03/02/2007
CAA Dumps Hateful Radio Host Michael Savage
It's not like he wasn't spewing hate before, but after his recent rant against Melissa Etheridge and gay parents was protested across the internet, CAA dumped Michael Savage yesterday, three days after signing him.
They did the right thing.
You may have missed...
CAA Adds Hatemonger Michael Savage to its Client List [tr]
Posted 8:10 AM EST by Andy in Gay Slurs, News, Radio | Permalink
Comments
Right thing!?!?!? The right thing was never to have taken him on as a client.
Posted by: Will | Mar 2, 2007 8:23:11 AM
Exactly my comment, Will. They should never have hired that jackass in the first place!
Posted by: Michael W. | Mar 2, 2007 8:26:12 AM
I'll use an argument that I read often yesterday coming from conservatives on this blog:
It just made good business sense for CAA to drop Savage.
Posted by: mark m | Mar 2, 2007 8:42:04 AM
The conservatives yesterday really do not get that he should be free to say whatever he wants - but good people should be morally outraged. Something that group of posts showed the "conservatives" did not feel at all.
Shame on them.
GREAT CALL CAA --- the noise people like Andy Towle made resulted in this change.
can you spell H.E.R.O.
Posted by: rjp3 | Mar 2, 2007 9:01:39 AM
Thank goodness people are waking up to this vile piece of feces. With his dark glasses, he looks as if he may be hiding dilated pupils. His mouth dilates like the sphincter of a heifer.
Posted by: mack | Mar 2, 2007 9:48:19 AM
The question is, did CAA do this on their own, or was there pressure from other bigger clients?
Posted by: Scott | Mar 2, 2007 10:01:00 AM
Thanks, Andy, for informing people about this story. I'm not shocked that he was hired, but I am shocked—and thrilled—that he was fired so quickly. Maybe souls and Hollybiz can coexist. At the same time, it would have been fun to see the stink that Clooney and Glen Close and Julia Roberts and Melissa herself [her own agency, quelle ironic] might have raised—"Up against the walls, Motherfuckers!!!"
STILL, the larger point is that this guy is still on the radio spewing his homohatred to MILLIONS every week, and it's guaranteed that this will only increase it [bullies always like to blame someone else for their failures]. Whether or not GLAAD's verbal protest when he was on MSNBC and told someone to "get AIDS" played a role in his being dumped by them a few years back, WHERE have they been in the meantime? WHERE have they been since his rabid rant against Melissa and gay families generally? WHERE is HRC? WHERE is NGLTF? As of yesterday afternoon, none of the three had even posted about it on their Websites? And, this type of thing is EXACTLY what GLAAD was created to fight. They should be identifying and pressuring sponsors, and organizing pickets in front of his employer's and sponsers' offices. Two words: Dr. Laura.
"'Wait, Uncle Leland! What about free speech?!!' said the pussy." There is a great deal of confusion about free speech, in the US, and along Towleroad. Free speech does NOT equal "guaranteed platform." The Constitution only speaks to a general right to speak freely, but courts have consistently and reasonably found that it can be restrained within contexts, e.g., the classic "falsely yelling 'fire' in a crowded theatre; students to a degree; soldiers to a degree; employees to a degree which brings us to this silly Savage.
It is a part of OUR free speech to demand that his employer and sponsors not give him a platform for spreading hate. With so much hate crime, Athos' murder, et al., the case could be made that he is yelling fire in a crowded and already frightened and hostile "theatre" of millions. Let him take his viciousness and paint it on a sign and march up and down the street like the inbred Phelps clan. But get the fucker OFF THE AIR! People like him help lead to the killing of body and soul.
As for anyone about to write, "but we need his voice, like Hardaway's, so people will know about homohatred." Honey, they know. They already know.
Posted by: Leland | Mar 2, 2007 11:13:40 AM
Thanks to Andy and all the bloggers, etc. that may have had a hand in the CAA dropping this hateful pervert.
Posted by: Cory | Mar 2, 2007 11:20:31 AM
Good. Let Savage learn his lesson. (which I doubt)
Posted by: Karim | Mar 2, 2007 11:38:14 AM
This story bothers me because it means that (1) this nutter now has first class representation to further pollute the nations airwaves with his one man hate fest and (2) the people who are representing him are hoping to make a fast buck at the expense at immense cost to others (namely, the legions of minorities he regularly bullies and menaces on his "show").
Posted by: FASTLAD | Mar 2, 2007 11:47:54 AM
The dope looks like gangster Henry Hill when he used to wear a disguise. Compare him to the pure class of Melissa Etheridge appearing in concert bald from her cancer treatments, thus making millions of women in such circumstances feel a bit less uncomfortable.
