Sponsors yanking ads from Imus

Imus isn't that bad a guy

I've listened to Imus on and off for quite a few years, as my dad is a fan.  And he says, as I do, that Imus can be a dick, for sure, but he's not a racist.  I think this is a case where he thought what he was saying would be funny, but he went into that deadly minefield of Race to try and make his joke.  I am not condoning what he said, by any means, but I think the answer is not to fire him, but to let him help fix the problem.  Firing him won't do anything but rile his fans, plus he'll just get hired by someone else.  He does lots of work for charity, so let him use his connections there to help make amends.

In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a Bad Move. - D. Adams

---

by: Megarouge @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 09:42:27 AM CDT

he's racist

You know what? I'm sorry, but he's racist. We're all infected with it, and when you have folks like Imus and Michael Richards insisting they are not, it's because they believe, in their minds (as you apparently do), that racism is only defined by the folks like those in Jasper, TX who James Byrd behind a truck until his limbs fell off, or folks in Klan sheets burning a cross on the lawn of a minority family that moves into a white neighborhood. Racism comes in all forms, and that includes saying that a women's basketball team is full of  "nappy-headed hos" by simply watching them onscreen. He didn't know them; they didn't have a political agenda he was trying to skewer, he simply let his racism spill out there for us all to see.

Some are self-aware enough to realize that our culturally ingrained biases can be challenged, others never question it, and it erupts in incidents like Imus's, leaving him to feel victimized and running for cover.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 09:49:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wow....

Tell me more about myself, Pam.

In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a Bad Move. - D. Adams

---

by: Megarouge @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:00:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Why should she? You aren't listening.

I agree with Pam that all white folks are racist.  The analogy I used is that we're porus carrots simmered for years in a racist stew.  We didn't be asked to be dropped into a racist broth, but we were and racism permeated all of us.  Now, if a white guy were raised by wolves in the Yukon, he wouldn't be racist.  But if he were brought to Fairbanks, day by day, he would learn racist ways.

What Imus said about hair has me thinking about about Michael Jackson and his not quite caucasoid mug.  I expect that Imus would dismiss Jackson as a freak.  Yet, Imus plays a part in the self-loathing that Jackson especially embodies.  Even Oprah grows whiter, magazine cover by magazine cover.  Even being a billionaire and arbiter of white suburban values isn't enough for mighty Oprah.  Do I blame Jackson and Oprah for their whitening?  Nah.  I blame the cultural loathing of blackness, for which Imus is a mouthpiece.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:11:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Huh?

Since Operah's whitening is an apparent problem, exactly how might Oprah become "more black"? 

---

by: musicguy2723 @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:20:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't know Oprah.

All I know is that she's increasingly presented as whiter, probably through a combination of cosmetics, lighting, and photoshopping.  That someone desires a lightening is disturbing.  I don't know that that someone is Oprah.  It might be her marketing folks.  Her audience.  But it's happening for a reason.

Musicguy, you made me laugh with your typo, turning Oprah in Operah.  You really are into music!  ;-)

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:32:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oprah - Stays in the Shade - she's not out chasing the sun for a tan

If I had her bucks, I'd stay in the Shade too drinking a few umbrella drinks with my staff of pool men. Oh one can dream on a dreary Wednesday.

---

by: RogernDC @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 14:46:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

yah...OK

Sorry, here I was thinking this was a blog that would encourage open-mindedness and intelligent discussion.  Instead I find it's just another haven for people with massive sticks on their shoulders, ready to attack anyone that doesn't share their beliefs, ready to judge and slam people they don't even know.

I've made a grand total of, I think, 4 posts here, yet you and Pam both seem to "know" all about me.

I hate to say this, but this reminds me an awful lot of the Conservative Republican blogs I've seen.

Sorry to mess up your Internet, Pam.  Good luck in fighting the good fight.  The one for GLBT rights, I mean, not the one against everyone that doesn't think like you.

In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a Bad Move. - D. Adams

---

by: Megarouge @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:24:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sounds like you have it rough

You must really know how Imus feels. Too bad more people won't recognize your right to intelligent discussion by agreeing with you no matter what you say. Isn't calling someone a racist a violation of the First Ammendment or something?

What the hell was I doing in Oaxaca in 1992, on the eve of the Zapatista revolution?

---

by: Cambridge Kid @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:30:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Cambridge

Read my posts again, and then see if that's still your reply.

