Neal Boortz, the Courts, and the First Amendment

Atlanta-based talk radio host Neal Boortz of WSB 750AM appears to have used the end of Arbitron’s spring ratings season to test the limits of the First Amendment. In mid-March, Boortz engaged in on air behavior so outrageous it’s reasonable to assume he was hoping to create enough controversy influence his ratings.

The more recent of two incidents involved a March 14 anti-war protest by the Pittsburgh Organizing Group, or POG. POG had announced that it would picket a military recruiting office that evening. Just after noon EST on March 14, Boortz demonized POG and its activities and then encouraged anyone on hand for the protest to “Shoot those leftist bastards dead.”

Boortz, who holds a law degree, must know that the First Amendment doesn’t protect speech intended to incite violence. In Schenck v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that reasonable limits on freedom of speech are constitutional:

…the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. Aikens v. Wisconsin, 195 U.S. 194, 205, 206. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. It does not even protect a man from an injunction against uttering words that may have all the effect of force. Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co., 221 U.S. 418, 439. The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.

The legal question is whether or not encouraging someone among Boortz’s hundreds of thousands of listeners to “Shoot those leftist bastards dead” created a clear and present danger to members of POG.

What’s most interesting is that the members of POG were clearly exercising their First Amendment rights by holding a peaceful protest, which calls Boortz’s motives into question. In addition to potentially creating a clear and present danger to POG, an incitement to violence against such protesters could reasonably be expected to create a chilling effect on similar protesters, that is, to infringe on their right to free expression. It appears that Boortz was concerned with ratings and not principle.

(Ironically, Schenck v. United States involved incendiary language used by leftists protesting the draft.)

By far the more disturbing incident occurred a week before, when, beginning at approximately 10:35am EST, Boortz repeatedly played audiotape of a nine-year-old child and mocked and ridiculed the child’s speech patterns. Legal precedent makes such behavior, while reprehensible, protected speech when aimed at adults. One legal issue to be determined is whether such behavior aimed at a child is also protected.

To compound Boortz’s malevolence, both he and WSB General Manager Dan Kearney were advised that the child in question suffers from at least one disability. Even without having been notified, the audio speaks for itself; Boortz listeners commenting at this blog suspected some disability. Subsequently, posts at Newsprism.com that addressed the disability were referred to by Boortz on air, and the Boortz Show emailed Newsprism several times. One such email specifically addressed the question of the child’s disabilities: “In your blog you seem to be backing off your claims that Lil’ Buford has some sort of a disability...”

Nonetheless, Boortz, clearly with the knowledge and permission of WSB management, continued to humiliate the child up until Thursday, March 13. A second legal issue to be determined is whether a broadcaster has a responsibility to consider the psychological and/or emotional state of the target of such humiliation. If, for example, if someone with schizophrenia were to be humiliated publicly over an extended period of time, would it be foreseeable that psychological damage might be done?

Boortz went so far as to publish the following additional insults towards the boy on his web site, www.boortz.com, on March 13, well after having been informed of the child’s disabilities: “…looks like we’ve really twisted a few knickers out there with our panning of Lil’ Buford’s communications skills. You remember Lil’ Buford, don’t you? The 10-year-old kid who can’t speak the English language? Yeah .. that one, the future worm farmer.”

A well-publicized case involving an adult harassing a teenager online in 2006 did not lead to criminal charges being filed despite the fact that the harassment appears to have contributed to the teenager’s suicide. However, public outrage made the adult harasser a pariah after a blogger published her name and address on the Internet. Wired.com notes that “few can imagine an offense more egregious than a trusted adult preying on the emotions of a vulnerable child.” No civil suit was filed, and the question remains open whether such circumstances would support an intentional infliction of emotional distress suit.

By March 14, the web post in question was removed from www.boortz.com. On that very same day, Boortz made his “Shoot those leftist bastards dead” comment; was this coincidence, or did he simply choose another tactic in a cynical attempt to generate controversy and increase ratings?

The privilege of broadcasting carries with it a fiduciary duty (an assumption of trust) and a mandate to act in the public interest. Broadcasters, then, are subject to the same or more stringent limits as private citizens—there is no “extra” protection afforded them. The law on intentional infliction of emotional distress, while vague, involves behavior so outrageous that it “shocks the conscience” and therefore doesn’t have a place in a “civilized society.” Standards have been created that address “depraved indifference” towards a victim or the “reckless disregard” of another’s well-being.

