Boycotts or Censorship?

By Michelle Giametta on 08/24/2009

Boycotts once used as instruments of peaceful protest designed to put pressure on public and private entities to change policies for social good have morphed into weapons used by groups of people to silence, intimidate and destroy people with differing ideological views. Martin Luther King led the infamous Montgomery Bus Boycott when they arrested Rosa Parks for sitting down and not offering her seat to a white passenger. Blacks refused to ride the buses for over a year until they were given their rights. This boycott put enough economic pressure on the buses and community that they were forced to change their policies.

However, recently the tables have turned in terms of boycotting and over 20 major companies have decided to publicly pull their advertising from Glenn Beck's television show. This boycott materialized after "Beck called President Obama a racist who has a "deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture."

The Color of Change, an African American online political organization, is leading this boycott stating, "Beck is on a campaign to convince the American public that President Obama's agenda is about serving the needs of Black communities at White people's expense. It's repulsive, divisive and shouldn't be on the air." In an effort to silence what the Color of Change deems unacceptable rhetoric they are urging people to send a generic letter to companies, such as Wal-Mart, Geico, RadioShack, State Farm, and Procter & Gamble, that advertise on Fox News during Beck's time slot. An excerpt from the letter clearly states, "I presume your company does not want to enable such rhetoric, nor have your products or services associated with the kind of views and tactics espoused by Beck. I urge you to immediately cease all advertising on the Glenn Beck Program on the FOX News Channel." Are organizations like the Color of Change using advertisers to suppress free speech? Whatever happened to just changing the channel?

However, even though many major companies have pulled their advertising from Beck's television program, the Daily News reported that "there were plenty of companies eager to fill the ad slots, including The Wall Street Journal, DirecTV, Honda and Oprah Winfrey's Oxygen Channel." Not to mention the counter-boycotts that have sparked up since many of these companies decided to participate in the boycott against Beck's television show. DefendGlenn.com urges Beck supporters to "fight the boycott" by contacting Beck's advertisers. "A Fox News spokeswoman said Tuesday: "The advertisers referenced have all moved their spots from Beck to other programs on the network so there has been no revenue lost.""

So what does it mean when citizens intimidate companies and advertisers to boycott the media? Do boycotts against controversial commentators like Glenn Beck open the door for future boycotts against other outspoken commentators like MSNBC's Keith Olbermann? Are boycotts still a legitimate form of protest or are they becoming an attempt at censorship?

[Additional Photos: Ted Axelrod/Fox News, 2009; "DownWithTyranny!.com", 2009]