In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a Bad Move. - D. Adams

---

by: Megarouge @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:33:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yup

Pam disagreed with you and instead of letting your position stand or elaborating on it, you decided to play the martyr.

What the hell was I doing in Oaxaca in 1992, on the eve of the Zapatista revolution?

---

by: Cambridge Kid @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:40:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Actually....

Pam did more than disagree with me.  She proceeded to inform me of what kind of a person I was, implying that I was not able to see racism.  Like I said, if you had read the exchange, you would have seen that.

In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a Bad Move. - D. Adams

---

by: Megarouge @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:47:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

That means

Either

A) She identified your position correctly, or
B) She misrepresented you.

All she said was that she assumed that you hold the position that "botched jokes" such as those of Imus and Michael Richards do not count as "racism". Do you hold that position? If not, you explain.

You were not banned, your comments were not deleted, and nobody asked you to leave. Why you think discussion was being shut off is beyond me. You see, it is possible for people to read your comments, comprehend what you have said, and still disagree with you. Our only options are not to either agree with you or reread you.

What the hell was I doing in Oaxaca in 1992, on the eve of the Zapatista revolution?

---

by: Cambridge Kid @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:00:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Megarouge,

since you're newly arrived, you might not know this about Pam.  On a daily/near daily basis, people write to Pam telling her that they hate her.  When her dog died, some fundy created a website to celebrate her loss.  She isn't just an out black lesbian.  She is a public black lesbian.  Therefore, she is a lightning rod for racists.  For homobigots.  For misogynists.  She conducts more current than the high tension wires at Niagara Falls.  And she does so with more grace than Baryshnikov.  Now, obviously, I'm her fan, but I'm not newly arrived.  I've seen how kind and patient she is with Blenders over the years.  I've witnessed her goodness, kindness, and good humor.

And I believe, that as a public black lesbian, Pam knows more about oppression than most folks.  When Pam talks, I listen.  This doesn't mean that I don't dare disagree.  I disgreed with her, to a degree, in the Barr thread and have disgreed with her on many other occasions, but as a white woman, I know I wear blinders regarding race.  It doesn't matter how many black neighbors or black friends I have.  I never have to walk into a room in black skin and have people react to me, seeing that skin first and foremost.

I urge you, megarouge, now or later, to consider Pam's words.  She's earned that.  And much, much more.
 

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:05:24 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Let's see:

You said that Imus was not a racist, despite the fact that he used a racially-charged insult to attack a group of women whose only fault was to excel in sports.

But he's not a racist! Some of his best friends are black! And it's a vicious attack to suggest that you're unable to see racism when it comes up and kicks someone else in the ass!

Okay then!

---

by: Darkrose @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 16:13:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

a simple response to your comment

You said "but he's not a racist" and I responded to counter your definition of what racist is. You obviously don't have to agree, but I'm certainly entitled to respond to your assertion -- you're the one with the thin skin. If you've been a long-time reader, you'd know that I've had plenty of debates with commenters here on many topics where we disagree -- you're the one, however, that's bailing when challenged.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:33:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Pam

Pam, I'm not bailing for being challenged, I'm bailing because I've discovered that you are the kind of person who makes snap judgements about people you don't know.

I did not realize that was the kind of person you are, like I said, I expected more open-mindedness. 

Now that I know that you (and Holly) have already pigeon-holed me into what YOU think I am, there is no point in my posting here.

I wish you the best of luck.  We are on the same side.

In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a Bad Move. - D. Adams

---

by: Megarouge @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:37:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, if you're off, then good luck, but...

...the door won't lock behind you.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:40:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

then explain to us all

why Imus is not a racist. I'm willing to hear you out and say that I was wrong in the belief that you feel calling a team of women as "nappy headed hos" off the cuff is not indicative of someone who has serious problems when it comes to race.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:41:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yep.

Pam's House Blend is one of the friendlier, fairer places on the web.  And the Blenders tend to follow her lead.  However, megarouge, you have incurred a few bruises for a new arrival and understanding that, I did wince as I parried and thrust the second time. 

But it's not personal.  I'm not pretending to you know.  I haven't fashioned even a crude conception of you.  I just reacted to what you wrote: the ideas.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:38:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well...

I made a comment that I did not think Imus was racist.  Pam proceeded to tell me that I was the kind of person who only recognized blantant acts like violence and KKK activity as racism.  She based this off one post from me.  So my reply to her was to ask her to tell me more about myself, since she had obviously already figured me out.

And your reply to THAT, was that I was not listening.  It kind of baffled me, really.

So, sorry, but you and Pam definitely had the Tag-Team thing going on here today.  I hope that all newbies aren't put through the gauntlet by the site regulars like this, or you won't end up with many new folks.  Assuming you even want new ones.

Best of luck to you.

In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a Bad Move. - D. Adams

---

by: Megarouge @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:45:54 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

thanks, Holly

the door _is_ open. While we cannot wind the clock back, had I left out "(as you apparently do)" from the original reply, one can only wonder if megarouge would have engaged the response differently -- or directly. I certainly don't know what was going through Imus's or Michael Richards' minds, but I doubt they gave much thought to where their statements came from, or its impact. That's the whole problem here - a serious lack of self-awareness of the impact of racism on our society as a whole.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:47:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes

Leaving out "as you apparently do" would have made all the difference.  That HURT me Pam, because I was raised in a home that did have trouble with racism, and I have fought my entire life against that part of me.  It doesn't mean that I can't see racism, it means that because I have been surrounded by it, I have learned to discern between racism and intentionally MALICIOUS racism.

In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a Bad Move. - D. Adams

---

by: Megarouge @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 10:55:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

then I apologize

And hopefully we can engage the subject at hand -- and your observations are welcome here.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:00:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

With this,

Pam just proved all my praise for her upthread.

I once apologized to a woman a classmate at Harvard and a famous thinker, who is a consultant for kings and presidents, was sitting in that class.

He stood and said, "What you just witnessed is beyond all of you.  She apologized and you think that's sweet.  What you don't understand is the courage required to apologize.  I can see it in your eyes.  It's beyond you."

I just hope that Pam's courage, compassion, and decency are comprehended by a few.  She deserves that and more.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:11:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh puh-leeze

Megarouge, as someone who agrees with your original point, I must say that I think you need to find some skin thickening pills and swallow them. You mean to tell me that the words "as you apparently do" set you off on this tirade?

Oh boy, do you ever have a few things to learn about the Internet. I don't think Pam ever launched a personal attack on you. I've checked into this story, mostly because I think the reaction to Imus is far overblown. Along the way, even though I disagree with Pam and her supporters, I've been pretty impressed by their lack of invective toward those who don't see it their way.

Which, I suppose could be famous last words on my part. Who knows, maybe in one of these threads I'll get my ass blasted clear out of the water in a personal and unfair way, and then I'll be mad etc etc etc. But so far, those who take Pam's point of view have made some good arguments that have caused me to at least recognize that it's not all "mock outrage."

My point is this, Megarouge: Try to give fair consideration to the other side. We all ought to do that.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 12:08:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yep, Mr. Wilson, you disagree a lot of the time with a lot of us, and yep,

most of the time most of us are just fine with that.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 12:29:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wow Pam

That response is, on its own, a succinct and beautiful summary of the entire incident (and many others).  It makes me want to copy and paste it to my site (where I haven't really blogged on Imus because I've been commenting here), with due credit of course.  Then again, I wouldn't want someone to read just a snippet without reading what's being written here.  So, I've linked to the Imus threads instead. :) I have loads of admiration for you and regularly learn good stuff from the Blend and Blenders.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

---

by: n8nyc @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 14:23:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree!

He can't spout stuff like that and claim it's an exception, that he's really a good guy and just slipped.  It's what he really thinks.

But consider this: would there be a national scandal of this magnitude if he'd called them some "big-ass bulldykes"?  Would America care?

"In order to maintain an untenable position, you have to be actively ignorant."  The Colbert Report

---

by: Lev Raphael @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 18:23:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good question, Lev.

My guess?  Probably not. 

Still, I'm glad he's fired.  He loved his hate speech and now, in his retirement, I wonder if he still loves it.  It'll be interesting to see how other hatemongers respond.  What will Savage say?  Coulter?  Limbaugh?  Imus was probably the best of this quartet. 

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 18:28:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Clarence Page: "[Imus] keeps saying racist things."

Quoting Media Matters (quoting Clarence Page):

By contrast, the report on the April 9 broadcast of NBC's Nightly News noted that Imus in the Morning "has come under fire before" and that in 2000, Imus pledged to Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page that he would "stop using racially insensitive language." That report also quoted Page asserting that Imus "keeps saying racist things."

Imus "keeps saying racist things."  If that doesn't make him a racist -- or if the use of the term "ho" doesn't make him sexist -- his words at least reveal a "functional racist" and "functional sexist." 

At this point I don't really care what's in his heart -- whether he thinks he's a racist, sexist, both or neither -- I'm judging him on what repeatedly has come from his mouth.  I personally hope more sponsors drop his show.

Frankly, I don't know what it is to be on the receiving end of racist epithets.  I do know what it's like to be on the receiving end of anti-gay and anti-trans epithets.  I do know what it's like to be sexually harassed. 

So, when Rutgers player Matee Ajavon said "I think that this has scarred me for life," that much I believe I do understand -- being on the receiving end of pejoratives, epithets, and slurs find many of the recipients feeling scarred for life.  Apologies really aren't really enough anymore -- people should pretty much know better at this point than to use pejoratives, epithets, and slurs.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:50:35 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Those Comments mirror what Pat Robertson said on his 700 Club Tuesday Night

Pat was defending Imus as a Good Charitable Person. Pat also countered back on how women are misrepresented in rap music, to which I agree.
Me thinks Imus is damaged goods, just as Shock Jock Greaseman still is for his 1998 racist remarks and Announcer Jimmy the Greek for racist remarks on Football palyers and his remarks about Tiger Woods.
Imus should be financially well-off enough to retire and continue his Charitable acts on a Full Time basis.  He could do special guest speaker engagements to audiences that support him and/or his cause. His daily appearance on MSNBC and the Radio should come to an end.

---

by: RogernDC @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 14:35:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

dick vs racist

What is the difference?

He is more of a 'ho than the women he used for comic material and publicity for being paid to talk like a dick.

If he isn't like his radio personality in real life then he seriously needs help to realize what his other personality is doing to his charitable reputation.

It is becoming a routine occurrence to say something awful - either untrue (like our gov't) or simply mean (in the entertainment ind) - and then claim a distance between the words that are said and the person that says them. 

Imus isn't the only asshole on the air - and this isn't the first time he has been offensive.  He is in the company of many, many, many foul mouthed whores that make a killing on the radio from advertisers willing to sell their crap to the willfully bigoted moron that sits home soaking up the "humor" of trash. 

Listening to garbage coming from the mouth of a dick on a regular basis isn't anything to boast about.  That is the same as looking the other way while an innocent victim is abused and claiming no responsibility. 

We all should watch each others back - as Rosanne may have been implying - and tell people like Imus to STFU and tell his advertisers that they should not profit off trash that contributes nothing - absolutely nothing - to the world.

The only people that enjoy his shtick are those who value victimizing people or don't mind listening when someone else does it. 

---

by: Patrick @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:09:53 AM CDT

This is probably a language problem.

When I first saw the written comment made by this man Imus I decided that I didn't want to view the media available of it. Too disgusting if he was calling women athletes whores (mistaken maybe)?

I assume race must have been from "nappy head", as in zipper or raghead? For us a nappy is worn by infants so I do not make the connection there.

Still, from the bit I do make of it this is not what should be made public.

---

by: Carbonchild @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:19:18 AM CDT

Good news (re sponsors)

The sad truth is that an economic shift is usually the most effective way to get these people off the air.  As long as Imus is making people money, they'll find some way to rehabilitate him.  But if P&G etc. will no longer write their checks, the rehabilitation becomes much less likely.

---

by: KC @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:38:51 AM CDT

Where Did This Comes From?

Given that Imus has been a crude asshole throughout his career, and in fact the entire basis of his career is being a crude asshole, my question is this: Can anyone trace the what launched this comment of his onto the front pages, ahead of the war and the Gonzales scandal?

What I'm interested in knowing is the process by which this was turned into such a big story. The process has always mystified me. This happens constantly. Things that aren't intrinsically important get treated as if the world hangs on them.

The last one in my memory was last Thanksgiving when James Kim, the technical writer in San Francisco, got stranded in the woods in Oregon with his wife and kids, so for a week the lead story on all the cable networks was the saga of the backwoods hero. All sorts of crocodile tears got shed on that one, even though there are many dozens of people who get lost in the woods and don't come back.

Who got this one onto the front pages, and how did they manage to do it?


BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:46:54 AM CDT

Mr. Wilson, I think that Mel Gibson, Michael Richards, Imus, and others...

...are trying to determine, albeit unconsciously, whether cultural boundaries of decency are enforced.  For rich white guys (and gals like Coulter), not being allowed to freely and publicly hate the Other might feel like prison.  After all, if you're rich and white, aren't you due more than a $24,000 watch?  Aren't you also entitled to feel superior to others?  It must ease their way to believe that their success has NOTHING to do with their pigment or their crotch package.  So, they break the rules and break the rules and perhaps culture is finally pushing back. 

Perhaps the people are saying, "Enough.  Just because you have gold-plated fixtures in your bathroom doesn't mean you get carte blanche in bigotry." 

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:53:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

That's Not My Question

I'm happy to get into the point you're making, but I was really asking a process question. How did this comment, which is one of the thousands of stupid-ass statements that guy routinely makes, turn into this huge thing? My question is about the mechanics of it. Who made the decision to give this such prominent attention?

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 11:59:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I believe that in groups, there are no chance happenings.

I ALSO believe that in groups, there are far fewer conscious happenings than most people believe.  I doubt that one person or even a group of people decided that this latest chunk of racism from Imus's lips is the one that warranted a response.  I think that the reaction is largely an unconscious one.  I think and hope that the country is turning from unfettered racism, misogyny, etc.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 12:02:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Isn't It Interesting ...

... that divergent stuff like this happens to blow up just when something really big is happening in the reality-based community?

Is anyone even aware that Bush's troop surge is now going to be roughly 10 times (maybe more) bigger, in terms of man-hours, than originally advertised? Not only are they calling up 12,000 more National Guard troops, but they're going to extend by three months all tours of duty in Iraq. The surge is now being extended to the end of the year.

This stuff is just now coming to the surface. But what's the lead story everywhere? Nappy headed hos at Rutgers.

With all due respect to the women at Rutgers, might I suggest that a whole lot more harm is coming to black folk (and white folk too) from that troop surge, which has just taken a major step upward that no one is talking about?

Oh, and next Tuesday the attorney general is going to testify in Congress. Let's see what the "news" people are talking about. Gonzales or Don Imus. Sheesh!

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 12:17:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think it's possible that Iraq is too horrible to contemplate.

So, we collectively contemplate anything and anyone other than Iraq and Bush.  But Imus is important.  Millions of black folks have heard kinky hair applied as a pejorative.  Pam has written at length about the trouble and pain of straightening hair to conform to Euro-hair.  But the trouble and pain inflicted upon the top of one's nappy head is only the sympton.  The true trouble and pain is how such racial hatred infects the inside of one's head.  It hurts.

And it hurts.

And it hurts.

Or so I assume.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 12:27:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Two Sides

You and Pam make good points. That's not just a throwaway line, either. But I've been around the track a few times, and this Imus thing comes off to me as a classic distraction. If I were Karl Rove this is exactly what I'd want people to be thinking about right now.

It's an excellent cover for a big increase in the Iraq escalation -- from 63,000 manmonths of effort to 840,000 manmonths of effort. This is being nailed into place right now as we speak, with only scraps of additional reporting and hardly any additional debate.

And we're going to get wrapped up in whether some professional jerk is a racist because he made his 13,412th asshole comment? Okey dokey, but I can't help but wonder about the priorities.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 12:56:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

William Wilson or Rosanne?

Reveal your secret identity, Mr. Wilson!!!

I get it.  I totally do.  I also think we can handle more than one issue at a time.  World War I was fought while women pressed for the right to vote. 

I am excited to think that maybe...just maybe...Imus getting slapped (repeatedly) might make a difference in how we do or don't respect each other.  Even if it is in a minute way. 

It is more important than ever to dig deep into news that is (and isn't) broadcast and rely on each other to keep up to date.  Our corporate owned media decides what is news and which asshole gets to spew his filth on the airwaves. 

They also get to decide which country we occupy and who gets to profit from it. 

Did you know about Dianne Feinsteins' marital connection to war profiteering?  She supported Bush's invasion and her husband makes money on her vote. She just (in 2006) bought a multi-million dollar home in San Francisco (to replace the last one).

There is news that is ignored...and there is news that is ignored.  Don't let any of it escape dissemination or critical thought.

