MSNBC Fires Michael Savage.

[Queersetti]

And it's about damn time, too. They knew he was a vicious homophobe when they hired him.


MSNBC fires Savage after anti-gay remarks

Associated Press
Jul. 7, 2003 01:00 PM

NEW YORK - MSNBC on Monday fired Michael Savage for anti-gay comments.

The popular radio talk show host who did a weekend TV show for the cable channel referred to an unidentified caller to his show Saturday as a "sodomite" and said he should "get AIDS and die."

"His comments were extremely inappropriate and the decision was an easy one," MSNBC spokesman Jeremy Gaines said.

There was no immediate comment from Savage, according to a spokesman at his office in California.

The brash, tough-talking Savage is one of radio's hottest jocks. His Paul Revere Society advocates closing borders, deporting illegal immigrants, mandating health tests for immigrants and eliminating entitlement programs.

The televised version of "The Savage Nation" began March 8 despite the protests of such advocacy groups as the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

Aired at 5 p.m. EDT Saturday, Savage didn't translate into a television hit. He increased the ratings for the time slot marginally, according to MSNBC.

The incident that resulted in his firing began innocently enough. Savage was taking viewer phone calls about airline horror stories, and a male caller began talking about smoking in the bathroom.

"Half an hour into the flight, I need to suggest that Don and Mike take your ..." the caller said, before he was cut off and his words became unintelligible.

"So you're one of those sodomists. Are you a sodomite?" Savage asked.

The caller replied: "Yes, I am."

"Oh, you're one of the sodomites," Savage said. "You should only get AIDS and die, you pig. How's that? Why don't you see if you can sue me, you pig. You got nothing better than to put me down, you piece of garbage. You have got nothing to do today, go eat a sausage and choke on it."

He asked for another phone caller who "didn't have a nice night in the bathhouse who's angry at me today."

These bums "mean nothing to me," he said.

GLAAD spokeswoman Cathy Renna said of Savage's firing: "It's about time.

"This latest attack made the clearest case for why Savage has no place on any reputable news network. MSNBC witnessed firsthand exactly the kind of verbal assaults GLAAD's been warning them about for the past five months, and to their credit, they backed up their promises to hold Savage accountable."

 

[Etoile]

Way to go, MSNBC - it sure took them long enough. I'll be watching the gay press for their response, too.

 

[Pookie]

It'll be interesting to see how others comment on it. Will freedom of speech issues be raised? How far should freedom of speech go with an employee of a broadcasting company?

I completely agree with his being fired. MSNBC has every right to retain people that support the image the company wants to present. I figured he would hang himself eventually. But it will be interesting to hear the reactions of his peers.

 

[deliciously_naughty]

about bloody time...I mean MSNBC is a rightwing station, but there is a line

 

[Miss Molly]

It'll be interesting to see how others comment on it. Will freedom of speech issues be raised? How far should freedom of speech go with an employee of a broadcasting company?

I completely agree with his being fired. MSNBC has every right to retain people that support the image the company wants to present. I figured he would hang himself eventually. But it will be interesting to hear the reactions of his peers.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone has a right to have a TV show.

MSNBC fired Phil Donahue because he opposed the invasion of Iraq, even though he had the highest rated show on their channel.

 

[Pookie]

Freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone has a right to have a TV show.

MSNBC fired Phil Donahue because he opposed the invasion of Iraq, even though he had the highest rated show on their channel.

I agree. But it will be interesting to see how many feel his freedom of speech was violated. He was an employee of a company. If he wants to stand on his front porch and preach all day, that's cool with me. But MSNBC needs to decide what image it wants to portray. I don't think having a gay basher is the image they want.

 

[Miss Molly]

I agree. But it will be interesting to see how many feel his freedom of speech was violated. He was an employee of a company. If he wants to stand on his front porch and preach all day, that's cool with me. But MSNBC needs to decide what image it wants to portray. I don't think having a gay basher is the image they want.

You are right, there will probably be a lot of complaints from conservatives. Of course, they had nothing to say about Donahue.

 

[bozinka]

You are right, there will probably be a lot of complaints from conservatives. Of course, they had nothing to say about Donahue.

Hmm, so we can't gay bash, but we can bash all conservatives?

Speaking as a pretty stinking conservative person... married to an even more conservative person (one who votes solely Republican... or won't vote at all... heehee) we both hate Michael Savage. He is not a good representative of the conservative side of things. He's as repungent to me as, say, Bill...

And, if MSNBC wants to fire Donahue or Savage for having views contrary to the image it wants to portray... that is their right.

We have a right to free speech - we do NOT have a right to be heard....