The family of the child Boortz humiliated appears to be pursuing a lawsuit in which these and similar issues will emerge. The FCC is also investigating Boortz’s behavior in this case. It’s worth noting that the issues in these cases don’t involve mere content, such as indecent or obscene statements, but rather the infliction of damages on specific listeners and the duty of the broadcaster to mitigate such damages.

It’s clear that neither Boortz nor WSB management was operating in the public interest, in the best interest of POG or the young child, or in the best interest of the First Amendment. The timing of the incidents suggests an attempt to improve ratings in order to increase advertising rates.

Boortz and WSB will argue that Boortz was simply exercising his First Amendment rights. Hopefully, a jury (or two) will get to decide the limits of those rights.

Newsprism

Operation Chaos vs. “Shoot Those Leftist Bastards Dead”

Not all political machinations of and by the media deserve the same censure. 

Rush Limbaugh has been touting the success of his “Operation Chaos” campaign designed to sow dissent and chaos within the Democratic Party. Statistical data support the possibility that significant numbers of Limbaugh-led Republicans have been voting for Hillary Clinton in Democratic primaries, the goal being to extend the Democratic nomination process as long as possible.

The beneficiary: John McCain (and, of course, Rush Limbaugh.)

Democrats have criticized Limbaugh for inserting himself into the Democratic race, claiming that he’s undermining the democratic process. That’s an odd accusation coming from a party that uses elitist superdelegates and can’t find a way to make the votes cast in Florida and Michigan count.

If states want to restrict party primaries to voters registered in that party and registered independents, that’s their right. Until then, Limbaugh’s tactics are no more or less unethical than those routinely practiced by his critics.

Limbaugh is participating in the democratic process, even if it’s in a pretty sarcastic and mischievous way. The only thing he’s undermining is his opposition.

Meanwhile, last Friday, during the noon hour of the Neal Boortz Show, Boortz spoke about the Pittsburgh Organizing Group, or POG, a radical leftist anti-war group that pickets military recruitment offices.

Boortz’s admonition to any military personnel present for a protest scheduled that evening: “Shoot those leftist bastards dead.” That could easily be interpreted as an incitement to violence at a particular place and time against a specific group of citizens … a reasonable and widely accepted exception to free speech that might interest the FCC.

Limbaugh’s strategery has generated ample press coverage and the deeply satisfying scorn of the left; Boortz’s stunt just confirms that he’s an amoral, artless self-promoter.

Newsprism

A wise man cannot be harmed by criticism; for if the criticism is false, it means nothing to him, and if it is true, he’s grateful for the opportunity to improve himself

An Open Letter to WSB 750 AM re: Neal Boortz

Over the last eight days, I’ve been following the repeated belittling of a disabled nine-year-old boy by Neal Boortz of WSB 750 AM in Atlanta. It defies logic and decency that one of the most storied broadcast stations in the South would follow such a course; surely financial gain doesn’t justify causing harm to any child, much less a disabled one.

Jordan W never asked to become the target of a bully like Neal Boortz. But last week, several large pieces of ice, probably from a passing airliner, crashed through the roof of his family’s tire ship. Reporters converged on the scene, and one, from WSB TV (both WSB 750 and WSB TV are owned by Cox Communication) recorded Jordan’s smart and plausible reaction to the incident:

Satellite things up in the sky, I thought one of them done fell down in the roof.

Jordan’s father, Gordon W, was also recorded.

On Friday, March 7, at approximately 10:30 am, Mr. Boortz replayed the audio of Gordon W and began mocking the tire shop owner’s speech patterns. In northeast Georgia, exurban Atlanta butts up abruptly with Appalachia; Mr. W speaks in the distinctive dialect of the region. This kind of mockery is the stock in trade of Mr. Boortz, who promotes his show as “America’s Rude Awakening” and ”Insensitivity Training.”

Then Mr. Boortz played the audio of Jordan W. The learning diabled boy shares his father’s distinct Appalachian dialect, and he also spoke very rapidly in his excitement and so was difficult to understand.

Boortz proceeded to mock and ridicule the boy’s speech, to demean his intelligence, and to question his future economic prospects. Jordan may or may not achieve the kind of succes Boortz has achieved—four million listeners, successful books, television appearances, speaking engagements—but there’s no reason to belittle his shot at the American Dream.

