The Snowball Effect

According to WCBS TV 2 news, CBS has fired Don Imus from his morning show position.  Read the announcement here.

And more on the topic...

I haven't seen us cover this very much on The Blue State, but it appears things continue to escalate for Don Imus and his "racist" remarks.  After calling the Rutgers' women's basketball team a group of "Nappy-headed hos," Don Imus has been on the receiving end of a relentless attack from just about everyone with political points to gain. 

Imus went on Al Sharpton's radio show to apologize and discuss the issue and then said he couldn't get anywhere with "you people," referring to Sharpton and a caller - though the term certainly rests alongside other racist cliches.

Yesterday MSNBC announced that they were dropping the television simulcast of Imus' radio show; between then and now just about every politician from Barack Obama to Hillary Clinton to John Edwards to Harold Ford Jr. has given his or her input.  Rosie's on the record, as she is with just about everything.  Now he's off the air completely.

I'm not sure what I think about this.  I don't care for Don Imus as you might expect, but I think the reaction to his comments has been extraordinary and overdramatic.  It's good to see him fall, but I'm not sure people are being reasonable.

Your thoughts?

Comments

[Tony]

I personally can't stand Imus, and I found his show to be mostly crap. He is a miserable man and often very abusive to his staff.

As far as his statement; Because of his shows format, I believe that is what "did him in". His show wasn't just comedy, satire, news or political...it was a mixture all of them. In today's media, that does matter and dictates what you can and can not say.

Do I think he was relentlessly pelted by critics? yes, but I have been on the "relentlessly pelting of Bill O'Reilly" band wagon.

Once you put yourself out there, you have entered a realm of debate. The side that Imus was on lost this round.

[Jerry]

I think this whole deal is way over blown. I agree with what he said was out of line, but this backlash to destroy him in lite of all the things that are said that are over the line on radio, TV internet and in print. Is just wrong. Imus cant say
something like that, but rappers, comic's and
coservitive's can say anything they care to say and its all good. What is this country comming to? No longer land of the free!

[Chief Administrator: Todd]

My thoughts exactly, Erick.

As I wrote earlier today, it was pretty pathetic how this story jumped to the front page, at the same time as people are dying in Iraq. Did you all hear about the attack in the Green Zone today? Like 3 or 4 members of the Iraqi parliament were killed.

[VooDooAddict]

What bothers me most about this is that Imus stood up and took responsibility. He didn't blame it on booze and declare that he was going into rehab. Instead of the usual "pass the buck," he said things to the effect of: "Yeah, my bad that wasn't the proper thing to say. I'm sorry it was said, but I need to let people know that it was not said with malice." He's not a guy who has ever worried about being terribly politically-correct, but personally there seem to be far more hateful people on the radio then Imus. Instead of starting a constructive dialog about hateful commentary ... a mob frenzy lynched him.

[keystone Patriot]

Imus' comments were reprehensible but the punishment should fit the crime. If Imus is to be vilified for something he said, then you could be equally as vilified as the movement to destroy an individual over something said gains momentum.

[keystone Patriot]

Imus' comments were reprehensible but the punishment should fit the crime. If Imus is to be taken off the air for something he said, then keep in mind that you could be vilified for an ill-conceived statement as well.

[George]

Have you ever heard the Ray Nagin character on his show? Imus basically uses him as a punching bag. He's clearly a racist - I'm surprised it's taken this long to get rid of him. Every time I hear the Nagin character I cant believe he gets away with it. Good riddance. Now we can discuss actual news?

[Chief Editor: Todd]

Yes, George. I agree. Back to real news. Yesterday a bridge blew up in Iraq, and cars spilled into the Tigris river. There are lives at stake in Iraq, and the conflict there is more important than Imus, Anna Nicole and all the other non-political issues.

