Danny Glover fired by MCI because of his political stance.

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Fencer128

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,700
1
91
Danny Glover was fired because his boss (and more importantly to MCI the buying public) didn't like his views. That's it.

Can this be done, yes.

Is it illegal, no.

I can't see how this can be argued unless we're willing to forego some of the freedoms we all enjoy. I don't agree with "purging" the public eye of anti-war sentiment - but in a professional environment where what your employees say can affect your earnings I think Mr. Glover should have applied a little more care with regard to telling everyone his personal views.

Cheers,

Andy

BTW, it would be interesting to read what he actually said, rather than third hand opinions.
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,978
0
0
Originally posted by: Dari
MCI is the new/old name for WorldCom. The last thing they want is more publicity.

But the two media outlets that are mouthpieces of the right are no better than the likes of Jerry Springer; spouting sensationaslism, with a legion of lemmings doing their biddings. Fox News and MSNBC are in a race to the bottom.

I hope CNN or the BBC never scoop to that level.


BBC has had complaints of anti-US bias leveled against them by their own employees, have yet to hear any of CNN's people complain of any editorial bias in their reporting of the news.

Bad career move Danny, who would want a minority opinion associated with a product they are trying to sell universally?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,763
6,332
126
Originally posted by: Lucky
I've been trying to find what Glover said, so far I've found a lot of jinoistic BS that doesn't actually quote him. Well except when he praised Cuban and Latino Cinema as refreshing and condemned Hollywood as uninspired. I've tried to find a transcript of the letter he signed, nada so far, just a lot of jingoist BS link there as well. My question is this: Does anyone know what Glover even said? What the letter he signed even said? Is everyone just taking the jingoistic BS as the truth?


Why is is so hard for you to use google? "danny glover" cuba petition. Seriously, its REALLY not that hard.

The first link to come up


Many people know Danny Glover as the genial salesman on evening television pushing MCI long distance telephone services. It's less well known that Mr. Glover is a big fan of Fidel Castro. To prove it, he and Harry Belafonte and another 160 or so ''artists and intellectuals'' have just signed a declaration of support for the Cuban regime.

Published on May 1 in Cuba's government newspaper, Granma, the statement says: ''Today there is a tough campaign against a Latin American nation. The harassment of Cuba could serve as an excuse for an invasion.'' The document supported Fidel's May Day warning to the Cuban people against President Bush's ''Nazi'' aggression.

the wall street journal is lying when it says this was published? like that would not be able to be checked? Ok, how about the NYT? Take your pick, conservative or liberal, they both say the same thing.

Yes, I read that link. Like I said, jingoistic BS. The second article doesn't even apply to this situation, the one concerning Glover. I read 3 pages of Google links, none of them actually quote the alleged "letter of support for Fidel Castro". One link suggested that Castro is not even mentioned in the letter, but the letter speaks of the Cuban people. A few others mention "peaceful means" to the issue of a transition of Cuba to Democracy. Yet every single Conservative spin(there are tons of articles about this issue by Conservative sites) equates Glover to being a "Castro supporter", none however provides a quote in support of the allegation. Are you not in the least bit curious as to what Glover's position is?
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,978
0
0
and to think they turneded their backs on the other 159 potential customers who also love Fidel, that should have been their marketing campaign anyway, if you like castro, you'll love our phones.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Yes, I read that link. Like I said, jingoistic BS. The second article doesn't even apply to this situation, the one concerning Glover. I read 3 pages of Google links, none of them actually quote the alleged "letter of support for Fidel Castro". One link suggested that Castro is not even mentioned in the letter, but the letter speaks of the Cuban people. A few others mention "peaceful means" to the issue of a transition of Cuba to Democracy. Yet every single Conservative spin(there are tons of articles about this issue by Conservative sites) equates Glover to being a "Castro supporter", none however provides a quote in support of the allegation.



