insignificant thoughts - Latest Comments in CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

jeff chambrovich — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 17:21:09 -0000

Don Imus has done more for more people , black or white, young or old . than any 10 al sharptons.
He said something monumentily stupid, but it wasn't anyahere near as bad as what is on most of that garbage hip hop crud.
I challenge the Rutgers girls to take a stand and the next time this language is used near them or by them
that they demand that it stops. They can stand up and jump on an old white man when they have Fat al pushing them but can they confront their friends and aquaintances when it may really mean something.

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

Black "Man on the Street" — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:05:32 -0000

I am an African American male who, before this morning, was an ardent fan of the â€œImus in the Morningâ€ television program on MSNBC. Funny enough in fact, my usual routine was to flip back and forth between Imus and â€œThe Today Showâ€ while readying myself for work. I have just a few points to offer about the brewing controversy over Don Imusâ€™ use of the phrase â€œnappy-headed hosâ€ to describe the Rutgers womenâ€™s basketball team, and some of the comments I have read here in response to Mr. Rokerâ€™s courageous stance.

First, I am put off by the media instinctively going to Reverend Jackson and Reverend Sharpton for the pulse of black America. While I respect much of what both have done over the years to turn the spotlight on issues of race and civil rights issues in general, the Black community is not a monolith. These men donâ€™t speak for all of â€œus.â€ No one does. It is absurd (and offensive) that whenever someone utters a racially insensitive statement about black people, the knee jerk reaction of TV program directors and producers alike is to immediately cut to Jackson or Sharpton for comment. (Why? Did I miss a meeting or something?) Were, say, offensive comments about Asian people or Jewish people (recall the Mel Gibson comment) to get similar mainstream traction to the Imus comment, imagine how silly it would be for the mass media to keep cutting to shots of the SAME TWO Asian or Jewish guys to â€œspeakâ€ for their respective races/groups. And beyond absurdity, there is the â€œkill the messengerâ€ syndrome that naturally follows when we leave it up to Jackson and Sharpton to speak for black America. We must never make the messenger larger than the message. It obscures the real issue by leaving open Reverend Jackson and Reverend Sharpton to ridicule and criticism for their own past statements and actions. (With Jackson, people talk about his 1984 reference to Jews as â€œHymiesâ€ and to New York City as â€œHymietownâ€; with Sharpton, people talk about the racially charged incident in 1987 where he defended Tawana Brawley, a 15 year old black teenage girl who accused a number of white police officers of raping her. That incident was later revealed to have probably been a hoax.) Hereâ€™s a thought. Why not talk to more black people to get varying perspectives? (Al Roker, for one, has shown himself willing and capable of expressing a point of view. And heâ€™s as American as apple pie!)

Second, as a number of posters have stated, there certainly is freedom of speech/expression in America. Don Imus is free to speak his mind, just as the market place is free to express itself. If he survives this, because of the core demographic makeup of the â€œImus in the Morningâ€ television program, I am assuming (and I could be wrong) that his audience will largely stick by him â€“ resoundingly â€œspeakingâ€ or â€œexpressingâ€ their support for Imus and his message through sustained ratings. But this is not an issue of freedom of speech. Having a nationally syndicated television and radio program, broadcast over federally funded airwaves, is not a constitutional right. It is a privilege. And it is for this very reason that the snide comments directing Mr. Roker to simply â€œturn the channelâ€ or â€œnot listenâ€ to Imus instead of calling for him to step aside are misplaced. (I note that when Howard Stern was finally fed up with the FCC censoring what he could broadcast over public airwaves, he went to satellite radio; were Imus to have done the same and made this comment, Iâ€™d condemn his statement BUT defend his right to remain on the air.)

Third, regarding the comment made by Don Imus himself this morning (and others in response to Mr. Roker) to the effect that African American popular culture tacitly condones racist images and terms in rap music et al., the comment doesnâ€™t appear to be motivated to change the negative aspects of African American popular culture. Instead, it seems designed to provide cover for bigotry in mainstream media. Sure, blacks are as guilty or more guilty than others in creating, propagating and consuming wholesale racism aimed at blacks. But that is not an excuse under which Imus or anyone else can hide. Lets be crystal clear on this point. Wrong is wrong. It is as wrong if an African American media personality refers to a black woman as a â€œnappy-headed hoâ€ as it is for Imus to have used this term to describe the Rutgers women. Similarly, other racist images and terms should be railed against and purged from the public airwaves. But I offer an analogy that I think will make my point here: pointing out racist images and terms in African American popular culture as a cover for Imusâ€™ offense is no different than pointing to everyone else who is whizzing by and defying the speed limit when a cop pulls you over for speeding. It doesnâ€™t undercut the substantive point, which is that YOU committed an offense for which YOU should be punished.

This brings me to my fourth and final point, which explains why I think that the I-man should either voluntarily leave his post, or be forcibly removed. I started watching the â€œImus in the Morningâ€ program regularly last year, mostly for the political personalities that go on daily to sell books. From my admittedly limited perspective, it has been a mixed bag on issues of race. For example, while Don Imus (and Chris Matthews, also of MSNBC) was one of the few mainstream faces to attribute a racial component to the Hurricane Katrina fiasco, Imus and his crew think nothing of routinely referring to, say, black athletes as animals. While Imus campaigned for Harold Ford to be the first black Senator from the south since reconstruction, I flinch every time he has one of his regular â€œcomicsâ€ parody Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who is Harvard educated and speaks the â€œKingsâ€™ Englishâ€ without a hint of an accent, as a heavily-accented buffoon. However, one incident in particular happened a while back which really turned me off to the Imus show (although Iâ€™m ashamed to say that I didnâ€™t turn him off completely until this recent incident). During this particular sketch, Imus had his producer, Bernie Kerik, go to Harlem, New York to get a â€œMan on the Streetâ€ perspective on the war in Iraq. Bernie approached an African American man, late twenties, who had just gotten off of the subway and asked him what his take was on the war and the impending Iraqi elections. The man responded with insight and eloquence, even when pressed with follow-up questions from Bernie. From the studio, Imus let Bernie know that he was not pleased and that this was not the point of the sketch, to which Bernie then approached a tragically intoxicated black man who looked to be homeless and in his late sixties, and asked him the same questions. When the man gave his answers â€“ the ones which were coherent, Imus and his cohorts erupted in laughter and applause. They had succeeded in making a black man in Harlem appear foolish.

I suppose that my detractors will say that â€œImus in the Morningâ€ is a comedy program and that it is intended to make everyone look like fools, including Don Imus. And I guess thatâ€™s true to a certain extent. But hereâ€™s my beef with Imus and race. Whenever he makes a joke at the expense of a person of color, it always has to deal with the targetâ€™s race â€“ like saying that Serena Williams should pose for National Geographic Magazine and calling both Williams sisters â€œapesâ€; like constantly referring to Arabs as â€œrag headsâ€; like referring to Senator Barack Obama as â€œthat colored fellowâ€; like calling PBS journalist Gwen Ifill, who famously moderated a vice presidential debate in 2004, a â€œcleaning lady.â€ And because it deals with the targetâ€™s race, and race is shared by millions of innocent bystanders, by extension these comments are almost universally hurtful. In other words, calling a black athlete an animal because he or she is black is tantamount to calling ALL black athletes animals; calling the Attorney General a gardener because he is Hispanic is tantamount to calling ALL Hispanics gardeners or other sorts of menial workers. It reeks of racial superiority and it has no place on the public airwaves.

Iâ€™ll end with this. In 2000, on the air, Don Imus promised Clearance Page, a black journalist who works at the Chicago Tribune and often serves as a media pundit, that he would stop with the racially offensive statements. (Ironically, that was the last time that Imus had Mr. Page on his show!) Imus clearly broke his promise time and time again. For the foregoing reasons, I think its obvious that a two week paid â€œsuspensionâ€, to be served after he has finished fund-raising for his ranch and promoting his wifeâ€™s new book, is less than insufficient. It is insulting.

Thank you, Mr. Roker, for having the courage to stand up against this garbage. Now, in the mornings, Iâ€™ll be exclusively watching you and the gang over at â€œThe Today Show.â€

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

nathalie — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 02:47:55 -0000

If black leaders (and the Rutgers basketball team) would spend half as much energy slamming rappers for the poor image they convey of black women, I'd give a crap about this. If they would direct their angst to the hip hop community instead of Bill Cosby for pointing out that racism isn't the only thing to blame for the dismal economic and educational conditions in the black community, then they'd have more credibility in my mind. This selective outrage is tired and old. The content on MTV is way more offensive towards black women EVERY DAY than Imus could ever hope to be in a single statement. Seriously.

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

mullah cimoc — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 00:46:18 -0000

Mullah Cimoc say do this womens having the tattoo and look like whore? Is truth still defense in usa? ameriki society not free now. this like a stalinism. tv show make woman the power position and beat down the man him so stupid.

this for punish ameriki for iraq war. ameriki woman to boss the man, lesbian control government, this destroy all ameriki for not having the baby but kill abortion all the child.

now the govt force him girl child take the shot for destroy reprodution system. make mandatory law. this only for beneift pharmacutical company.

so sad ameriki destroyed complete for be obedient slave of zionist masters in tel aviv.

stop1984now@yahoo.com

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

Patrick — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 20:55:09 -0000

I can't help but wonder about the reaction to "nappy headed ho" had it been an all-white basketball team...

And forget the FCC... doesn't it bother anyone that a few civil rights leaders and the corporate establishment seem to have decided what is acceptable broadcasting?

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

annie — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:35:46 -0000

Re: Rhea

Glad to meet a member of the Offenderatti. Imus's comments were par-for-the-course, locker-room banter his show is famous for. His comments were not well thought out, but that kind of riffing seldom is. This is all a tempest in a teapot and it should have never been blown out to the proportions it has.

Last night I watched in wonder as Jesse Jackson had the nerve to tell Glenn Beck that Imus should be fired for his 'racially insensitive' comments. I kept hoping that GB would call him on this "HymieTown" reference to NYC a couple of decades ago. Alas it didn't happen.

Should Imus have made the comments he did? No, and I imagine he wishes he hadn't. Should he be fired for it? Not just no, but hell, no!

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

heyjude — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:38:52 -0000

How sad and completely ridiculous.
On one hand we have an idiot making a sexual and racial slur-who probably needs to go back to his cave and stay there
and on the other hand-this type of racial and sexual slur is said daily by their own race and that's all right.
No one has it right.
We are all wrong.

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

Joe — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:26:43 -0000

Given CNN's "popularity" I just wonder how many of the people who complained actually heard it live, and how many heard about it from a mass e-mailing campaign. It's like how members of Parent's Televsion Council submit complaints to the FCC that they didn't even watch. Isn't it odd how no one ever kowtows to them?

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

Vinny — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:20:23 -0000

Yawn...

Re: CBS, Predictably, Suspends Don Imus

Rhea — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:09:34 -0000

Imus' comments were racist and sexist. He should be fired, not given what amounts to a two-week vacation. Sometimes I forget that "Talk Show Radio Host" and "Complete Jerk" are often synonymous.