NYTimes's Brian Stelter Labels Rush Limbaugh an 'Offensive Figure'
New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter wrote a column for Wednesday's Business section on the "offensive figure" Rush Limbaugh ("After Apology, National Advertisers Are Still Shunning Limbaugh") on the radio host losing advertisers after his "slut" comment on birth-control activist Sandra Fluke was inflamed by the left.
But the Times has thus far ignored the counterexample raised by conservatives of comedian and HBO "Real Time" host Bill Maher, who used a far more vile word to describe Republican Sarah Palin in March 2011. (The word's very offensiveness makes it unprintable, unlike Limbaugh's comment, a standard of obscenity that actually shields Maher.)
Not even Tuesday night's news that Obama advisor David Axelrod, who has used the Limbaugh controversy to attack Mitt Romney, was obliged to back out of a scheduled appearance on Maher's show has triggered a Times mention.
The only two mentions of the Maher-Palin controversy turned up by a nytimes.com search were in online columns from opinion writers, and Times academic blogger Stanley Fish actually defended the double standard. In a Wednesday front-page story, "Obama Allies Feel Pressure To Raise Cash," reporters Nicholas Confessore and Michael Luo talked to Bill Maher about his $1 million pledge to an Obama SuperPAC Priorities USA," without mentioning the controversy.
Stelter wrote:
In place of paid advertisers, public service announcements now fill some of the time between Rush Limbaugh’s monologues on radio stations, a consequence of an ad boycott against the conservative talk show host that is now nearly two weeks old.
It is, analysts say, the most serious rebellion against “The Rush Limbaugh Show” in the more than 20 years that the show has been broadcast. This week, new evidence emerged that the ad boycott was costing Premiere Radio Networks -- the show’s syndicator -- money, though the total amounts are unclear.
This month, powered by online organizing tools, liberal activist groups and other critics of Mr. Limbaugh have successfully highlighted the host’s repeated attacks on a Georgetown University law student, Sandra Fluke, and persuaded companies to advertise elsewhere, at least temporarily.
Mr. Limbaugh apologized to Ms. Fluke -- a supporter of the Obama administration’s contraception policy -- on March 3, three days after calling her a “slut” and a “prostitute,” but national advertisers have continued to shun his show. The case is a reminder that associations with offensive figures -- no matter how popular they might be -- carries risks for companies.
....
It is unclear whether Mr. Limbaugh’s audience has been affected by the uproar. Arbitron, the measurement company that the radio industry relies upon, does not release national ratings the way that Nielsen does for television.
But the tumult has been a boon for liberal broadcasters who love to rail against Mr. Limbaugh. Liberal hosts on the cable news channel MSNBC, in particular, have dedicated segment after segment to the ad boycott. Conservative critics of MSNBC are said to be considering their own boycott campaign, aiming at liberal commentators like the Rev. Al Sharpton.
Stelter doesn't characterize Sharpton as an "offensive figure," even though he has a history of race-baiting which has been long ignored in the Times.
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
What’s black and white and red all over?
Submitted by needle on Wed, 03/14/2012 - 4:43pm.
I am seldom among the first to comment on an NB article; but I suspect the reason I am this time is because the most reliable thing about the NYT is its completely constant bias. Why bother remarking about that.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
Stelter, nobody cares what
Submitted by bassndude on Wed, 03/14/2012 - 4:46pm.
Stelter, nobody cares what you think. You obviously, along with Maher, do not understand that IQ is NOT the absence of stupidity. You and Maher are both proof of that.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal/troll!!
The hysterical rantings of
Submitted by celator on Wed, 03/14/2012 - 5:34pm.
The hysterical rantings of Stelter illustrate why the NYT loses money and subscribers every week it is published. Keep up the good work, Stelter. Won't be long before the only advertisers in the NYT will be massage parlors and fortune tellers.
The NY Slimes...
Submitted by kch50428 on Wed, 03/14/2012 - 5:39pm.
Is an offensive Leftist propaganda machine.
the editor of the NY TIMES. Jill Abrahamson, was quoted as
Submitted by Paarl on Wed, 03/14/2012 - 8:26pm.
saying that in her home, when she was growing up, the NY TIMES was the church or something to that effect....I do not know how old she is but the NY TIMES WAS ONCE a fine paper..not ...as Michelle Malkin says it is now...The Fishwrap of Record...I remember days in Rhodesia in the 1960s when our family would visit the US consulate in Salisbury and spend several hours reading the NY Times...IT WAS WONDERFUL.!!!! areal education..i was 12/13 years old...
there was nothing like it ...the news from everywhere....the great writing...the VERY smudgy ink....
it changed several times over the years but hit the current skids when Pinchie Sulzburger..the ultimate 1960s loser took command about 12/13 years ago......the destruction of NY TIMES by young pinchie might be a good argument for a 100% confiscatory inheritance tax !!! ;>)..just kidding..
what a bunch of losers !!!!! and when a great insitution like the NY Times is ruined...we are all losers...at this time I only sometimes buy the Tuesday NY Times for the Scinence Section...
paarl of Rhodesia
Brian Stelter is a slut.
Submitted by mattm on Wed, 03/14/2012 - 9:00pm.
Brian Stelter is a slut.
Who is this insignificant, irrelevant Stetler bonehead?
Submitted by drsamherman on Wed, 03/14/2012 - 9:03pm.
So he writes for the New York Times? Outside of New York, the only thing that and $6 will get him is his double-soy, no-fat, half and half large Latte at some coffeehouse. And he better have the correct change or the barista will just throw it on him.
All I know is, I think enough of Rush to spend three hours...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Thu, 03/15/2012 - 3:13am.
a day listening to him and I wouldn't spend three minutes a day reading this guy's column.
Rush stands for the truth and I think when a woman says she spends $3,000 during the school year for birth control, then what do you call her? Calling her a scholar does not come to mind.
The truth is that Rush's National advertisers need him...
Submitted by Thalpy on Thu, 03/15/2012 - 8:48am.
The truth is that Rush's National advertisers need him much more than he needs them. Carbonite many fail as a company this year and others will suffer severe damage because of all of this nonsense.
Sadly, irreconcilable differences exist between many of us in this country. Nothing will change that. We truly hate each other. so now what?