---

by: Patrick @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 12:32:18 PM CDT

It's A Stretch ...

... to imply (with the words "her husband makes money on her vote") that Feinstein supported the Iraq War for personal gain. If she's corrupt, then yes, I think it ought to be exposed along with the rest of the war profiteering. It's a huge issue to me, far more important than the Missing White Girl of the Week or the Nasty Nigger Outburst of the Week.

It's not that these things aren't news, but it's really dismaying to see how much attention they get. Of course, I'm just as guilty because here I am, commenting on it.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 13:00:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

if there was any question about Imus's history

You can't ignore this, from TomPaine.com (via Americablog)::

A sample of the Imus team's routine sport:

On the New York Knicks: "chest-bumping pimps? the New York Crips."

On superstar Gloria Estefan: "this little Chihuahua-looking 'ho."

On serial gay-killer Andrew Cunannan: "Why are they bothering to catch this guy? He's just whacking off freaks!"

On Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, a Native American: "The guy from F Troop."

On CNN's female anchors: "dyke-ie broads."

On media critic Howard Kurtz: "boner-nosed, beanie-wearing Jew boy." [John notes that was said back in 2000!]

Imus distances himself from the worst of it, but he's presiding, it's his show.

So the "God Squad" has second thoughts. What about A-list regulars like Tom Brokaw, Tim Russert, Dan Rather, Cokie Roberts, Howard Fineman, and Jeff Greenfield?

Clarence Page, the respected columnist, told TomPaine.com last week that he's "very reluctant" to appear again with Imus. And he thinks Imus should apologize to Gwen Ifill, Page's friend and accomplished colleague.

When Ifill, who like Page is black, worked for the New York Times, Imus said, "Isn't the Times wonderful? It lets the cleaning lady cover the White House."

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 15:21:47 PM CDT

anyone want to chime

in now with what a misunderstood man poor Imus is, or that he's really not that bad a guy?  Or is it time for the old saw, "he's just an equal opportunity offender?"  Please. 

I hope other sponsor follow the lead of Staples and P&G.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

---

by: n8nyc @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 16:03:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes, and Isn't That The Whole Point?

Imus is on the air not despite that stuff, but because he's a jerk. He's the naughty boy in class who says things that shock the adults. His listeners get to be 12-year-old white boys again, just like the hip-hop gangsta rappers get to be rowdy black teenagers. All that's really different is the choice of what's shocking. Today, it's ethnic insults. When I was a kid, I watched George Carlin get arrested for saying the 7 dirty words.

Even though I disagree with you on all of this, Pam, I do take you seriously and I do acknowledge that you and others have made some worthwhile points about how hurtful his comments were. I want to say that so we don't feel like we're totally at loggerheads.

But look, the gangsta rappers offend me and I'm a 49-year-old white guy. Why do they offend me? You might not believe me when I write this, but it's virtually in my genetic code that "nigger" is one of the worst things one person can call another. I'm not angling for the Martin Luther King Racial Harmony Award here, but "nigger" is a word I was raised never to let pass my lips. And not just because people would be offended, but because it was wrong.

So, when I hear black people using it with each other it truly jangles. Which is fine. Believe me, I'm not so fragile that I can't get over it. But I do notice. And I also notice this double standard being applied. Now, even there, I realize how in-group humor is different when it breaks out, so I'm not one of these people who says, "If it's okay for blacks to call each other nigger, than it's okay for white people to call black people niggers." (And nappy-headed hos, and all manner of other racial insults, which I equate with nigger.)

But still, the level of outrage being focused on Imus seems disproportionate to the offense, and all the more so when you realize that being offensive is what the guy is about. Aside from the specific nature of his material, Imus is not the first comedian to plow that field. He's a successor to Don Rickles, Rodney Dangerfield and God-knows-what-other Borscht Belt guys, for crying out loud.

The in-your-face style is never one that appealed to me, but it's been around forever. Imus has been combining it with ethnical and sexual material forever, as you yourself have demonstrated. So why the big blow-up now? To me, the best argument against him is that his target was a bunch of college kids, but even that's suspect. When I went to college in the 1970s, there wasn't a hell of a lot sacred when it came to humor, and I haven't noticed any big movement to de-coarsen the culture since then.

