Rush’s Spirit of the Radio

17 Apr

Rush Limbaugh, the outspoken conservative radio host known for his inflammatory and controversial remarks, once again made news on Thursday, March 1 for his comments concerning Georgetown University student, Sandra Fluke.

Sandra Fluke was scheduled to speak in front of the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee about Georgetown’s policy of not covering birth control under their insurance policy. Limbaugh’s comments concerning Fluke crossed the line when he called her a “slut” and a “prostitute” during his Wednesday show. Fluke was interviewed on “The Ed Show,” a part of MSNBC’s lineup and declared that “this is outside the bounds of civil discourse.”

Fluke is correct in stating that the comments should not be a part of the discussions in the political field. Rush’s insults take away from intelligent, thoughtful deliberations that occur concerning our nations policies, and instead puts the focus on personal battles and mud-slinging. When trying to communicate or persuade, it is important to focus on the issue rather than make personal attacks against the opposing viewpoint’s supporters.

The speaker destroys his or her image and reputation any time insulting or hurtful language is used. Rush Limbaugh, through his use of these derogatory terms, loses credibility in his communication. A writer can preserve their standing as an effective communicator by avoiding hurtful or slanderous language when they write.

by Jeff Stoecker



2 Responses to “Rush’s Spirit of the Radio”

  1. Connie Chen April 19, 2012 at 6:33 am #

    Regardless of whether one agrees with Rush Limbaugh or not, he clearly crossed the line in this incident. One thing that is important to keep in mind when trying to communicate effectively in a public setting is to avoid using negative emotions. Keeping your statements neutral, especially in business writing, goes toward making your argument compelling. Once people read or hear insults or anger, then you automatically lose credibility. I think this is something that celebrities and radio/tv hosts often lose sight of.

  2. Christina Sukhu April 23, 2012 at 1:42 am #

    I agree that using slander was not an appropriate approach. A more effective method that could have added to his credibility rather than detracting from it would be to acknowledge the opponent’s argument and refute it. I will admit that unfortunately his negative words did draw a lot of attention from audiences who weren’t aware of the issue before; however, they were poorly informed because, as Connie said, they were ultimately focused on the insults, not the issue.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: