There’s no connection between Damon Bruce and free speech

Damon Bruce’s Rant and Free Speech

11/11/13 in NFL   |   PAULLEBOWITZ   |   109 respect

I think you’ll find that the level of tolerance for controversy is inextricably linked to the amount of money Jul 22, 2013; Davie, FL, USA; Miami Dolphins guard Richie Incognito (68) during  training camp at the Doctors Hospital Training Facility at Nova Southeastern University.  Mandatory Credit: Robert Mayer-USA TODAY Sports that is on the line. How much did the producers of Two and A Half Men put up with from Charlie Sheen behaving in a way that – in the regular world or even Hollywood if it was a low-rated, low-revenue show – would have gotten him dismissed immediately? It was the number one rated show in large part because Sheen was the star. High ratings mean high advertising rates which means big money.
 
This line of reasoning can be extended to the ongoing Martin-Incognito saga. The Dolphins’ offensive line has performed horribly all season long. That’s one important factor that’s conveniently ignored as it gets swallowed up in the story. As much as Martin is lauded by some for his supposed intelligence as a Stanford graduate and treated by others as if his intelligence is why he can’t handle playing the NFL; as much as Incognito is treated by some as the ideal offensive lineman and others as a brutish buffoon who wrecks lockerrooms – neither has done a particular notable job in what they’re there to do: protect the quarterback. If it was Jonathan Ogden and Larry Allen who had an off-field problem, it wouldn’t have blown up to this degree because the team needs top-tier offensive linemen to compete and would have found a way to get everyone on the same page and able to function as a unit.
 
If the radio station leaves Bruce or any offensive personality on the air, the situation will sort itself out. The listeners will whittle away, the host will stay on the air and become more successful, or it will continue as it did before. It’s up to the radio station as to whether they’re willing to take the short-term hit, criticism and – most importantly – lost revenue from advertiser cancellations and see if the host can weather the storm.
 
It’s here where the line between free speech and freedom to speak intersect. An article in yesterday's New York Times related how colleges are looking at the social media accounts of prospective students and denying them admission in spite of solid academic credentials due to their activities on Twitter and other outlets. It’s common that employers will want to see a possible employee’s social media accounts to make sure they’re not hiring a person who will embarrass their company and possibly cause a decline in business. 
Notify me by email about comments that follow mine. Preview

11/12/13   |   cam_barr   |   1 respect

Dan_B wrote:
Why thank you, sir.

No doubt

11/11/13   |   Dan_B   |   1067 respect

PAULLEBOWITZ wrote:
I don't think it counts as a rant if it's dead-on point. 

Why thank you, sir.

11/11/13   |   PAULLEBOWITZ   |   109 respect

I don't think it counts as a rant if it's dead-on point. 

11/11/13   |   Dan_B   |   1067 respect

I have always found the misunderstanding of "freedom of speech" in this country interesting. The 1st Amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." I bolded "Congress" because the 1st Amendment addresses government actions, not the actions of private companies (like KNBR).

So when teams get mad when athletes said stupid things and people react by saying there is freedom of speech, that is silly. That just means that athlete can't get prosecuted for that speech -- it doesn't mean the team, or the league (hello, Roger Goodell), can't get mad. 

--end rant--