So are we now going to fire Imus and run the gangsta rappers out of business? Somehow I doubt it, because in my gut I don't think the gangsta rap customers  are paying the least bit of attention to me, to you or to any other tsk-tsking adult. Procter & Gamble doesn't sponsor them to begin with. What will happen here is that Imus will be made an example of, and gangsta rap will continue.

And thus, there will be a new rule: If you're going to call a black woman a nappy-headed ho, you'd better be black. And if you're white, you'd better smile and keep moving.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 16:32:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What do rappers

have to do with Imus making hateful comments? I haven't read anyone here disagreeing over the content of some rap music (in fact, I've read the contrary).  Am I alone in suspecting that, in this context, rappers are a red herring?

An Atrios post (yes, I still go there sometimes) caught my eye earlier:

I'm perfectly happy for there to be a wider conversation about racism and misogyny in all of its myriad forms in our media and popular culture, including but certainly not limited to hip-hop culture, but this wider conversation has almost nothing to do with Don Imus and the fact that he thought it appropriate to call the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team "nappy-headed hoes" and whether or not this is a firing offense.

Specifically, the fact that rap contains misogynistic lyrics has nothing to do with what Don Imus said. Absolutely nothing. Zero. Zip. If the Imus affair goes on to inspire this wider conversation, great, but this isn't about Fifty Cent lyrics. It's about Don Imus calling the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team "nappy-headed hoes."

He also just posted that new bailing sponsors include Sprint, Amex, GM, Ditech, and GlaxoSmithKline.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

---

by: n8nyc @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 16:46:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's A Double Standard

First off, it's looking quite a bit like Imus will be toast. People ought to be careful what they wish for. The same corporations that can exercise direct power to quash speech you don't like can do the same to quash speech you do like.

Anyway, if Imus is fired for racism and mysogyny but it's rampant elsewhere, then it's not any sort of justice but a sort of Bill of Attainder against one guy. This guy happens to be someone I don't like, but I think I'm more opposed to Bills of Attainder than I am to Don Imus.

Is this a precedent you really want to set, that at any moment someone can be suddenly plucked out of their career because what made him popular has suddenly suddenly made him unpopular, even though others are doing the same thing?

I find that a little scary.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 17:40:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Were he to be fired,

it wouldn't be one person getting the message that racism and misogyny are ever so slightly less tolerated than they were before his hateful remarks. 

Anyway, if Imus is fired for racism and mysogyny but it's rampant elsewhere, then it's not any sort of justice

I would call it a small bit of progress rather than a singling out of one person.

People being slow to notice or respond to what Imus has been up to for years is no reason to oppose speaking out against him, his sponsors, and his guests.  People come to the party late all the time.

This is a free speech issue.  I'm as free to contact his sponsors and guests as he is to make hate speech.  If he ends up barking that free hate speech from a street corner (or some remote corner of the internet), all the better.

I'm also free to support sponsors of hosts that promote tolerance and peace (and let the sponsors know why I support them).  I think that's important too.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

---

by: n8nyc @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 17:55:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Two Sides to Every Story

I think you make a good point about people not noticing how crude the guy is. The few times I've listened to him -- and I will admit, it's been quite a while -- I was taken aback by his nastiness. Please understand when I tell you that this is not a guy I like, appreciate or approve of. Quite the contrary.

That said, I think Imus's being fired (now that MSNMC has dumped him, I think the handwriting's on the wall) will play poorly outside of liberal circles. I think most blacks who pay any attention will approve, while most whites who pay any attention will say it's one more example of a double standard at work.

I don't think it'll play too well among most Latinos, many of whom see blacks as being special pleaders who get too much slack. You haven't noticed that there's tension between blacks and Latinos? Hang out in L.A. sometime.

I'm not going to shed any tears for Imus himself. He's an asshole, and life has been more than fair to him for a lot longer than he ever deserved. But I think the people who'll look askance at this firing will have valid gripes. The one cavet would be if this is followed up by some serious, sustained effort against the same crap that's been rampant among the hip-hoppers.

If liberals do that and keep up the pressure, then they'll earn respect from non-liberals. I'm sure I am sounding like a "non-liberal" because of my comments, but that's not the case. What I am is a realist who looks around and would like to see my side of things get more support.

To do it, we've got to be aware of how other people see things. We constantly -- and rightly -- complain about how Bush and his Christiand whackjobs employ a double standard toward truth, fact, ethics and all the rest. I don't like double standards. Always have. I dislike 'em even more when I see my side using them.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 18:12:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hip-hop

I don't see why people keep dragging in hip-hop and saying, "What about their lyrics?" etc. etc. etc.