 

[Netzach]

Before I say "yayyyy they fired him"

I'll also mention, they hired him.

 

[Queersetti]

Hmm, so we can't gay bash, but we can bash all conservatives?

Speaking as a pretty stinking conservative person... married to an even more conservative person (one who votes solely Republican... or won't vote at all... heehee) we both hate Michael Savage. He is not a good representative of the conservative side of things. He's as repungent to me as, say, Bill...

And, if MSNBC wants to fire Donahue or Savage for having views contrary to the image it wants to portray... that is their right.

We have a right to free speech - we do NOT have a right to be heard....

Criticizing someone's political views is an utterly different thing from attacking them for their sexuality.

 

[MzChrista]

Hmm, so we can't gay bash, but we can bash all conservatives?

Speaking as a pretty stinking conservative person... married to an even more conservative person (one who votes solely Republican... or won't vote at all... heehee) we both hate Michael Savage. He is not a good representative of the conservative side of things. He's as repungent to me as, say, Bill...

And, if MSNBC wants to fire Donahue or Savage for having views contrary to the image it wants to portray... that is their right.

We have a right to free speech - we do NOT have a right to be heard....

Nobody bashed all conservatives.
Yet.

 

[bozinka]

Ah.. forgive me...

Nobody bashed all conservatives.
Yet.

I was browsing the board LATE that night - almost 2 am... The word ALL wasn't in the original post I replied to, but I do feel it was strongly implied.

And, I had just got done reading some other threads and posts where they were very negative to people with conservative views.

I also realize that to some, criticizing someone's political views are very different than criticizing sexual views... but then again... you're still criticizing a very integral part of a person... what they think and believe.

And, though different... both so often get stereotyped and lumped together. That was the main point of my post. Well, that and the fact that I strongly dislike Savage... Heehee!

No offense meant.

 

[Queersetti]

Re: Ah.. forgive me...

I was browsing the board LATE that night - almost 2 am... The word ALL wasn't in the original post I replied to, but I do feel it was strongly implied.

And, I had just got done reading some other threads and posts where they were very negative to people with conservative views.

I also realize that to some, criticizing someone's political views are very different than criticizing sexual views... but then again... you're still criticizing a very integral part of a person... what they think and believe.

And, though different... both so often get stereotyped and lumped together. That was the main point of my post. Well, that and the fact that I strongly dislike Savage... Heehee!

No offense meant.

A person should be able to defend their political philosophy, but should not have to defend their sexuality.

Conservatives, by definition, oppose social change. Since we live in a society that has historically repressed homosexuality, to be a conservative would seem to imply that one agrees with that repression and opposes the recognition of the equality of gays and lesbians.

So it is logical that many gays and lesbians see conservatives as being inherently in opposition to them.

 

[bozinka]

Hmm... a draw perhaps?

A person should be able to defend their political philosophy, but should not have to defend their sexuality.

Conservatives, by definition, oppose social change. Since we live in a society that has historically repressed homosexuality, to be a conservative would seem to imply that one agrees with that repression and opposes the recognition of the equality of gays and lesbians.

So it is logical that many gays and lesbians see conservatives as being inherently in opposition to them.

I guess... but then I think if it is logical that for those reasons conservatives are seen as being inherently in opposition... wouldn't the opposite also have to be true?

Regardless - I did not come in here to stir things up... so I will now bow gracefully out...

 

[Queersetti]

Re: Hmm... a draw perhaps?

I guess... but then I think if it is logical that for those reasons conservatives are seen as being inherently in opposition... wouldn't the opposite also have to be true?

Regardless - I did not come in here to stir things up... so I will now bow gracefully out...

I see no reason for you to bow out, I believe we could have a productive and perhaps mutually enlightening discussion.

As for your question, my personal belief is that gays and lesbians absolutely ought to oppose the conservative agenda, I think it is implacably hostile towards us. That does not mean I think all conservatives are bad people, or anti-gay themselves, by any means. There is no reason we can not respectfully disagree.

 

[bozinka]

Re: Re: Hmm... a draw perhaps?

I see no reason for you to bow out, I believe we could have a productive and perhaps mutually enlightening discussion.

As for your question, my personal belief is that gays and lesbians absolutely ought to oppose the conservative agenda, I think it is implacably hostile towards us. That does not mean I think all conservatives are bad people, or anti-gay themselves, by any means. There is no reason we can not respectfully disagree.

You're right, which is why I said I was going to bow out. Sure, we could have discussion about it, and it could be very interesting... but in the end... it would all boil down to us agreeing to disagree... which is fine with me.