I'll quote from the second article:

The Cuban government, however, continues to accuse the United States of planning an invasion, most recently when a high-ranking official told ABC News on Sunday that Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida was urging his brother, the president, to attack. Dozens of intellectuals and artists, from the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Rigoberta Menchú to Danny Glover, the actor, have signed a petition that condemns what they assert is a campaign to destabilize Cuba as a pretext for an invasion.


Are you not in the least bit curious as to what Glover's position is?


Since both sides of the media are reporting the same thing....and I dont read spanish...I think its pretty clear what he said.
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,978
0
0
Yes, the US really wants to invade Cuba, but we are not sure our military can handle Castro's forces.


US policy = the realization everyone will die, including castro

wake me up when he does and his brother tries to take over, that's when this will get interesting.
 

DZip

Senior member
Apr 11, 2000
375
0
0
Mr. Glover was using his position as a well-known actor to help MCI sell their products. When he came out with his anti-American stance (his right to free speech) he became a problem for MCI since he lost his credibility. The reason companies use well known people as spokespersons is because of their credibility. When they loss credibility, they are no longer useful. Mr. Glover found out the price for his free speech, freedom does have a cost, it is not free.
 

Pliablemoose

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
25,195
0
56
I was unable to find the text of the letter, but I imagine it mirrors this:

VII. Recommendations


We are united in our insistence that the blockade brings pain to Cuba.
Dr. Johnnetta Cole

It is not appropriate for the United States to design retaliatory public policy on the backs of children, the poor and dispossessed simply because the leader is not liked, in the absence of any discernible threat to the general welfare of citizens of the United States ... Fair play, integrity and justice demand a higher standard of public policy.
Dr. Norman Francis

The delegation left Cuba convinced that the most pressing issues in Cuba today were the human rights consequences of four decades of punitive economic sanctions imposed by the United States. Many members believe that the only course of action consistent with American values and interest is an immediate end to the embargo. There was consensus on the need for an immediate concerted campaign to eliminate all U.S. measures that have contributed to human rights and humanitarian problems in Cuba. Of particular concern to the delegation were those measures that have been clearly identified as worsening the condition of women, children, and Afro-Cubans. The following recommendations focus on how to enhance Cuba's capacity to meet its health, educational, and food sufficiency responsibilities to its citizens:

Health

The United States must immediately end all restrictions on the sale of medical products by U.S. companies to Cuba and stop its campaign to deny the Cuban government access to any medicines, medical information and general medical supplies which contain parts or technologies of U.S. origin. Health care is a human right and the campaign to prevent the Cubans from obtaining needed medical products such as plasma, antibiotics, and surgical instruments is inhumane.
The United States must end its policy of blocking the sale of Cuban pharmaceutical and biotechnological products to other countries. Such efforts deny Cubans badly needed foreign exchange and deny useful and inexpensive products to others.
Education

United States policies and measures that have prevented Cuba from purchasing educational materials and educational technology such as computers and software from American companies as well as from third parties must be ended. The delegation saw evidence of the human cost of such denial and found such policies to be cruel and contrary to the best interest of the United States.
Food Sufficiency

The United States must immediately act to expand recently announced efforts to allow the sale of food, agricultural supplies and machinery to Cuba. There is no need for any restrictions in these areas and such trade would be beneficial to the people of both countries. U.S. restrictions on agricultural trade has severely harmed the health and well-being of the Cuban people and denied U.S. farmers access to a significant market.
The United States should remove restrictions on Cuba's ability to sell sugar on the world market, including but not limited to allowing access to U.S. commodity markets. Restrictions on the sale of sugar -- Cuba's principal export -- denies Cuba the foreign exchange that it needs to promote the welfare of its citizens.



VIII. Conclusion

The TransAfrica Forum delegation visited Cuba at a time of growing demands in the United States for change in U.S. policy toward Cuba. There are notable anti-embargo activities across the American political spectrum and the Clinton administration has begun to respond even if its initial response has been, characteristically, more form than substance, more tentative than comprehensive.