Posted by: Joe T. | Mar 2, 2007 11:49:37 AM
Wow! That was fast. Congrats, to all the guys and girls that made it happen.
Posted by: Jack! | Mar 2, 2007 1:18:47 PM
Leland...I assure you, Julia Roberts would NOT have raised a fuss. She is waaaaaaaaayyyyy too self-involved to worry that the agency that brings her business (ie: money, fame, power) might also be representing a hatemonger.
Posted by: peterparker | Mar 2, 2007 1:30:52 PM
>> Julia Roberts...self-centered?! But she's America's Favorite Hooker With A Heart Of Gold!
Posted by: Charlie | Mar 2, 2007 1:43:56 PM
Well, the thing I would worry about is not CAA, as glamorous and prestigous as that is (I'm not sure what they could have done for MS that he hasn't already achieved--product endorsements??) but that his large audience laps up everything he says--they want to hear what he has to say. He's not a leader but a follower, as they say.
Posted by: anon | Mar 2, 2007 2:25:32 PM
I always think its encouraging when right wins out.
Vehement protest and boycott can be effective in our image concious, status driven society.
I wish that more people knew about Mr. Savage's or whatever his name is's association with that Rockstar Energy Drink. His son seems to be the front for that under a different name.
Posted by: John | Mar 2, 2007 10:36:58 PM
Problem with this is that Savage's contract was broken by CAA. Hence Savage keeps his advance $$, which was prolly quite a few hundred thousand $$.
Money 4 nut'n.
Posted by: zabadak | Mar 3, 2007 4:42:59 PM
I understood that freedom of speach was a right in America. Apparently not. Why not change the channel or boycott the channel. One person is not the country or what people really think. We do have the right to change the channel. Or do we.
Here in Ottawa we do have a mouth piece on CFRA radio, when he comes on I just change the channel no big deal. One can make an issue out of anything and lord knows people do, I would suggest that one has to get out more.
Just a thought.
Posted by: Dr. Pat | Mar 3, 2007 8:07:54 PM
As was stated in other comment chains that I have read today...freedom of speech is a right, tried and true but it is not an absolute. Take the old dead horse of you can’t yell 'FIRE' in a crowded theater. Under the mandate of an absolute freedom of speech practice that action is unpunishable.
It has been my understanding that a person sovereign rights extend as far as possible until they intersect with the rights of another.
People always jump about with the freedom of speech bit...but what about the right to live free of oppression? Or without fear in your own home?
Some would say that "they are only words and words only have as much power as you give them", and although I believe this to be true it can not be used as a shield by those who would intentional abuse their privilage of freedom of speech.
Further more I do not feel that we should have to "change the channel" so to speak. It is wrong to spew fourth such poison unckecked. What if instead of spreading hate about "fags" he was spreading it about "niggers"? (Personally I strongly dislike both words)
Why is it nearly a crime to say horrible things about black people but it is semi acceptable to say equally hateful things about gay people?
You know, I'm new to this site. Granted I am glad to now be a small part of it, I can’t help but feel really sad about how many vile, repugnant atrocities are being committed against me and my kind. I was totally ignorant of the fact that a man was BEATEN to death because who he was proud to be... it is sad and it is for that reason and many others that we can not just "change the channel" because to do so would be turning a blind eye to the atrocities and doing nothing to stop them from happening.
I feel that it is the weak mans out for having to deal with the injustice of the world around him. "Maybe if I don’t look it will just go away on its own..." well sorry I’m not going to just look away and hope for the best.
The only way that things are going to change is if we all band together and as one fight against the monsters that is ignorance and fear.
"United we stand, divided we fall"
Posted by: Nick | Mar 3, 2007 9:43:45 PM
Oh, Dr. Pat! Are you writing from the Ottawa I know, or is there a distant planet also called Ottawa?
TV and radio stations, and the syndicators that supply them, fire and cancel on-air people, such as Michael Savage, all the time without violating their constitutional right to free speech!
Know why? Because the TV or radio station is paying for the TV or radio signal with the station's own money, not with Mike Savage's money! They have a right to control the information carried on their signal!
If Mr. Savage wants to run his own radio station, let him pay for it himself! (After applying to the FCC, of course!) *THAT* is the right to free speech that the First Amendment actually protects.
And if Mr. Savage can't afford to open up his own radio station, then maybe he should go down to Kinko's and run off a few hate-spewing flyers and stick them on people's windshields.
Or better yet ... up his ass.
Posted by: Allen | Mar 3, 2007 9:50:43 PM
Recent Comments