(from freakingnews.com)
Yesterday, more advertisers departed from Rush Limbaugh’s ranks, responding to public pushback and outrage against a man known for vitriolic, uninformed commentary. Likely others will drop the show today as a public campaign to boycott all who advertise with Limbaugh mounts.
Why? For several days last week, Limbaugh lambasted Sandra Fluke, an articulate, Georgetown law student who urged health insurer coverage for contraception. Limbaugh took to the air, ridiculing Ms. Fluke, calling her a slut, comparing her to a prostitute and demanding a video so “so we can see what [sex] we are getting for our money.” This campaign may gain momentum in spite of the fact that prior efforts to “shut down” Rush failed. In this case, Rush isn’t beating up on poor black women by referring to the whole as welfare queens. Nor is this about his loathing of Hillary Clinton, about which a backlog of commentary can be found. By attacking Ms. Fluke, he led an assault on interest group recognized for its economic power and political influence. In this case, I’m not speaking of Ms. Fluke and her cohort, but the mothers.
Beyond the perversity of his three-day rant, some commentators argue that Limbaugh’s comments represent the way that conservative Americans think about women or women and their reproduction. I’m not so convinced of that. But, it is clear that Limbaugh, a man known for greeting his audience with incendiary racist and sexist comments, occupies a special place among a wing of Americans. And maybe his banter appeals to the prurient in them, (after the devastating hurricane in New Orleans, he called Hurricane Katrina survivors “morons” interested in raping and looting). Doubtful that he’d say the same about his listeners in Florida who annually endure hurricane season by staying home. At any rate, most of his advertisers stayed on board after that tirade. But not all conservatives see the world through Limbaugh’s warped lenses.
Importantly, though, advertisers and now radio stations are pulling up their real-estate from Limbaugh’s show and that is a powerful economic statement. While most Americans believe that freedom of speech should be accompanied by responsibility, especially on news and “talk shows,” inaccuracy, incendiary commentary and erroneous allegations are perennially tolerated on Mr. Limbaugh’s show. To be clear, there are others too—shock jocks that Americans not only tolerate, but embrace.
Indeed, Rush has a right protected by the First Amendment to say almost anything that comes to his mind. But advertisers are making a strong point: That right does not entitle Limbaugh (or the radio network that airs his show) to their dollars, an audience, or a radio platform. Sears and Allstate claimed their commercials were never meant to be aired on Limbaugh’s program on Monday. Allstate demanded an apology from a media vendor that inadvertently placed its commercial on the show. The departure of advertisers makes a symbolic and economic point about where and how these companies will spend advertising dollars. More specifically, women’s spending power matters and calls to boycott the companies that advertise with Limbaugh hit an economic nerve.
Like the bus boycotts in the 1950s, it was economic activism (boycotts)–and not laws–that changed transportation policies, which previously forced black women to give up their seats to white men and women. Bus companies starved without black commuters. Rush may very well survive this debacle. However, the boycott against his show is a powerful reminder about the agency and clout of women–and that should not be forgotten.
As important, Limbaugh’s attack on Ms. Fluke should not detract attention from the broader point that she tried to make about the importance of insurance coverage for women’s reproductive health care.
