to pay libel damages. In other words, the market will win out.   Joan Garry responds: I don't regard the problem as whether or not I or anyone likes or dislikes Dr. Laura. To me, the issue is that she is shaping people's perceptions of lesbian and gay men - and therefore affecting how others treat them. I certainly can choose to turn off Schlessinger's programming, but my neighbors may not choose to do so. Those people whose perceptions Schlessinger shapes may pose a threat to me, my family and others in my community. GLAAD has worked for the last year to bring Schlessinger's defamatory comments to the attention of the media and the public - and we've succeeded. What we've found is that once people hear Schlessinger in her own words, there is no question that what she says is abusive and prejudicial. In GLAAD's collection of "The Dr. Laura Program" transcripts available at www.glaad.org, Schlessinger suggests that huge numbers of gay men are preying on young boys (Aug. 12, 1999); that being gay is "a terrible sadness" and that adoption by lesbian and gay couples is "despicable" and "a travesty" (June 22, 1999); that society should discriminate against people based on sexual orientation (Dec. 21, 1999); and that people can shun the partners of their lesbian and gay family members (July 21, 1999). The real danger of Schlessinger's words is that all of her opinions (including her prejudicial ones) are regarded with equal credibility by most of her audience. As a mother, I understand Schlessinger has credibility on many topics, such as making family a top priority and treating others as we want to be treated. However, her credibility on some issues should not automatically transfer to her misinformation on sexual orientation issues - and her audience easily can accept as fact her discredited, divisive opinions about lesbians and gay men.