So far, the protests have achieved considerable success. Two major advertisers, Procter and Gamble and United Airlines, are pulling ads from her TV and radio shows, respectively, and WCVB-TV in Boston is reconsidering its decision to air her show, slated to debut in the fall.

Should these protests worry free speech advocates? Schlessinger's defenders have asserted, with some accuracy, that she is the victim of political correctness. But that is simply another way of saying that increased tolerance for homosexuality has meant decreased respectability for the crude homophobic ravings of Laura Schlessinger. Not that she lacks an audience: An estimated 14 million listeners tune in to her radio show each week. While liberal social norms may ''victimize'' Schlessinger, she has benefited greatly from conservative social norms that still demonize homosexuality. From a right-wing perspective, Dr. Laura is politically correct.

So, we needn't worry that her views will not be heard if gay rights groups somehow succeed in derailing her television show.

Still, some free speech advocates do object to efforts to keep Schlessinger off the air. Her speech is protected by the First Amendment, they point out. Besides, if liberals can mount campaigns against television and radio shows, so can conservatives. Threats of consumer boycotts against advertisers will backfire, they warn.

The first argument is irrelevant: Of course Schlessinger's speech enjoys First Amendment protection. If the government tried to prosecute her or if a private individual sued her for indulging in hate speech, I'd contribute to the Dr. Laura defense fund.

But like me or you, she doesn't have an entitlement to a television show or a newspaper column. Editors and producers regularly decline to air speech they find offensive, thoughtless, boring, or unlikely to please their respective audiences. If Laura Schlessinger has a First Amendment claim, so does every writer, or content creator, in America.

The second argument, about encouraging right-wing consumer boycotts, is naive. Right-wing groups have long protested television shows (and other entertainments) that they find offensive, and they'll continue to do so, whether or not gay rights group crusade against Laura Schlessinger.

In any case, consumer protests of media are constitutionally protected (like Schlessinger's opinions), and they can help maintain the marketplace of ideas. One of the great threats to dissent and diversity of opinion facing us today is media conglomeration.

Huge corporations exercise unprecedented power over the circulation of opinions and ideas. How can corporate executives be held accountable to the public they're supposed to serve? We can't vote them out of office. We shouldn't ask the government to monitor the content of their programming. All we can do is band together and threaten to boycott their products if they don't respond to our concerns.

Boycotts, or threats of them, are powerful vehicles for dissent. The NAACP recently pressured the networks into taking small steps toward more racial diversity in prime time. NOW, which issued a report on sexism in prime time, plans to pressure advertisers into supporting shows that perpetuate ''positive'' images of women. Fortunately, the right wing is not alone in protesting popular entertainment.

I'm not dismissing the occasionally censorious effect of consumer protests. I'm suggesting that these protests may encourage diversity of ideas as much as they deter it. The more people willing to protest the decision of media moguls, the more likely their protests will serve First Amendment values. Consumer boycotts of speech are most dangerous when they are organized by one segment of society and not others. If everyone - left, right, and center - enters the fray, the media are more likely to reflect their divergent ideas.

''Another party heard from,'' my father used to say when I voiced an opinion at dinner. Consumer protests can bring many parties to the table.

Wendy Kaminer is a fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study.

© Copyright 2000 Globe Newspaper Company

###