The visit gave the delegation a strong impression of Cuba's efforts to promote social equality through concerted campaigns in the areas of health and education, even in the face of limited resources. Also, the delegation noted increased efforts on the part of the Cuban government to respond to changing global political and economic conditions. The delegation noted the effects of the decade-old state openings toward religion, epitomized by the highly successful visit of the Pope in early 1998. Cuba's growing receptivity to private foreign investment was also visible in hotel construction activity in Havana.

The delegation was concerned by the difficulties, both in Cuba and the United States that have resulted from forty years of hostile relations between both countries. One thing was clear however: the unnecessary suffering imposed on the Cuban people by successive U.S. governments in an effort to overthrow the Castro regime ñ must end. The United States embargo has worsened the lot of the Cuban people by limiting the economic activities via which Cuba can strive to achieve its full potential. Similarly, repeated and varied American attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro and topple his government have created within Cuba a state of tension not conducive to the promotion of civil liberties.

The TransAfrica Forum delegation left Cuba with a profound appreciation of the Cuban people's (i) pride in the accomplishments of the 1959 revolution; (ii) desire to have the embargo-limited restrictions on their country's achievement removed; and (iii) feelings of goodwill and friendship towards the American people. The visit provided delegation members with crucial information and experiences upon which to base individual and collaborative actions to change U.S. policy towards Cuba.

From Trans Africa Forum's visit to Cuba.

Glover is chairman of Trans Africa Forum, Bellafonte is President.

They even brought along Maxine Waters, I'll bet she's a blast on road trips
rolleye.gif
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,978
0
0
of course every prooblem is the fault of the US, where have you been?

How much money did they give in aid to the people of Cuba, or did they just spout off opinions?
 

NightTrain

Platinum Member
Apr 1, 2001
2,150
0
76
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

I still think it is wrong to launch character attacks for political gain and leverage.

Anyone take the time yet to investigate Joe Scarbourogh integrity?


Thanks for the laff :)

 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,326
19,426
146
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: sandorski
Well, in isolation this wouldn't be such a huge issue, but if you add in the Dixie Chicks, the Boss, Michael Moore, Tim Robbins, and others into the mix you begin to see something different. That being a campaign to silence opposition. At the least this is McCarthyism 2, at the worst Krystal Nacht non-violent style. It is a systemic labeling then ruining of those who dare speak opposition, a dangerous precedent.

OH BS. This is not government sponsered in any way. In this country there is the freedom of association. You do not have to associate with, like, buy the product of, or support the careers of those you do not agree with.

Tell me, if you found out your local gas station was a front for the KKK, would you continue doing business there? No? FASCIST! McCARTHYITE!

See how that works?

Who sponsors it is immaterial, if the end result is the same. Danny Glover's personal statements/beliefs(still no confirmation on what those are) is not anywhere near similar to "a front" for some some quasi criminal organization.

So if the KKK never hurt anyone but still preached the same messages, you'd still think it would be wrong to distance yourself from them?

Come on, Sandorski. This is one sided and you know it.

 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Danny Glover called the president of the United States a racist, he blamed American policy for the murderous acts of September 11th, and he signed a petition comparing American soldiers in the Gulf War to 9/11 terrorists. He called America ?the greatest purveyor of violence in the world.? And most recently Mr. Glover signed a letter of support for Fidel Castro.

Now tell me, honestly. No matter what your political position was, would you want someone like this as your company spokesperson? Why the hell would you want a spokesperson who is actively alienating 50+% of your customer base?

And honestly, Glover has some serious issues. The man jumps on the race card faster than Jackson, Sharpton and the Simpson defense team put together.
Words out the MCI is looking to hire Carrot Top:D A lot of good firing Glover is going to do them. The Reactionaries that wrote in complaining about Glover do not make up a significant part of the American Consumer. I can assure you that if they were to hire that Hot Bag of Noxoius Gas Rush Limbaugh they'd dtill get trounced by ATT.

Oh well at least the Red Asses are happy and O"Riely has another topic to blather on about for his show.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,326
19,426
146
Originally posted by: classy
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: classy
This is a tough one. While Glover sounded like a complete fool, I don't think you can go around and fire people for their personal beliefs, unless those beliefs could lead to physical harm or something.

