L.A. City Council To Bar Radio Hosts From 'Racist, Sexist' Comments...

[Montrovant]

i don't see where they're prohibiting the speech. it seems like they'e condemning it... which is simply stating their opinion, too.

perhaps someone can show me otherwise. but i'm not seeing any there there.

Why am I not surprised???


You dont even need to read between the lines here.... you lefties never cease to amaze me at how you can twist the 1st Amendment.

Councilmember Jan Perry introduced legislation this week that would call upon media companies to ensure “on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs” on radio and other broadcasts.

That is what i'm more concerned with Jillian......how do they "ensure" this as a govt?

You need to look at the whole line, I think....they are calling upon media companies to ensure...so it is the media companies that would do anything, not the government.

 

[saveliberty]

"Ensure they do not use", implies restricted free speech period.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"Ensure they do not use", implies restricted free speech period.

Do you really think that unrestricted free speech on broadcast radio is a right?

unreal.

 

[Montrovant]

"Ensure they do not use", implies restricted free speech period.

Speech restricted by the private employers. Do you believe that a private media employer should not be able to restrict the speech of it's employees on the air?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

L.A. City Council To Bar Radio Hosts From 'Racist, Sexist' Comments...

In addition to being a liar, the OP clearly has no idea what the term “symbolic gesture” means, as no resolution has been enacted to ‘bar’ anything.

 

[Liberty]

The philosophical question that needs to be asked is, "Who has the power to decide what constitutes as "racist" and/or "sexist," since these terms are by their very definition subjective? This is a dangerous precedent...giving power over definitions to government...scary times.

 

[Liberty]

L.A. City Council To Bar Radio Hosts From 'Racist, Sexist' Comments...

In addition to being a liar, the OP clearly has no idea what the term “symbolic gesture” means, as no resolution has been enacted to ‘bar’ anything.

And you sir, have no idea what a slippery slope is...research the history of the income tax for a great example of something seemingly small growing out of proportion.

 

[saveliberty]

"Ensure they do not use", implies restricted free speech period.

Speech restricted by the private employers. Do you believe that a private media employer should not be able to restrict the speech of it's employees on the air?

The private employer is not restricting the jocks. Maybe on paper, but not on air. Its the employer's choice, not LA's.

 

[Montrovant]

"Ensure they do not use", implies restricted free speech period.

Speech restricted by the private employers. Do you believe that a private media employer should not be able to restrict the speech of it's employees on the air?

The private employer is not restricting the jocks. Maybe on paper, but not on air. Its the employer's choice, not LA's.

That's the whole point....this is a resolution saying the government would like the employers to restrict what is said. Since it is, apparently, a non-binding resolution, the choice remains with the employers.

 

[bripat9643]

i don't see where they're prohibiting the speech. it seems like they'e condemning it... which is simply stating their opinion, too.

perhaps someone can show me otherwise. but i'm not seeing any there there.

Are you the biggest dingbat in the universe?

 

[saveliberty]

Speech restricted by the private employers. Do you believe that a private media employer should not be able to restrict the speech of it's employees on the air?

The private employer is not restricting the jocks. Maybe on paper, but not on air. Its the employer's choice, not LA's.

That's the whole point....this is a resolution saying the government would like the employers to restrict what is said. Since it is, apparently, a non-binding resolution, the choice remains with the employers.

No, it does not say they would prefer or like it to be that way. Read the wording for what is actually stated. "Ensure they do not use..."

 

[Unkotare]

City Council members were one step closer on Wednesday to becoming the first in the nation to adopt a resolution condemning certain types of speech on public airwaves.

Councilmember Jan Perry introduced legislation this week that would call upon media companies to ensure “on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs” on radio and other broadcasts.

Members of Black Media Alliance, National Hispanic Media Coalition, Korean-American Bar Association, and American Indians in Film and Television were on hand to voice their support for the proposal.

The resolution — which was also supported by Councilmember Bernard Parks and Council President Herb Wesson — called attention to the recent uproar over comments by KFI 640 AM talk show hosts John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou.

Kobylt and Chiampou were suspended after they called the late pop singer Whitney Houston a “crack ho” three days after her death in February.

The proposal cites a “long history of racially offensive comments as well as deplorable sexist remarks, particularly towards women and Black, Latino, and Asian communities” at KFI 640 and calls for parent company Clear Channel Communications and other broadcasters to hire a more diverse workforce to offset the trend.

Read More:
City Council Warns ‘Crack Ho’ Comments ‘Intolerable’, Calls For Diversity In Talk Radio « CBS Los Angeles
DRUDGE REPORT 2012®

Is "crack ho" a race-specific term? I guess the "ho" part could be deemed sexist but it is also a descriptive term that in some instances would have to be considered accurate. It's a move in the wrong direction for government to be considering such things. Common decency should prevent most of such bullshit, and the expectation of having one's stupid ass fired on the spot should prevent the rest. I suppose there is a grey area where cursing is prohibited on public air waves, but the question as to what constitutes cursing is murky. The more the government's hand is involved in such considerations, the worse.

 

[Zander]

This is totally retarded, but that is what the City Council seems to specialize in these days....


In a related story....The brilliant LA City Council decides to force a billion dollar industry that generates millions in tax revenue for the city, to move elsewhere.....Nanny state morons!

City Council Approves Mandatory Condom Law For Adult Film Stars « CBS Los Angeles

 

[saveliberty]

Cocaine WAS a contributing factor in her death.