Boortz demeaned the child for over an hour, replaying the tape again and again and laughing that he couldn’t “translate” Jordan’s words. Boortz also said Jordan “sounds as dumb as a stump” and would probably wind up “changing tires” or “farming worms.” Boortz even accused Gordon W of child abuse based solely on his son’s speech patterns, an accusation echoed numerous times in his listener’s comments on this blog.

The line between good and bad taste was being pushed for a ratings bump, only this time, the schtick involved a young child. On his website, an unrepentant Boortz asked his listeners this question:

“Is Neal being too hard on that 10-year-old boy from North Georgia with the thick accent?” One of the statements respondents could choose from: “mah diddy sez neil’s bein ignert.”

On Tuesday, March 11, I heard Boortz again ridiculing Jordan, whom he had now dubbed “Little Buford” the “future worm farmer.” No child deserves such treatment, not on a playground or in a home, much less on national radio. I contacted Gordon W and asked him if Jordan was aware of what was being done to him. Mr. W said he was, and that

“…it’s really disturbing him…he’s really, really sad about it.” Mr. W also had a message for Boortz: “We just want him to leave us alone.”

With Boortz’s huge local following—Lula is less than an hour north of Atlanta—it was inevitable that Boortz’s abuse would come to the attention of Jordan and his family. In fact, according to Mr. W, people have been coming into the family business and talking about it, leaving Jordan traumatized and depressed. I posted both of the statements above on this blog and also emailed the Boortz show to inform them that Jordan has, among other problems, ADHD. Their response that evening:

Horseshit. There is no such thing as ADD or ADHD.

I replied, “And that justifies harming a nine-year-old child (not ten) named Jordan (not Buford)?” Based on subsequent comments made on air, and on search engine results, I believe that by this time, Boortz and/or his staff had been reading my posts. Their response to me that same evening:

Oh yeah! We’re sitting here just shaking in our boots! Bid bad Preston is going to really show us who’s boss here! Are we in trouble now! I guess we had better all get our affairs in order because soon we aren’t going to have jobs! Oh, the humanity!

The irony of these people invoking “humanity” appears to be lost on them.

On Thursday morning, March 13, I heard Boortz mention me on his program. He noted that I had been “blogging” about him and mocked the idea that he might be held accountable for his actions because of that. It’s hard to believe that by this time he was unaware of the fact that Jordan W suffers from something more than ADHD. (Out of respect for the boy and his family, I’ve agreed not to specify the boy’s disabilities, but to use general terms instead.)

Boortz repeated his attacks that Thursday and posted this on his web site beginning at around 8:30 am:

…looks like we’ve really twisted a few knickers out there with our panning of Lil’ Buford’s communications skills. You remember Lil’ Buford, don’t you? The 10-year-old kid who can’t speak the English language? Yeah .. that one, the future worm farmer.

According to Boortz, a substantial number of emails, some of which mentioned the boy’s disabilities, had been sent to WSB over the week ending Friday, March 14. I sent numerous emails to both Boortz and WSB General Manager Dan Kearney myself. WSB management had to be aware of the situation.

As of the writing of this post (Friday, March 14, 9:00 pm,) the Boortz quote above is no longer available on Boortz’s web site, www.boortz.com. This may be on orders from above at Cox; I certainly hope so.

I hope the W family will file a civil lawsuit against this hateful coward, Neal Boortz, and that WSB will demand at the least an on-air apology and at most a suspension. WSB should also seriously consider making a good-faith offer of compensation to the family to avoid the added trauma of a very public and ugly lawsuit.

I know that James Cox, the founder of WSB’s parent company, Cox Communications, would be scandalized by what’s been done to Jordan and Gordon W. People with disabilities should never be subjected to the kind of abuse heaped on Jordon W, nor should their parents be made to suffer needlessly like Gordon W was.

Sincerely,

Dr. Preston Coleman

Newsprism

Neal Boortz Ridicules Disabled 9-year-old on National Radio (Audio)

On Friday morning’s Neal Boortz Show (March 7), Boortz repeatedly played an audiotape of a nine-year-old disabled boy, Jordon W, and ridiculed the way the boy speaks, saying, ”He sounds as dumb as a stump.”

Boortz also ridiculed the boy’s father, Gordon, demeaned the family’s business, a tire shop, and accused the father of child abuse based solely on Jordan’s speech patterns and distinct mountain accent.