Wrong. Glover was acting as a spokesperson for a company. They relied on his popularity to advertise their product. By voicing an opinion that polarized the public, he put MCI's image at stake. His beliefs and the way he voiced them could have caused (and probably did cause) MCI very real financial harm. If you're making my company lose business, you better believe I can fire you.

I think the the proper thing that should have been done was not to renew his contract or buy it out and part ways, but firing him was wrong and he'll probably win a court case. While he was again I believe wrong in what he said you can't fire him because of it.

Unless he had a contract with them that had a severance clause in it, they can fire him at any time.


Nowhere was he a spoke person for them. WTF are you talking about. He made commercials for them thats it.

WTF do you think a spokesperson IS, Classy??? It's a person who in one capacity or another SPEAKS FOR, or represents a company. That's what an actor who advertises for a company IS, Classy.

And most actors sign contracts to be used in commercials for a company.

Yes, they do. And if you looked at most of the contracts, the company has a right to fire the actor if his actions in any way cause harm to the company's image and/or sales.

If thats the case you should never see anyone do commericals cause guranteed they have or will say something not everyone agrees with.

Not as outrageous as Glover, I promise you.

As far as polarizing the country is a bunch of bs. This country was 50/50 in favor or against this war.

Once the war started, it had a 75+% approval rating. Oh, and the issue of Cuba is NOT 50/50. Hell, I doubt you could find 5% of the people support Castro. I also doubt 50% of the people would agree that calling Bush "racist" is accurate or in good taste.

75% of the world was openly against it as well.

rolleye.gif


So his comments were no more dumb or stupid than all the others. I do think he went to far with some things, but considering the circumstances I can understand it although I don't agree with it. You need to as always get your facts straight. Oops I forgot facts don't mean much to you.

Opps, I forgot, you only address the issues you THINK give you the upper hand. Why didn't you address the outrageous support of Castro, Classy?

I have my facts straight.

 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Originally posted by: Alistar7
Originally posted by: Dari
MCI is the new/old name for WorldCom. The last thing they want is more publicity.

But the two media outlets that are mouthpieces of the right are no better than the likes of Jerry Springer; spouting sensationaslism, with a legion of lemmings doing their biddings. Fox News and MSNBC are in a race to the bottom.

I hope CNN or the BBC never scoop to that level.


BBC has had complaints of anti-US bias leveled against them by their own employees, have yet to hear any of CNN's people complain of any editorial bias in their reporting of the news.

Bad career move Danny, who would want a minority opinion associated with a product they are trying to sell universally?

I was thinking relatively. I really hope they don't join MSNBC and Fox in the race to the bottom. That would be a damn shame. At least CNN has my respect.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: Alistar7
Originally posted by: Dari
MCI is the new/old name for WorldCom. The last thing they want is more publicity.

But the two media outlets that are mouthpieces of the right are no better than the likes of Jerry Springer; spouting sensationaslism, with a legion of lemmings doing their biddings. Fox News and MSNBC are in a race to the bottom.

I hope CNN or the BBC never scoop to that level.


BBC has had complaints of anti-US bias leveled against them by their own employees, have yet to hear any of CNN's people complain of any editorial bias in their reporting of the news.

Bad career move Danny, who would want a minority opinion associated with a product they are trying to sell universally?

I was thinking relatively. I really hope they don't join MSNBC and Fox in the race to the bottom. That would be a damn shame. At least CNN has my respect.

The only thing keeping Fox off the bottom is that they keep bouncing off Al Jazeera.

