After reading the comments made by david I`d like to know where are those so called civil rights bigots Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson..Because the comments were about a white woman they are quiet and hiding under a rock..If the comments were abt a Black woman they would be marching in the streets leading a lynch mob demanding Shusters head on a noose..Well talk abt reverse discrimination..By the way I`m an Asian and not white and the rtemarks still offends me b`cos it shows that these folks have no respect for their mothers,sisters,daughters and women in general..

Though I am no fan of Sharpton and I detest Jackson, I think your comparison is a little off-point.

I think Sharpton would argue that he marches precisely because the alleged victim is a marginalized person without advocate.

In contrast, I pity the fool who attacks Chelsea Clinton. And, indeed, Shuster was a fool who let his rabid hatred for Hillary cloud his judgment, comparing Chelsea to a prostitute for doing what practically every adult child of a politician running for office does! And the result? He has been suspended. Chelsea Clinton needs no Al Sharpton, that's for sure!

Thank you. I sometimes get the idea that the army of youth entering this democratic fray could use more education on the meaning of words and how careful selection of words is important. Pimping, to a wide audience, has one meaning: selling for sex. It's not a hipper term for "marketing". It implies the use of physical abuse over a person, be that person male or female. As such, the use of it by a media person was defamatory to Chelsea and the Clintons. While as public figures they might not have been able to sue for defamation, they did have a right to complain of sexual harassment by a member of the media. I certainly would have if one of my daughters was accused of being a whore.

I also found offensive the continuing headlines that imply the comment was that of Chelsea and not the media's. A possessive doe not mean that the statement was about someone, but from someone's mouth.

As a professional in such legal claims, I'd also like to point out that Shuster's punishment was legally required by his employer: the law requires that the employer take action that is reasonably calculated to prevent a re-occurance of the offensive language.

This is not the first time citizens have complained about media treatment of people; anybody can lobby the media about offensive language. In fact trend was started by the right wing conservatives in the 1990s or earlier in an attempt to prevent any liberal bias in the media.