This is the same Neal Boortz who made light of the disabling of 13-year-old surfer Bethany Hamilton shortly after she lost her arm in a shark attack in 2003. Boortz called the girl “stupid” and ”inarticulate,” called her lost arm ”shark food,” and laughed that she’d “never be a typist.” (Bethany is now a competitive professional surfer despite her disability.)

Boortz promotes his talk show by admitting that he has a “personality disorder” that he’s parlayed into a “very good living.”

The disorder goes deeper than the personality, and “good living” involves more than making money.

Here’s the original WSB news story where Boortz got the audio he used to trash the W family. WSB had sent a reporter to the family tire shop in Lula after a pieces of ice crashed through the roof of the family business.

And here’s the flippant poll where Boortz makes light of his emotional abuse of Jordan W (scroll down to see it):

Is Neal being too hard on that 10-year-old boy from North Georgia with the thick accent?

*Yes, he should lay off     *No, he’s spot on     *mah diddy sez neil’s bein ignert

Worst of all, here’s the demeaning post at www.boortz.com from Thursday, March 13—a full week after the initial humiliation, and well after both Boortz and WSB General Manager Dan Kearney had been informed that the boy is disabled (emails demonstrating this are available and have been forwarded to the FCC):

…looks like we’ve really twisted a few knickers out there with our panning of Lil’ Buford’s communications skills. You remember Lil’ Buford, don’t you? The 10-year-old kid who can’t speak the English language? Yeah .. that one, the future worm farmer.

Finally, here’s the audio of Jordan and Gordon W. Jordan says, “I don’t care about me, I just care about my daddy.” As it turns out, Little Buford outclasses Neal Boortz by a country mile.

Wouldn’t it be nice if that mysterious ice from the sky wound up taking some cold hard cash out of the pockets of Boortz and his employer, and putting it into a trust fund for Jordan W?

Newsprism

The gods must be crazy in mysterious ways

Is Neal Boortz Stupid, or Evil?

Talk radio blowhard Neal Boortz has sunk to a new low, mirroring the sinking ocean floor. But his “logic” reveals much about global warming skeptics in the right wing spin machine.

Boortz’s web site leads today with a Reuters story about a study based on computer models that say sea levels are dropping and have been for 80 million years. Here’s a quote from the journal Science as reported by Reuters:

Sea levels are set to fall over millions of years, making the current rise blamed on climate change a brief interruption of an ancient geological trend, scientists said on Thursday.

Later the Reuters article puts that prediction on falling sea levels into perspective:

Still, the projected rate of fall works out at 0.015 centimeters a century — irrelevant when the U.N. Climate Panel estimates that seas will rise by 18-59 cms by 2100 because of global warming stoked by human use of fossil fuels.

“Compared to what is expected due to climate change, the fall is negligible,” said Steinberger. Cities from Miami to Shanghai are threatened by rising seas that could also swamp low-lying island nations in the Pacific.

In other words, the liklihood of sea levels rising due to human activities (literally) swamps the imperceptible drops predicted in the Science article.

Now here’s how Boortz reports on the issue:

A new report in the journal Science concludes that sea levels are going to fall over millions of year (sic). This makes the current rise in sea levels (blamed on global warming) a “brief interruption” of an ancient geological trend. In the big picture – which global warmers can’t seem to grasp – the oceans are getting deeper.

Okay, Neal. If sea levels drop 120 meters over the next 80 million years, as the study predicts, we don’t have to worry about rises of half a meter in the next century. Do the math: a drop of .00015 meters versus a rise of .5 meters over the next century. Instead of sea levels rising .5 meters, the’ll only rise .49985 meters!

Those people living on low-lying islands in the Pacific just have to wait a few million years, and their homes will be back on dry land. Lovely.

“Big picture?” Boortz either has no clue about the big picture, or he’d take any chance, however asinine, to trash global climate change theory.

Besides, Neal, if computer models can’t be trusted to predict climate in the near term, as you’ve said repeatedly, why are you so uncritical in buying what they say about ocean levels over a span of 160 million years?

Boortz couldn’t care less about the potential consequences of global climate change. The issue is nothing but a political football in his mind.

I’d call that just plain evil.

Newsprism

By the way, it’s 10:30 am, and as I write, Boortz is replaying audio of a 9-year-old boy and ridiculing the way the child speaks. I can’t make this up…Boortz is ridiculing a 9-year-old boy on a national radio program (Boortz: “He sounds as dumb as a stump.”) He’s nine years old, Neal.

