CNN Under Pressure to Stop Booking ‘Anti-Gay’ Guests

January 7, 2011  •  Post A Comment

CNN is facing a push by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation to convince the news network to stop booking guests representing what GLAAD calls the "anti-gay industry," reports TVNewser.com.

GLAAD has launched a petition drive to persuade CNN to stop booking such guests in segments about the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, the story notes.

The group cited a recent "John King, USA" segment as an example, when the show on Dec. 21 looked at the "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy and brought on the Family Research Council’s Peter Sprigg, whom GLAAD says "has worked to advance some of the most hurtful, dangerous, and demonstrably false notions about the lives of LGBT people that our country has seen in recent years."

The segment also featured openly gay former service member Alex Nicholson, the story notes.

CNN responded by noting that "CNN appreciates GLAAD’s concern for objective and fair reporting" and said the channel strives to book experts with "different points of view."

13 Comment

  1. All too often, “different points of view” means one guests insists the moon is made of green cheese, and a JPL scientist insists that, no, it’s actually made of rock.
    Cable news hosts generally nod their head at each of them and at the end of the screaming match say something like, “Well, it’s clear these two disagree. Stay tuned for more on this contentious subject…”
    I’m almost embarrassed to tell people I went to journalism school. Too bad it’s so hard to find it being practiced these days.

  2. I would have more sympathy for these people if they hadn’t taken a perfectly good English word and bastardized it to refer to ona particular group of sexual deviates.
    Think “The Gay Divorcee” “Gay Paree,” and other loveble legitimate uses of that beautiful word. I even named one of my Daughters “Gay” and she had to defend it all her short life.

  3. Red, I do wish you’d get your facts straight, so to speak. “Gay” was used to denote “immoral” for centuries before it was used for “homosexual,” and was originally used as an insult. (Sort of like your use of a common term for illegitimate, perhaps?)
    As far as “The Gay Divorcee” goes, you are aware, certainly, that the lovable songs for it were written by Cole Porter, who was, um, gay, and used that very same word in his songs to mean “homosexual?”
    (“Don’t inquire of Georgie Raft
    Why his cow has never calfed,
    Georgie’s bull is beautiful, but he’s gay!” – Farming)
    So how do you feel about the homophobes who appropriated a perfectly good word for “bundle of sticks” and use it as the most comon anti-gay slur? Of course, anyone who decries “deviates” isn’t some homophobe having a hissy fit, just etymologically caring, right?

  4. All ideas are not equally valid. The insistence on “balance” often means legitimizing personal opinion rooted in ignorance as merely a different but equal “point of view”. That’s why so many boneheads think global warming and evolution are hoaxes. You don’t need to “balance” a story about the harm done to molested children by giving equal time to a spokesman from NAMBLA.

  5. You’re not doing your argument any favors by using NAMBLA as an example,Tad. There are people who think both groups are really the same group. But you also do no favors for the issue by claiming that those with a dissenting opinion aren’t “valid”. We already have a news source that only presents one “valid” side of issues, thank you. One FOX News is plenty.

  6. You could have used Catholic priest instead.

  7. Part of the main problem is that CNN invites these people who are from recognized hate groups and who have no other agenda other than to keep the LGBT Community second class citizens.
    What makes it worse is that these groups quote inaccurate data and in some cases out and out lies and CNN does not fact check or call them on it.
    If CNN wanted to be fair in balanced in something like DADT what are they having on a gay hate group as a conterpoint instead of military personell or a politician that was against it? On Gay Marriage instead of a finge anti-gay hate group again why not politicians or actual religious clergy instead of a hate group that uses made up false data, and LIES they themselves helped create to validate thier hate.
    That is not a balanced counterpoint.
    Would CNN have the KKK or Stormfront members on to counterpoint something like the black farmers lawsuit? When they have a debate over the Isreal and the Middle East do they have someone on from Hezbollahto counterpoint?
    CNN has a responsibilty to get the best educated and most well informed guests. Which it certainly does not do in this instance if they truly want to counterpoint

  8. Red,
    You’re a F***ing moron.

  9. CNN, like nearly all of our popular media today, care more about drama and the potential it has for drawing viewers (ratings) than they do about a fair and balanced discussion of the issues.
    When you get right down to it, the only way that CNN and all the other so-called news channel’s programming differs from network prime time fare is that the news channels utilize extremist nut jobs able to improvise their battle scenes on demand, while the prime time program’s hire writers and actors. The end result is the same. The only problem is that too many people mistake the circus for factual information.

  10. CNN’s front page has looked like the old National Enquirer for some time now.
    This doesn’t surprise me. It saddens me, though.

  11. Love all the opinions expressed here! How is everyone? Love how everyone expresses whatr they feel :)

  12. FYI – http://OutMilitary.com is providing a supportive environment for friending, sharing and networking between active gay and lesbian military and their allies.

  13. Any solutions here? Editors/news producers are under pressure from management to produce ratings through false drama. Who’s there to push back? There is no ‘voice of reason’ built into the system. Can there be? PBS and NPR have peer pressure and policy to encourage a higher, smarter level of discourse, but then, they don’t depend directly on ratings. Is the system permanently broken?

Your Commment

Email (will not be published)