CNN Invites Hate Group Spokesperson to Debate Mississippi's Extreme Anti-LGBT Law
Written by Erin Fitzgerald
Published
CNN hosted a spokesperson from a notorious anti-LGBT hate group during a discussion of an anti-LGBT bill under consideration in Mississippi, giving him a national platform to peddle misinformation about the purpose and impact of the bill.
On the April 1 edition of CNN's New Day, guest host Don Lemon interviewed Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council (FRC) to discuss Mississippi's HB 1523 -- which is being referred to as the “most sweeping anti-LGBT legislation in the U.S.” and which would establish a legal defense for discrimination against LGBT people in a number of settings.
FRC has been designated as an anti-gay hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The group has a history of making wild and inflammatory attacks on LGBT people while masquerading as a serious policy organization in the media. Sprigg has called for recriminalizing gay sex in the U.S. and suggested that LGBT people should be “export[ed]” from the country. CNN failed to identify Sprigg as a hate group spokesperson, and Sprigg took advantage of the national platform to spread misinformation about the bill and its potential impacts.
CNN has been criticized for hosting an FRC representative in the past. In 2013, just minutes after the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), CNN hosted Tony Perkins -- president of FRC -- to peddle lies about the decision's impact on religious liberties. In response, more than 32,000 people signed a petition asking CNN to stop hosting the hate group leader.
Media outlets routinely invite anti-LGBT hate groups to comment on federal policies, state laws, and Supreme Court cases, needlessly exposing audiences to misinformation while failing to hold those groups accountable for their track records of dishonesty and inflammatory rhetoric. If a media outlet thinks it necessary to host a hate group with a history of misinformation in a report or segment, it should at the very least properly identify the group as anti-LGBT extremists.