First of all, they're not hosts of major radio shows that are simulcast.

Secondly, they are not sought after by famous journos and politicos who want to hang with them and act cool.

In terms of cultural discourse, I think Imus's racism, anti-semitism, misogyny are far more deleterious than any number of CDs by hip-hop artists.  The latter are routinely attacked; Imus has been routinely feted by the high and mighty.  That's a huge set of differences.

"In order to maintain an untenable position, you have to be actively ignorant."  The Colbert Report

---

by: Lev Raphael @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 19:13:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Disagree

I think Imus's racism, anti-semitism, misogyny are far more deleterious than any number of CDs by hip-hop artists.

I think you have it exactly backwards. Imus reaches a more educated audience that is more likely to see what he does as an act. The hip-hop artists reach a younger and far more impressionable audience.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 22:12:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

If he's dropped off radio too,

it will indeed be interesting to see what's next.  Hate creeps and I want to be watching, waiting, and ready for the next hate monger.

I might be remembering incorrectly, but I don't remember a huge, lasting backlash when Dr. Laura faced the consequences of her actions.

It would be surprising if different minority groups rose up to defend someone let go over hateful, race based slurs.

I'd expect the howling from the usual places, the lands of the freepers.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

---

by: n8nyc @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 20:05:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Imus has been canned from MSNBC

Two thoughts:

(1) I don't think this would have happened with either a "just ignore him, don't give him any more attention" or a "this is relatively less important than..." approach.

(2) Does McCain, etc. still think it would be just dandy to go on Imus's show?

---

by: KC @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 18:12:31 PM CDT

Dropped from MSNBC

So, MSNBC has dropped its simulcast of Don Imus?  Why now and not when it happened?  Well, straight from MSNBC's own website:

"The network's decision came after a growing list of sponsors - including American Express Co., Staples Inc., Procter & Gamble Co., and General Motors Corp. - said they were pulling ads from Imus' show for the indefinite future."

Money talks a lot louder than Imus, apparently.

---

by: Jami @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 18:31:28 PM CDT

This Is No Victory

Liberals really ought to think hard before welcoming direct corporate interference in editorial judgments. That is a double-edged sword. This one might feel good today because Imus is an asshole, but it's a little bit like torture in Iraq: It's going to have some future consequences that none of us are going to enjoy.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 23:42:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Advertisers have been interfering with editorial content for decades.

One reason that, for example, Archer-Daniels Midland (ADM) and big Pharma advertised on Sunday morning gabfests and public television and radio, was to kinda/sorta suggest that they not report negatively on issues that were of interest to them.  And they didn't.

The direct interference by advertisers was brought home to me about a decade ago, when it was reported that one large advertiser (I forget which one it was) wanted to have editorial control over every issue of a magazine in which its advertisements appeared. 

Advertising driven media is indeed double-edged.  It's cheap to the reader or viewer.  But the reader/viewer isn't the customer.  The customer is the advertiser, and it will always be induced to present the customer in at least a neutral light, and maybe a favorable one.

On the larger topic, I'm surprised that anyone pays attention to Don I'm-an-ass In The Morning, but whatever.

---

by: raj @ Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 01:41:28 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Was A Reporter

I wrote a consumer column in a small city paper back in the late '70s and early '80s. I got a letter from one of the paper's major advertisers about how the existence of my column offended him because we allowed anonymous allegations against named businesses.

I published the letter -- anonymously, by the way, because the complainant's name was never printed -- and vigorously defended the column and its approach. We'd keep complainants' names confidential, I wrote, but if a complaint was unfounded we always said so.

The reason for keeping the complainants anonymous and the targets public was because of the inherent imbalance of power and influence. Most people don't like the idea of putting their names in the paper on a complaint, especially in a small town.

In any case, after the column ran I got a call from the owner of the newspaper, which was family held. He complimented me on the column -- which, by the way, I had not submitted for his approval. So, it's not always true that advertisers rule the content. Unfortunately, it's truer today than it used to be, because of competitive pressures and climbing return hurdle rates for news divisions.

I am uncomfortable with advertisers stepping into editorial decisions, even when the editorial decision might be one that I agree with. It sets a bad precedent.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 15:55:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]