"I've never felt the need before to hide who I am at work," says "D," a gay staffer at Bonneville's Eastlake broadcast facility, "but now I'm not so sure that was a good idea."
Bonneville International owns Seattle's KIRO, KIRO FM, and KTTH; Bonneville International is holy owned by the Church of the Latter Day Saints -- or the Mormons, if you prefer.
The church was the focus of furious protests over the weekend in Seattle and major U.S. cities after LDS honchos called on California Mormons to donate time and money to the campaign for Proposition 8 to overturn a supreme court ruling permitting gay marriage.
Joining with evangelicals who despise them and believe the Mormon church is literally Satanic, individual Saints gave an estimated $20 million to the cause.
Prop 8 passed, striking down marriage equality and a much anticipated knee-up for the mainstreaming gay and lesbian goals rights.
D says he's always been out in his workplace, as most gays are at Eastlake. (There are notable exceptions, he says, and regaled us with amusing stories of cubular lust).
Bonneville, he reminded us, got off to a rocky start when they took over after buying out Entercom in May 2007. In an introductory meeting, Program Director Rod Arquette, (also a company veep) said in jest at the full-staff pep talk, "... now all we have to do is finish off the KOMO homos."
This jolted KIRO staffers, especially with Bonneville brass sitting there laughing along with him. They included CEO Bruce Reese; Market Manager Scott Sutherland; Regional Manager Drew Horowitz, and other upper and middle managers.
A gay staffer told BlatherWatch at the time: "The staff remained mostly silent, maybe shocked. But the officers and managers, who had an opportunity to quickly diffuse the ignorant comment, just smiled and said nothing. At least one manager, days after the fact, has apologized to a few employees, myself included, but only after they realized some employees were upset."
"I remember thinking, 'Oh. My. God.' " says D. "Better dust [off] the old résumé... seemed like there might be a little institutional homophobia going on around here."
A state law banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in housing, lending and employment was passed by the Legislature in 2006.
The incident made him wary, but a little time and being managed by the new management dispelled many of his fears. "Rod Arquette is not a bigot," he says. "I have not felt discrimination, and I know fo
r the man knows where I'm coming from." (so to speak).
But the proactive campaigning for the anti-marriage equality measure in California by the church over the summer spooked D and, he says, he's not the only one.
"The Mormons have not been so blatant in the past." D said. "they're not like Dobson or Falwell ... I always say it's because they have been so persecuted themselves over the years."
But The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan disagrees:
There is nothing so far that suggests there's any discrimination in Bonneville workplaces against gays or anyone else. But D is a little uneasy.
"Gays and lesbians are angry, FINALLY. They've tried doing it the NICE way for years. We thought we were finally getting some equality, we didn't, and the Mormons are getting most of the blow-back. I just hope they practice what they preach here in the office."
The Stranger Editor Dan Savage is unapologetic about going after the Mormons:
(Bonneville has not returned our calls about this issue).

Mormons don't mind keeping gays around who make them money. It's only a sin where interest is absent. Gay staffers need not worry.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | November 18, 2008 at 02:39 AM
If 'D' was upset at the time of the 'KOMO homo' remark he should have immediately made it known that he was offended by such a remark. That's the way to combat this crap...immediately focus on the issue; they can't fire you for that and it gives you solid ground to further pursue. Too many folks let this stuff slide; you've got to immediately and tactfully make it known that you were offended and that there is no place for such talk and behavior.
Posted by: Duffman | November 18, 2008 at 05:36 AM
You really do not have to be gay to be disliked by the Mormons. Only requirement is to be a “gentile” or in normal language, non-Mormon. I lived in Utah for seven long years and Mormons actually believe they are an ethnic group! A devout Mormon will tell you that they have replaced the Jews as “God’s Chosen People” and an authentic member of the original twelve tribes of Israel. So for “D”, do not worry as they despise anyone who is not part of the LDS community. But stand up for your rights “D”. This isn’t Utah and I was one happy camper to be out of that theocratic state in 97.
Posted by: rozskat | November 18, 2008 at 06:49 AM
Still cant keep that timeline straight I see Roz. LMAO.