 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Glover was acting as a spokesperson for a company. They relied on his popularity to advertise their product. By voicing an opinion that polarized the public, he put MCI's image at stake. His beliefs and the way he voiced them could have caused (and probably did cause) MCI very real financial harm. If you're making my company lose business, you better believe I can fire you.
It could be that MCI was looking to change Spokespersons anyway (ATT is killing them) and the Reactionay Red Asses jumped on that fact to make it look like they had something to do with it. Just because that asswipe Scarborough claims responsibility for Glovers firing doesn't mean it's true.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,326
19,426
146
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Amused
Danny Glover called the president of the United States a racist, he blamed American policy for the murderous acts of September 11th, and he signed a petition comparing American soldiers in the Gulf War to 9/11 terrorists. He called America ?the greatest purveyor of violence in the world.? And most recently Mr. Glover signed a letter of support for Fidel Castro.

Now tell me, honestly. No matter what your political position was, would you want someone like this as your company spokesperson? Why the hell would you want a spokesperson who is actively alienating 50+% of your customer base?

And honestly, Glover has some serious issues. The man jumps on the race card faster than Jackson, Sharpton and the Simpson defense team put together.
Words out the MCI is looking to hire Carrot Top:D A lot of good firing Glover is going to do them. The Reactionaries that wrote in complaining about Glover do not make up a significant part of the American Consumer. I can assure you that if they were to hire that Hot Bag of Noxoius Gas Rush Limbaugh they'd dtill get trounced by ATT.

Oh well at least the Red Asses are happy and O"Riely has another topic to blather on about for his show.

Actually, they are using Kiefer Sutherland, now. AT&T wouldn't let them use Carrot Top. :p

 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,326
19,426
146
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Glover was acting as a spokesperson for a company. They relied on his popularity to advertise their product. By voicing an opinion that polarized the public, he put MCI's image at stake. His beliefs and the way he voiced them could have caused (and probably did cause) MCI very real financial harm. If you're making my company lose business, you better believe I can fire you.
It could be that MCI was looking to change Spokespersons anyway (ATT is killing them) and the Reactionay Red Asses jumped on that fact to make it look like they had something to do with it. Just because that asswipe Scarborough claims responsibility for Glovers firing doesn't mean it's true.

Well, the timing certainly was perfect. I guess the "red asses" have the Mission Impossible" thing down pat, huh?

rolleye.gif
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Glover was acting as a spokesperson for a company. They relied on his popularity to advertise their product. By voicing an opinion that polarized the public, he put MCI's image at stake. His beliefs and the way he voiced them could have caused (and probably did cause) MCI very real financial harm. If you're making my company lose business, you better believe I can fire you.
It could be that MCI was looking to change Spokespersons anyway (ATT is killing them) and the Reactionay Red Asses jumped on that fact to make it look like they had something to do with it. Just because that asswipe Scarborough claims responsibility for Glovers firing doesn't mean it's true.

Well, the timing certainly was perfect. I guess the "red asses" have the Mission Impossible" thing down pat, huh?

rolleye.gif
You actually think that "Scarborough Country" was able to scare and intimidate MCI into firing Glover? Maybe if he was a spokesman for Skoal or Pabst Blue Ribbon!
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Glover was acting as a spokesperson for a company. They relied on his popularity to advertise their product. By voicing an opinion that polarized the public, he put MCI's image at stake. His beliefs and the way he voiced them could have caused (and probably did cause) MCI very real financial harm. If you're making my company lose business, you better believe I can fire you.
It could be that MCI was looking to change Spokespersons anyway (ATT is killing them) and the Reactionay Red Asses jumped on that fact to make it look like they had something to do with it. Just because that asswipe Scarborough claims responsibility for Glovers firing doesn't mean it's true.

You also have to remeber that MCI/WorldCom is also coming out of bankruptcy, looking for gov't contracts, still dealing with the SEC wrt legal matters, etc. The SEC just fined them $500 million yesterday. You can bet they are fairly sensitive to anything critical of the goverment right now. Kind of like the war coverage we got while the FCC was contemplating ownership percentages.