 

[Salt Jones]

I remember how wrong jon and ken were on the energy companies closing down power plants to cause rolling blackouts and hike up the cost of electricity in California. They pushed to recall Gray Davis and bashed his people when they claimed that something illegal was going on.

 

[Montrovant]

The private employer is not restricting the jocks. Maybe on paper, but not on air. Its the employer's choice, not LA's.

That's the whole point....this is a resolution saying the government would like the employers to restrict what is said. Since it is, apparently, a non-binding resolution, the choice remains with the employers.

No, it does not say they would prefer or like it to be that way. Read the wording for what is actually stated. "Ensure they do not use..."

I did read it. Perhaps you did not. The city council is urging the EMPLOYERS to ensure they do not use. So, once again, a non-binding resolution, with no force of law behind it, telling the management of tv and radio stations that the city council wants THE MANAGEMENT to ensure their employees do not use the language. That would, as I have been trying to say, leave the choice to the companies in question.

Here it is again, "The City Council voted 13-2 to pass the resolution with a motion urging “the management of radio and television stations in Los Angeles to do everything in their power to ensure that their on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs over public airwaves in the City of Los Angeles”." Note how the council is urging the management to ensure the language they want, the council is not ensuring anything or forcing anything.

 

[AmericanFirst]

City Council members were one step closer on Wednesday to becoming the first in the nation to adopt a resolution condemning certain types of speech on public airwaves.

Councilmember Jan Perry introduced legislation this week that would call upon media companies to ensure “on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs” on radio and other broadcasts.

Members of Black Media Alliance, National Hispanic Media Coalition, Korean-American Bar Association, and American Indians in Film and Television were on hand to voice their support for the proposal.

The resolution — which was also supported by Councilmember Bernard Parks and Council President Herb Wesson — called attention to the recent uproar over comments by KFI 640 AM talk show hosts John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou.

Kobylt and Chiampou were suspended after they called the late pop singer Whitney Houston a “crack ho” three days after her death in February.

The proposal cites a “long history of racially offensive comments as well as deplorable sexist remarks, particularly towards women and Black, Latino, and Asian communities” at KFI 640 and calls for parent company Clear Channel Communications and other broadcasters to hire a more diverse workforce to offset the trend.

Read More:
City Council Warns ‘Crack Ho’ Comments ‘Intolerable’, Calls For Diversity In Talk Radio « CBS Los Angeles
DRUDGE REPORT 2012®

Another reason not to live in socialism usa, aka california.

 

[saveliberty]

That's the whole point....this is a resolution saying the government would like the employers to restrict what is said. Since it is, apparently, a non-binding resolution, the choice remains with the employers.

No, it does not say they would prefer or like it to be that way. Read the wording for what is actually stated. "Ensure they do not use..."

I did read it. Perhaps you did not. The city council is urging the EMPLOYERS to ensure they do not use. So, once again, a non-binding resolution, with no force of law behind it, telling the management of tv and radio stations that the city council wants THE MANAGEMENT to ensure their employees do not use the language. That would, as I have been trying to say, leave the choice to the companies in question.

Here it is again, "The City Council voted 13-2 to pass the resolution with a motion urging “the management of radio and television stations in Los Angeles to do everything in their power to ensure that their on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs over public airwaves in the City of Los Angeles”." Note how the council is urging the management to ensure the language they want, the council is not ensuring anything or forcing anything.

In that case, it was just a colossal waste of government time.

 

[snakedoc]

City Council members were one step closer on Wednesday to becoming the first in the nation to adopt a resolution condemning certain types of speech on public airwaves.

Councilmember Jan Perry introduced legislation this week that would call upon media companies to ensure “on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs” on radio and other broadcasts.

Members of Black Media Alliance, National Hispanic Media Coalition, Korean-American Bar Association, and American Indians in Film and Television were on hand to voice their support for the proposal.

The resolution — which was also supported by Councilmember Bernard Parks and Council President Herb Wesson — called attention to the recent uproar over comments by KFI 640 AM talk show hosts John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou.

Kobylt and Chiampou were suspended after they called the late pop singer Whitney Houston a “crack ho” three days after her death in February.

The proposal cites a “long history of racially offensive comments as well as deplorable sexist remarks, particularly towards women and Black, Latino, and Asian communities” at KFI 640 and calls for parent company Clear Channel Communications and other broadcasters to hire a more diverse workforce to offset the trend.

Read More:
City Council Warns ‘Crack Ho’ Comments ‘Intolerable’, Calls For Diversity In Talk Radio « CBS Los Angeles
DRUDGE REPORT 2012®

So who gets to decide what words and phrases are offensive? Who can use the said offensive words and phrases and who can not? If a white person uses the dreaded N word that is racist and offensive if a black person uses it then it's not or so I have been told. Can Hispanics not use words or phrases offensive to white people but white people can use them what would the rules be on this?

 

[Montrovant]

No, it does not say they would prefer or like it to be that way. Read the wording for what is actually stated. "Ensure they do not use..."

I did read it. Perhaps you did not. The city council is urging the EMPLOYERS to ensure they do not use. So, once again, a non-binding resolution, with no force of law behind it, telling the management of tv and radio stations that the city council wants THE MANAGEMENT to ensure their employees do not use the language. That would, as I have been trying to say, leave the choice to the companies in question.

Here it is again, "The City Council voted 13-2 to pass the resolution with a motion urging “the management of radio and television stations in Los Angeles to do everything in their power to ensure that their on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs over public airwaves in the City of Los Angeles”." Note how the council is urging the management to ensure the language they want, the council is not ensuring anything or forcing anything.

In that case, it was just a colossal waste of government time.

Can't argue with that!