TOO HOT FOR TV?

June 2000
		Does radio host "Dr. Laura" Schlessinger propagate hate? Should she 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

Chuck Wolf of San Bruno, CA asks: Whatever happened to "I disagree with what you say, but will defend with my life your right to say it"?   Keven Bellows responds: I guess that sacred doctrine was ushered out as the era of political correctness was ushered in.   Lucy Dalglish responds: It hasn't gone anywhere. It is still the ideological framework for those who support the right of free speech.   Joan Garry responds: This is exactly what GLAAD is doing, and our work regarding Laura Schlessinger is a perfect case study for the free exchange of ideas in America. The First Amendment protects Schlessinger's right to express her opinions free from government censorship, just as it protects our right to expose her prejudicial remarks and call for others to distance themselves from her programming. However, free speech (the right of every American) and corporate-sponsored speech in the commercial entertainment venue of your choice are two very different things. Keep in mind that Schlessinger is not standing in the public square where she must share the microphone, equal time or her "soapbox" with others. She does not permit divergent viewpoints on her radio program (in fact, she is the only national talk radio host we know of who does not allow callers to challenge her opinions on the air). Schlessinger still has the right to say what's on her mind, but her monologues no longer are going unchallenged. We don't believe our forefathers penned the First Amendment to guarantee anyone his or her own talk show on public airwaves. GLAAD's campaign to raise media awareness of Schlessinger's attacks and abuse of her credentials has jump-started a national dialogue about prejudice against the lesbian and gay community. This dialogue has now spread to potential advertisers on Schlessinger's TV program. Corporations across the country are realizing that they do not need to sponsor an entertainment personality who attacks members of their customer base. And entertainment media outlets are seeing that our community will hold them to standards of fairness in their programming decisions. These are decisions related to revenues and corporate responsibility and are based on an understanding of both sides of the debate.