Eliminate the writer part, and Mac just nailed Harry's entire radio act in two sentences.

_________________
“Mmmm. Move over, eggs. Bacon just got a new best friend - fudge.”

Thank God someone revived this thread! I was afraid it might pass into bolivian.

_________________

Is he going to be back today?

no.
he's on vacation this week too.

_________________
@audioidkid

Question - Is there a double standard at WMVP? You decide.

Mac calls out a woman by name, says she's a "bitch" and recieves a 2+ Week suspension.

Chet Coppock calls out a guy he used to work with by name, says he's a "son of a bitch" and it's not even discussed.

Why the difference? Gender? Bitch vs. Son of a Bitch? Isn't son of a bitch a pretty mean insult to the guy's mom?

If Mac's "history" is the reason, than Chet should have been given some type of minimal suspension as Mac has with his earlier transgressions. But, of course, WMVP/ESPN/Disney will do nothing because the double standard applies.

Chester should be suspended for horrible radio shows, much less on-air profanity....

_________________
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. ~ Benjamin Franklin

You bring up another example that shows how much hypocrisy there is in this decision by ESPN.

If she wasn't a woman, no suspension.
If she wasn't well connected, either through Comcast or her husband who is in the Bears organization, no suspension.
If he had just attacked her character, instead of using a word that from all indications is not banned on the air, no suspension.
If the management at ESPN 1000 realized that it is sports talk radio and it was built on radio hosts speaking their minds, no suspension.
If ESPN 1000 had the guts to defend one of their own instead of caving to pressure to not only suspend for the rest of the week, but continue it for a month, no suspension.

I can't wait until the day that Jerry Reinsdorf, John Paxson, Jerry Angelo, or someone else calls up to complain about a comment made by a host. The precedent was set by two people with a small amount of power(allegedly). I guess the score really will become the "voice of the fan" whereas ESPN 1000 will become the "voice of the censored".

I'm not a Mac apologist, as what he did was wrong, but ESPN 1000 is once again handling this pathetically. What is the funniest thing about this is that there was not a large public outcry. 99.9% of the audience could care less about him calling someone a name.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Yes, there is a double standard. Chet is a moron.
I suspend myself.

_________________
SideshowBob311: "Sadly enough, I think we're the "intelligent" portion of the sports radio fanbase".
"I make fun of whoever sucks, including me"- Harry 11/30/07

Suspend Chet from what? His one show a week. Coppock is done. The guy is a non-factor.

Mac would probably get more listeners podcasting from his hot tub.

_________________
@audioidkid

Of course there is. Most companies -- particularly any organization with unionized employees -- have different standards for discipline for people who are first time offenders and multiple offenders. Progressive discipline is a staple of unions and of employee discipline generally. I'd be interested in you telling us which companies you think do not have different standards for discipline, and that treat first-time and multiple offenders the same. That company would be an interesting case study in lousy HR management.

I also think you need to really think about the difference between making an off-hand comment calling someone an SOB and making an anger-filled attack on a producer. One of the words may be the same, but there seems to be a significant difference in context and in the impression created with the listeners. There are many words that can be used in some contexts, but not in others. That seems to be the case here. And the attorneys have surely educated all the broadcasters of their own rules and nuances of those rules...

You're wrong, Coast. Chet's comment wasn't "off-handed". Did you hear it? He was angry when he said it. And frankly, I don't care if she's a producer or not.

Unless you hear it, you have no idea about the "context and the impression createed with listeners". I heard it.

You're life experience may tell you that "son-of-a-bitch" can be used acceptably in certain contexts, but mine does not. I almost got the shit kicked out of me once because the guy took at as an insult to his mother - which it is.

In any case, you're argument is based on context, nuances, and the nature of the comment. So if you heard it, we agree to disagree. If you didn't (which I can't believe you did, otherwise you would have perceived Chet's anger and hatred), you're argument is baseless.

NSJ, OK, if you say so. To me there is a big difference, but I'll accept your uber sensititivity on that point. My question then is if that is how it went down, then perhaps Coppock did get a visit to the principal's office. I don't know that. Do you? How do you know Coppock wasn't talked to about it or given some kind of warning if it was as bad as you say? There are a lot of assumptions made on this board..one of which is that all forms of employee discipline of on-air personalities are public knowledge. I think we all know of several cases in which some hosts were mysteriously gone for a few days or a week on a sudden, unplanned "vacation" that reeked of an unannounced suspension. Some companies and personalities do a better job than others of keeping disciplinary matters private. When it results in a few weeks suspension, we usually learn about it. If it's a day, a few days or a week, I suspect we sometimes do not.

No, I don't know, but he was on the air the next day. He may, in fact, have been disciplined and I wouldn't know it. Possible, yes; Probable; no.