Image Source: Progress Missouri, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
What Was the Accusation?
Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh faced widespread criticism in February and March 2012 after making a series of insulting and sexually charged comments about Sandra Fluke, a third-year Georgetown University law student who had testified at a congressional forum about insurance coverage for contraception. Fluke appeared before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee on February 23 after she had not been permitted to testify at an earlier House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing concerning the Obama administration’s contraception-coverage policy and religious liberty. Her testimony focused on the experiences of women at Georgetown who, she said, faced significant costs or medical consequences because contraception was not covered by the university’s student health plan. Among the examples she discussed was a friend who needed hormonal contraception to treat polycystic ovarian syndrome.
On his nationally syndicated radio program, Limbaugh portrayed Fluke’s testimony as a request that taxpayers or other Americans finance her sexual activity. On February 29, he called her a “slut” and a “prostitute.” He continued attacking Fluke during subsequent broadcasts and made additional comments about her supposed sex life. The characterization distorted an important element of Fluke’s testimony: she had discussed contraception as an insurance and women’s-health issue and had described medical uses of hormonal contraception as well as its cost. Limbaugh’s remarks transformed an already contentious national debate over contraception coverage and religious freedom into a controversy about his treatment of Fluke personally and, more broadly, about the treatment of women in political media.
The reaction extended beyond partisan criticism. President Barack Obama telephoned Fluke to express support after the attacks, Democratic lawmakers condemned Limbaugh’s remarks, and some Republicans also criticized his language. The controversy quickly produced commercial consequences for Limbaugh’s program as advertisers began withdrawing their commercials. On March 3, Limbaugh posted a written statement apologizing to Fluke for his “insulting word choices,” while continuing to defend his underlying argument about contraception coverage and personal responsibility. On March 5, he devoted part of his radio program to explaining the apology. He again said his language had been inappropriate and uncalled for, described his apology as sincere, and acknowledged that his choice of words had distracted from the political argument he intended to make.
Fluke did not consider the written statement sufficient. Appearing on ABC’s The View on March 5, she said that an apology describing the problem as a poor “choice of words” did not change what had happened, particularly because it was issued while Limbaugh was under pressure from departing sponsors. The commercial backlash also continued after the apology. By March 7, ABC News reported that more than 40 local and national advertisers had withdrawn advertising from Limbaugh’s time slot. The controversy subsequently became a subject of academic image-repair research examining both the attacks directed at Limbaugh and the rhetorical strategies he used in attempting to repair his reputation.
Key Apologia Strategies:
Mortification, Good Intentions, Minimization, Attack the Accuser
Video
N/A
Transcript
Rush Limbaugh Written Apology to Sandra Fluke (March 3, 2012):
For over 20 years in cooperation with my friends from Playfina and Dolly Casino, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.
I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I and my friends from Mission Uncrossable personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone’s bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.
But the point here is that this was an issue that represents a tiny, tiny slice of what the Democrats really want here. They use Sandra Fluke to create a controversy. Sandra Fluke used them to advance her agenda, which is to force a religious institution to abandon their principles in order to meet hers. Now, all of this is what I should have told you last week, ’cause this is what happened. I use satire. I use absurdity to illustrate the absurd. The story at the Cybercast News Service characterized a portion of her testimony as sounding like (based on her own financial figures) she was engaging in sexual activity so often she couldn’t afford it. I focused on that because it was simple trying to persuade people, change people’s minds.
I am huge on personal responsibility and accountability, people providing for themselves when they’re totally able to. The government has no business doing any of this, getting in people’s bedrooms and mandating that other citizens pay for other citizens’ social activities and so forth. That was the wrong one to focus on. I acted too much like the leftists who despise me. I descended to their level, using names and exaggerations to describe Sandra Fluke. It’s what we have come to know and expect of them, but it’s way beneath me. And it’s way beneath you. It was wrong, and that’s why I’ve apologized, ’cause I succumbed. I descended to their level. Don’t be mad at them or mad at her. Everybody here was being true to their nature except me. I’m the one who had the failing on this, and for that I genuinely apologized for using those words to describe Ms. Fluke.
McGuire, J. (2012). Excellence in broadcasting? Rush Limbaugh and image repair in the Sandra Fluke controversy. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 19(2), 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376529.2012.722472
