 |
Commentary in Major Newspapers Appears to Backtrack GLAAD Press Release Conflicts with Statements in Media |
|
By John Aravosis
The anti-Schlessinger campaign began on March 1 with the launch of StopDrLaura.com, a Web site highlighting Schlessinger's anti-gay rhetoric (e.g., "If you're gay or a lesbian, it's a biological error," "a huge portion of the male homosexual populace is predatory on young boys," "I have called the sexuality, orientation, an error. And I think that is irrefutable and obvious. It's dysfunctional, it's deviant."). Why the launch of the Web campaign? Because on February 16, the Los Angeles Times reported that GLAAD and Paramount had reached a deal saying the Dr. Laura's TV show could air so long as it had a diverse audience and didn't defame gay people. Large numbers or gays and others labeled this deal a double-standard on prejudice, as no one would support giving David Duke a TV show, so long as he promised to only defame Jews on the radio and "other" TV shows than his own. As a result of the community uproar, provoked in large part by a particularly embarrassing interview between GLAAD executive director Joan Garry and gay journalist Michaelangelo Signorile, GLAAD jumped on the StopDrLaura bandwagon, attended the March 21st protest at Paramount's gates, and assisted StopDrLaura.com in organizing a number of local protests against the new show, in addition to running a number of newspaper ads critical of Schlessinger.
As evidence of GLAAD's potential change of heart, on September 7, 2000, GLAAD's Seomin told the New York Daily News that GLAAD would no longer participate in protests against Schlessinger--in particular, the organization would not participate in nationwide protests taking place September 11 to mark the launch of Schlessinger's TV show--even though for months GLAAD had been promoting itself as one of the key organizers, if not "the" organizer, of all the StopDrLaura protests. Seomin told the Daily News: "We are not protesting, we are not organizing or participating in any way. We have a strong belief that protesting on Monday will do nothing but spike her ratings." Seomin seemed to then reiterate GLAAD's initial position of last February, that the show should air so long as it doesn't defame gays: "According to Seomin, from the beginning, GLAAD has asked for Schlessinger to 'stop using rhetoric that's damaging to the gay and lesbian community. And from the shows we've seen in person, that's exactly what she has done'." Adding to the concern as to whether GLAAD is now endorsing Schlessinger having a TV show, this past weekend, at a conference of gay and lesbian journalists in San Francisco, GLAAD's executive director Joan Garry reportedly told an attendee that the battle against Schlessinger is now over because her TV show is not defaming gays. The notion that Schlessinger's defamation of gays on the radio, and on other TV shows like Larry King, is unrelated to her own TV show would seem odd. Does anyone really think that Paramount would give David Duke a TV show so long as he kept his anti-Semitic rants to the radio, other TV shows, and public appearances? Or Dr. Laura attacked blacks or Jews in any medium, does anyone truly believe that GLAAD, or anyone else, would defend giving her a TV show, even if she promised to only defame blacks and Jews on the radio and on OTHER TV shows? Ironically, this supposed distinction between Schlessinger's TV show and her anti-gay rhetoric in other venues didn't fly with her own former advertisers. Procter & Gamble, which dropped its advertising for the TV show in May, issued a public statement on May 15 saying: "We were offered this opportunity as part of an on-going programming partnership. The focus of the show is intended to be responsible parenting. As we've studied it more closely, we've decided it isn't possible to separate the broad range of Dr. Laura's opinions from the specific focus of this program." P&G had reason to be concerned. Schlessinger has not only NOT repudiated her comments about homosexuality being a biological error, she still stands by them and continues to promote them. As recently as three weeks ago (August 15), Laura Schlessinger told 20 million listeners to her radio show that "when an individual is not so drawn to a member of the opposite sex, in biology that's some kind of error." But of even greater concern than this possible exoneration of Schlessinger's ongoing anti-gay rhetoric is GLAAD's recent public comments criticizing the gay community's own organizing efforts against Schlessinger. Over the past six months, untold numbers of gays and lesbians and friends have taken it upon themselves to contact Schlessinger's radio advertisers--and to organize StopDrLaura protests in 31 cities nationwide.
Even were GLAAD to think that today's StopDrLaura
protests are counterproductive because they might give Schlessinger helpful
publicity (though GLAAD's own Joan Garry did an interview about Dr. Laura
with NBC News just 3 days ago--one day AFTER Seomin criticized local
activists for helping feed the publicity surrounding Dr. Laura), how does
it benefit the community to publicly criticize thousands of local
activists?
And stranger, how does GLAAD criticize anti-Laura protests when it is currently sponsoring anti-Eminem protests? Wouldn't that mean GLAAD's own protests are wrongly generating publicity for Eminem? Perhaps GLAAD hasn't sold out--but if so, it needs to at least get its message straight, as it were. According to the latest issue of Newsweek, Garry is still calling for the show to be kept off the air. "At this point, [Joan Garry] says, GLAAD is so convinced 'Dr. Laura' will continue its war on gays that she has called for Paramount to keep it off the air," Newsweek reported. So perhaps GLAAD spokesman Scott Seomin is a loose cannon whose public criticism of committed grassroots activists does not represent GLAAD's true views on Dr. Laura. And perhaps Garry herself misspoke the other day at the journalist conference when she seemed to rescind GLAAD's unequivocal call for the Schlessinger's TV show to be taken off the air. Perhaps this is much ado about nothing. Perhaps. (This article reflects the personal views of John Aravosis, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of StopDrLaura.com). GLAAD responded to the debut of Schlessinger's new program yesterday with a press release that quoted its Executive Director Joan M. Garry: "Watching Laura Schlessinger's TV debut called to mind a wolf in sheep's clothing. Her demure demeanor today is an obvious attempt to depart from her abusive radio persona, but it is clearly a superficial change. "After the mass exodus of national sponsors from her radio show, Paramount obviously has realized that allowing Laura to abuse and defame people on television is not in its best economic interests. "GLAAD views Laura's 'new attitude' as the result of the lesbian and gay community's efforts to expose her defamatory rhetoric. Laura has demonstrated time and again that she refuses to take responsibility for what she says publicly -- even when confronted with her statements directly as she was last Friday on NBC's 'Today.' "This is why GLAAD has mobilized volunteers in each of the top 30 television markets to monitor 'Dr. Laura' on a daily basis for defamatory content. GLAAD will continue to hold Paramount, Laura, and her program's sponsors accountable for everything she says on her TV program." |