Posted by: nevets | November 18, 2008 at 07:15 AM
"D", a gay staffer. Is that D for Dori? He has a girl's name after all
Posted by: PS | November 18, 2008 at 07:30 AM
Mike Webb was gay at KIRO, and look where it got him. George Bush and the Mormons killed him. It had nothing to do with his drug addicted homosexual lifestyle and partner. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
Don't forget, Dave Ross gets paid by the Mormons! Petition Dave Ross to quit KIRO, immediately. His lavish Mercer Island lifestyle is funded by the Mormons. Dave is selling out to Hate Speech!!! Boycott Mini Me Manson's (aka dave ross) show immediately.
Anyone who supports Dave Ross is funding hate speech against gays. We'll see on the next round of Armatron ratings how much you liberals live by principle and how much is bullshit.
But I think we both already know the answer to that...
Posted by: blatherdash | November 18, 2008 at 07:43 AM
The switching of children
The lynching of blacks
Homophobia and misogyny
Should be part of the past.
Posted by: joanie | November 18, 2008 at 07:51 AM
OMG...how absolutely PROFOUND! joanie, you never cease to amaze.
Posted by: Duffman | November 18, 2008 at 08:05 AM
come out of the closet duffman
Posted by: Wo Fat | November 18, 2008 at 09:21 AM
Note: I am not making a statement of opinion or position on this topic in any way, simply forwarding a YouTube video link. So don't rape the messenger.
VIDEO: Gays preaching tolerance and respect for everyone's rights mob Christmas carolers on a public street, threaten to kill and disembowel them because 70% of African-Americans in California voted in support of Obama/Biden's position on gay marriage. Police have to protect Obama/Biden position supporters from being killed, disembowled, tortured and sodomized by gay rights activists. Obama/Biden position supporters narrowly escape being forcibly anally and orally penetrated by mainstream gay rights community activists.
Posted by: Gay Gary | November 18, 2008 at 11:58 AM
LMAO,
Hey Joanie, can you please tell me why the majority's decision NOT to redefine the word marriage is in any way hateful or homophobic?
Have they not already been granted most/all of the same rights under civil unions?
This is about nothing more than a word and 1-3% of our society who want to claim it as their own.
The whole thing makes me start to believe that there really is a militant gay agenda afoot.
I think there will be a strong, negative backlash toward the gay community if they keep this up but they will, since they will never be truly happy.
Posted by: Brian | November 18, 2008 at 12:36 PM
Solution: have two (2) terms for this union.
1. Marriage
2. Traditional Marriage
Wouldn't that solve everything in this regard.
Posted by: Duffman | November 18, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Could this be the 'D' with the previously reported 'college-degree' controversy? [...and I don't mean Darcy...ha]
Posted by: Duffman | November 18, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Maybe he meant 'D' uffman You go gal!
Posted by: Wo Fat | November 18, 2008 at 01:28 PM
Why does anyone care whether people want to get married. Straight marriages have about a 49% chance of ending up in divorce, and I don't see anyone complaining about that being a threat to marriage. Divorce is just fine with the Mormons. How hypocritical.
Posted by: sparky | November 18, 2008 at 06:11 PM
Source citation, Ms. Sparky?
The reason I'm asking is because your 49% figure is oft-repeated and never cited. It has become urban legend. My social studies teacher tells we should not help spread urban legends. Then again, I don't go to a public school, so maybe that's just crazy-talk.
According to the 2000 census, the number of adults in the US who have ever been divorced is 21%. The number of adults who have ever been married is 71%. That means roughly 2/3's of marriages have not ended in divorce. Here's a spreadsheet from the Bureau of the Census. You may now provide your link to dailykos or whatever your eminently reputable source is ...
Next?
Posted by: The Beast Rabban (formerly Gay Gary) | November 18, 2008 at 06:22 PM
Also, among ethnic groups - Hispanics and Asian-Pacific Islanders - who voted by higher percentages for Prop 8 than any other groups - have the lowest rates of members of said groups who have ever been divorced ... 12.7% and 8.8%, respectively.
I've never been at a public school - is that kind of shoddy work (sparky's comment, above) really how they operate? I've heard stories but I thought they were just that - stories. Oh well, I needed a laugh today and Ms. Sparky's always good for one - wrestling practice starts tomorrow.
Posted by: The Beast Rabban (formerly Gay Gary) | November 18, 2008 at 06:29 PM
"McNabb admitted that he was not aware that an NFL game could end in a tie following a 13-13 game against the Cincinnati Bengals"
This is what a BS in Speech Communications from Syracuse gets you.
Posted by: nevets | November 18, 2008 at 07:52 PM
...how absolutely PROFOUND! joanie...