Of course the real answer will be arrived at after the DUCK TEST.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Glover was acting as a spokesperson for a company. They relied on his popularity to advertise their product. By voicing an opinion that polarized the public, he put MCI's image at stake. His beliefs and the way he voiced them could have caused (and probably did cause) MCI very real financial harm. If you're making my company lose business, you better believe I can fire you.
It could be that MCI was looking to change Spokespersons anyway (ATT is killing them) and the Reactionay Red Asses jumped on that fact to make it look like they had something to do with it. Just because that asswipe Scarborough claims responsibility for Glovers firing doesn't mean it's true.

You also have to remeber that MCI/WorldCom is also coming out of bankruptcy, looking for gov't contracts, still dealing with the SEC wrt legal matters, etc. The SEC just fined them $500 million yesterday. You can bet they are fairly sensitive to anything critical of the goverment right now. Kind of like the war coverage we got while the FCC was contemplating ownership percentages.

Of course the real answer will be arrived at after the DUCK TEST.
That Scenario is more probable than some write in from listeners of some second rate Neo Neanderthal Talk Show.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,326
19,426
146
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Glover was acting as a spokesperson for a company. They relied on his popularity to advertise their product. By voicing an opinion that polarized the public, he put MCI's image at stake. His beliefs and the way he voiced them could have caused (and probably did cause) MCI very real financial harm. If you're making my company lose business, you better believe I can fire you.
It could be that MCI was looking to change Spokespersons anyway (ATT is killing them) and the Reactionay Red Asses jumped on that fact to make it look like they had something to do with it. Just because that asswipe Scarborough claims responsibility for Glovers firing doesn't mean it's true.

Well, the timing certainly was perfect. I guess the "red asses" have the Mission Impossible" thing down pat, huh?

rolleye.gif
You actually think that "Scarborough Country" was able to scare and intimidate MCI into firing Glover? Maybe if he was a spokesman for Skoal or Pabst Blue Ribbon!

No, I think MCI was flooded with letters, calls and E-mails. Scarborough was not the only medium that spread the word on Glover's outrageous views. You can find dozens and dozens of websites that focus on Glover's activities as well.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Opps, I forgot, you only address the issues you THINK give you the upper hand. Why didn't you address the outrageous support of Castro, Classy?

Amused, sigh, poor Amused. This what I said in my very first post

This is a tough one. While Glover sounded like a complete fool, I don't think you can go around and fire people for their personal beliefs, unless those beliefs could lead to physical harm or something. A lot of people disagreed with what we did. Hell we're still trying to find evidence to support what we did. This is also tough because despite our religous, racial, and cultural differences we are all first and foremost AMERICANS. I think the the proper thing that should have been done was not to renew his contract or buy it out and part ways, but firing him was wrong and he'll probably win a court case. While he was again I believe wrong in what he said you can't fire him because of it.

I said he was wrong and I addressed other things as well in my other posts. Trying reading all I posted.
rolleye.gif
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Glover was acting as a spokesperson for a company. They relied on his popularity to advertise their product. By voicing an opinion that polarized the public, he put MCI's image at stake. His beliefs and the way he voiced them could have caused (and probably did cause) MCI very real financial harm. If you're making my company lose business, you better believe I can fire you.
It could be that MCI was looking to change Spokespersons anyway (ATT is killing them) and the Reactionay Red Asses jumped on that fact to make it look like they had something to do with it. Just because that asswipe Scarborough claims responsibility for Glovers firing doesn't mean it's true.

Well, the timing certainly was perfect. I guess the "red asses" have the Mission Impossible" thing down pat, huh?

rolleye.gif
You actually think that "Scarborough Country" was able to scare and intimidate MCI into firing Glover? Maybe if he was a spokesman for Skoal or Pabst Blue Ribbon!

No, I think MCI was flooded with letters, calls and E-mails. Scarborough was not the only medium that spread the word on Glover's outrageous views. You can find dozens and dozens of websites that focus on Glover's activities as well.
Well the NeoNeanderthals have really hurt the DC's career..NOT.
I think being affiliated to MCI was more of a negative to Glover than Glover being associated to MCI was a negative for them. When a Company shows it has no spine and can be swayed by a minority made up of reactionaries it shows that they are desperate.