Why don’t you go back to trashing 13-year-old girls?

Shut Up and Talk Radio

Laura Ingraham’s book Shut Up and Sing: How Elites in Hollywood, Politics and the UN Are Subverting America makes the case that liberals in the cultural elite (singers, actors, authors, filmmakers) are in cahoots with the political elite (appointed judges, ambassadors, legislators) in  subverting traditional, conservative American values and beliefs. I can’t argue with her premise; conservatism has been under particularly vicious attack at least since scurrilous lies were aimed at Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential election.*

I do take exception with one of the beautiful Ms. Ingraham’s central points, however: that those cultural elites should have less of a voice in our political discourse. What makes the opinions of a talk radio host any more legitimate than those of a singer or actor?

Laura, #4 in the talk radio ratings, is one of the best of the right wing radio hosts—smart, funny, informed, and principled. I’d say the same things about Bill O’Reilly. (I’ve already opined aplenty on the #1-rated Godfather of talk radio, Rush Limbaugh, both the good and the bad.) But there are others whose on-air behavior truly deserves the admonition to “Shut Up.”

Michael Savage, #3 in the talk radio ratings behind Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, is an unrepentent bigot, for example. His hatred for homosexuals and Muslims is palpable, as is his disdain for liberalism, which he calls “a mental disorder” (audio). Ironically, this attack on the mental health of liberals parallels the same attack made against Barry Goldwater in ‘64.

I’d be surprised if his homophobia and xenophobia haven’t encouraged, if not caused, violence somewhere along the way. Dr. Savage (he has a PhD in nutrition from, of all places, Cal Berkeley!) should just Shut Up.

Then there’s Hannity, who’s #2 in the talk ratings. His most recent book, Deliver Us From Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism and Liberalism, literally lumps liberals in with terrorists and despots. That’s Hannity’s schtick on TV and the radio as well: self righteous hyperbole without one iota of nuance or decency. No reasonable observer of the American political scene should countenance such sanctimony.

When Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks told a concert audience that she was “ashamed” that like her, President Bush is from Texas, Hannity launched a months-long attack on the group. He advocated boycotts against them by consumers and radio stations alike. Without a doubt, Hannity did everything in his power to damage the Chicks’ career.

But four years later, rocker Ted Nugent held up two assault rifles at a concert and told Barack Obama to “suck on” one and Hillary Clinton to “ride” the other—two very violent and sexually repugnant innuendos. Nugent also called Obama a “piece of shit” and Clinton a “worthless bitch.” Now I honor Nugent’s right to express himself, but his actions went way, way beyond Ms. Maines’s simple statement of shame.

Pressed to condemn Nugent on air, Hannity bluntly refused…this despite the fact that he’s repeatedly said that various liberals are guilty of “hate speech.” That kind of brazenly partisan hypocrisy doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously.

Bill Moyers once labelled Hannity as “vile,” prompting Hannity to challenge the septuagenarian ordained minister to “say it to my face.” Sean Hannity is a bully who should really just Shut Up.

And then there’s the lesser known, but more rabid, Neal Boortz. Boortz so angered Bill O’Reilly that the usually even-tempered Bill used his O’Reilly Factor to call Boortz a “vicious SOB.”

But that’s Boortz’s modus operandi: to anger people with outrageous statements that pollute discourse but increase ratings. When a US airstrike tragically targeted an Iraqi wedding, killing 40 innocents including women and children, Boortz joked about “40 funerals and a wedding.” When an American fighter pilot accidentally clipped the cable to an Italian ski lift, killing 20 skiers in a horrific plunge to the ground, Boortz joked about the pilot’s skill at making “lasagna.”

And when 13-year-old aspiring professional surfer Bethany Hamilton lost her left arm in a shark attack in Hawaii, Boortz attacked her mercilessly. He called the girl “stupid” and “inarticulate,” joked about her arm being “shark food,” and laughed at the fact that she’d never be a typist. What an ass—kicking a little girl while she’s down.

Neal, you should really, really, Shut the Hell Up.

Our democracy thrives when media proliferate and citizens express their views. But the hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric of Savage, Hannity and Boortz doesn’t serve the nation so much as it serves their bank accounts.

Newsprism

*Further reading: Conservatives Without Conscience by John Dean; The Conscience of a Conservative by Barry Goldwater