Thank you, Duffman.
Now, Brian. It is a word. How emotionally attached to a word can you be?
I was listening to NPR (borrrrring) the other day and the topic was marriage. That institution and its label have undergone numerous evolutions. As I recall, it didn't even belong to the church at one time. Not sure about that but you'd be surprised what "marriage" has meant over the ages.
So, what's the difference? Why not let churches choose if they wish to conduct the ceremony. Some will and some won't. But those that do can call it a marriage ceremony for all of me. They are just as welcome to all the expensive pomp and circumstance as anyone else. It might produce a few more jobs and our economy is terribly in need of those.
Allow "marriage" (whatever that means) and let churches decide whether or not to participate.
Quibling over a word?
Goodness Gracious! Don't you have anything better to worry about?
Posted by: joanie | November 18, 2008 at 11:12 PM
Obviously you idiots that think "seperate but equal" is acceptable haven't read the 14th amendment. This is an issue that will be settled by the Supreme Court in the same fashion as interracial marriage. Any law afforded a straight citizen legally applies to a gay citizen, including marriage, it's called equal protection.
Posted by: Don | November 19, 2008 at 12:29 AM
I don't get it Blather - a few posts back you crow that the election results prove that right wing talk and money are no longer effective. Now, the way I read it, you imply the Mormons (who we probably agree have both) had the power to practically singlehandedly propel Prop 8 to victory.
So what is it, Blather? Do the Mormon's still have game, or not?
Oh, and I'll just ask in passing -what about the 70% of the black vote that voted for Prop 8? How come you've never mentioned that? Are there that many black Mormans? Hmmm, I didn't think so. Funny how you ignore little factoids when they don't fit your view of the world as it should be.
FULL DISCLOSURE: Not a Morman, not an employee of Bonneville, just a distant lurker who generally enjoys the silliness of your blog and occasionally comments.
Posted by: Bill | November 19, 2008 at 03:01 AM
The latest fawning hagiography of Barack Obama comes not from Mormon-employed, obsequious, Obama buttkisser little Dave Ross, but from Barack koolaider Ray Taliaferro last night on KGO. Mr.T gushed like a schoolgirl, a la Dave Ross a week ago,about what a brilliant campaign the man waged and what a genius he is. All serious political experts have said that any reasonably qualified Dem was a cinch to win this year, even before the economic meltdown. Barack was losing clearly to McCain before said meltdown occurred.So much for the brilliant genius in the general election. Whites also proved to racist blacks in the general that Barack had no racism of any note to battle. Those battles had already been and fought and won by braver men than Obama in years past. So much for overcoming racism. You could say well but he was a genius in the primaries but a sober look at what happened there will tell you that Obama nearly lost to Hillary at the end ,only being saved by a mass of early primary caucus victories won using tactics that that were at best far from admirable and at worst sleazy and/or illegal (bussing voters in from Illionois to vote in Iowa). Am I going to admire and reward these kinds of thug tactics now that Obama has won, and call the man a genius for employing them? I think not.Sorry Dave, Ray.
Posted by: Tommy008 | November 19, 2008 at 06:58 AM
Also, Barack, the people have decided that, since as Maureen Doed put it, Bush backed Dad's station wagon into the country, we should give the rookie (YOU) a chance, despite the widespread perception that you're quite the arrogant fellow. i would try to avoid remarks like Sunday night's 60 Minutes response ".....I'm smart. That's why I'm President. ..."
Posted by: Tommy008 | November 19, 2008 at 07:18 AM
Gettin old T, time to put a sock in it and channel your energy to supporting our new leader. He ran a dynamic and unprecedented campaign, plain and simple. I too lament somewhat for Hillary but Secy of State will do for now.
Posted by: Duffman | November 19, 2008 at 08:18 AM
you give it a rest. sure we'll all now support Obama and wish him well, but give the bogus brillant campaign genius crapola a rest Smoke and mirrors. You can tout all the text meassaging and whizbang technology of your campaign all you want but in the end you didn't get any more young people to vote than 2004 and really not any more blacks to speak of either. Results are what matters, not flash, slickness and hype. Bush trashed the economy, it melted down, the people got angry and scared, and gave the rookie a chance. No more no less. Now let's all get to work to save the country, but enough of this undeserved fawning and worshipping crap of the rookie. enough is enough.
Posted by: Tommy008 | November 19, 2008 at 08:43 AM