I got the following article from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation or GLAAD. They have an online petition going on asking CNN to stop bringing people from anti-gay groups to speak from the counter point when talking about gay rights issues. Their stance is that those who come to oppose the gay rights agenda are not speaking as experts but only because they are considered anti-gay. I am trying to figure out what kind of training you need have to be to considered and expert who can oppose the gay rights agenda. Usually, I would think it would be someone who just opposed the agenda and then would present their talking points as to why they opposed it. If you do not bring people who oppose your views / stances, how do you have a counter point. It seems that GLAAD desires to use CNN as a platform to spread their views unopposed. Not much of a fair and balanced news source if that happens is it?
CNN has long been one of America’s most respected journalistic organizations on many issues, but for several years, it has had a giant blind spot when it comes to issues that impact the LGBT community. On December 21, John King USA ran a segment featuring Peter Sprigg from Family Research Council, but there are countless other examples. Out of a desire for ‘balance’ on these issues, CNN turned – as they often do – to the anti-gay industry to provide the counterpoint. Except all too frequently, the network doesn’t book these people because they provide any actual expertise or experience on issues that impact LGBT people; their only qualification is that they are anti-gay.
We’re all familiar with New Year’s Resolutions — things we pledge to do to improve ourselves in the coming year. The new year is a fresh start; achance to start anew, down a better, healthier path. Most of us have a vice or two we’d like to give up, a few pounds we’d love to shed, or an area of our lives that we need to organize.
Just like us the media needs to do a little housecleaning. Namely, it’s time for outlets to finally drop several hundred pounds of unhealthy weight, which they’ve been carrying around for years, in the form of anti-gay activists.
During that John King segment on the pending repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and its implementation, King featured openly gay former service member Alex Nicholson, alongside Sprigg, who is a “senior fellow for policy studies” at the Family Research Council.
Nicholson’s qualifications were clear. As an openly gay, former Army intelligence officer, he gave firsthand accounts of how the policy played out in the day-to-day lives of gay and lesbian service members.Sprigg’s qualifications, however, came exclusively from his job at the Family Research Council. There, Sprigg 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. And yet, by pairing him with Nicholson in this segment, CNN told its millions of viewers that both of these men should be seen as equally valuable to this discussion.
Is it important for the media to take these groups on? Of course it is. But that’s not what CNN and other media organizations are doing when it invites these groups to take part in otherwise reasonable discussions. The media is elevating their hurtful messages and attitudes to the level of rational discourse. The media is saying that people like Alexander Nicholson, who can speak to real-life experience and firsthand facts, need to be “balanced” by people like Peter Sprigg, whose claim to fame is arguing that being gay should be outlawed. If CNN wants to interview a gay person who believes being straight should be outlawed, THEN Peter Sprigg would be an acceptable “balance.”
CNN and the rest of the media are doing nothing but exposing their viewers to dangerous anti-gay rhetoric when they invite members of these anti-gay groups onto their programming. Starting in 2011, this needs to stop.
Many of us who make New Year’s Resolutions can run into trouble figuring out where to start. So the attached petition makes this a very, very easy resolution to keep. Tell the media that if they can’t find someone who isn’t part of the anti-gay industry to discuss an issue that involves the LGBT community, then the “other side” of that issue isn’t one worth hearing.