[The Mexican]

Actually, I'm going to take a conservative stance on this (silly, should-be non-) issue. I think it's disgusting what they did to the guy. He's a shock-jock, and he gets paid to joke about sensitive topics; he's been in radio scene for 30-40 years, so the backers knew what kind of guy he is. He's hit nearly every racial/ethnic stereotype, so it's not like he's singling out a certain group. One thing that upsets me about the liberals is this politically-correct movement. In certain cases I understand, like the comment Trent Lott said at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday about somehow the US missed out on segregation, something Strom was advocating back in his day. That's reprehensible; that's disgusting. That wasn't even a joke in the way he said it: it was a suggestion. I agree, and I don't think anybody thinks it was a smart thing to say. It was sexist and racist, no doubt. But if we're going to take this on, then every person who epouses a gaffe, a few-second brain fart, needs to be hung from the highest tree, and i don't agree with that one bit. I agree with George Carlin that there shouldn't be a limit on this type of speech, no matter how ignorant and feeble-minded. Once you start restricting, where does it end? And, that's not a slippery slope, that's been throughout history in every place where people have been shut up whether in rhetoric, politics, comedians, nay-sayers, etc, across the board. Don Imus should have treated it like every other person, but he's better than that: he came out to admit his wrong-doing, didn't shift the blame to drugs or anything else, or not take responsibility for what he said when he acknowledged "I didn't say if if offended people, I know it offended people." At the very least, he should have started a scholarship or major scholastic fund based on behalf of these women to honor their names and to help other minority or, in general, all women who rise up through the ranks to play college basketball, and whatever else he and they agreed to in the talks when he went to personally apologize. And, I hate the hypocrisy of Al Sharpton on this one. He's a man of the robes, and he sins like everybody else; yet was it not the amazing philosopher, Jesus Christ, whom he said, "Let the first person who has not sinned, throw the first stone?" His faith is on the absolute idea that there is forgiveness in everything because Christ has given himself to die for all sins, as the Christians would advocate; yet he goes apeshit on this, brings it to the national spotlight insofar the girls may never have even realized the comment was ever said had it not been so scrutinized, which caused them to deal with a lot of unnecessary bullshit. And Al Sharpton gets on his show to exploit his daughter? Something to to the effect of: "You see this young woman? Is she a nappy-headed ho to you, Mr. Imus? She's my college-graduate daughter." To me, that's disgusting. I had a sliver of respect for Al Sharpton, but it has gone away now. I don't like Imus either, but I'd defend anyone having the ability to say what they want (including some of the despicable things Bill Maher, Ann Coulter, Lou Dobbs, Bill O'Reilly, etc. have all said), so long as it doesn't incite some greater violence that would end up hurting people. Consistency matters on the substance on which consistency is the issue. In this sense, it is more about the intent, vem and ver, than whether every situation must be condemned. Besides, I'm libertarian in the respect that it's not the federal government's job to regulate this, regardless of the federal commission assigned to it. Feel free to disagree, but I think it sets us back. I'll say this, I don't believe the Macaca word was overblown, because the former Senator lied about how he knew the word and why he used it; and if you lie about it, then expect the media to take it to the next level as it should. That's my two cents; now, let's get back to the news-worthy items.

[The Mexican]

Edited: In certain cases I understand, like the comment Trent Lott said at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday about somehow the US missed out on remaining segregated, something Strom was advocating back in his day.

Again, what Imus said was really stupid: point not contested. But, that's exactly why there shouldn't be a limit. The words give us red flags to hold our vigilance, and it allows us to re-evaluate the person who says these words or phrases. Because this person says this, is this person really some kind of bigot, is this person prejudiced for what reasons and why, is this person willing to redeem themselves? Actually, I don't think this in and of itself is a bad story for news to get out there, because it would have lead in to a debate on racism and sexism, two big, elephant-in-the-room issues that don't get much airplay, because it's too painful to mention or discuss. The media could have really been heroes on this and tried to make this horribly negative thing bloom into a positive experience, such as Imus getting to know and understand these women on a level he wouldn't have had he never said this, a chance to resolve some issues. Instead, they focused on all the negative shit on this one, even after this man came out with the white flags and apologized left and right. Strategically, he should have done what Bill Maher or Ann Coulter does: neither would have apologized over it, just like when Bill Maher dressed up as Steve Irwin saying, something to the effect of, "I'm not John Kerry. I don't apologize for my jokes" and Ann Coulter talking about Edwards being gay, something to the effect, "I would never be so harsh to the gay community."

[Chief Editor: Todd]

True. And if we use that logic in removing Imus from the radio, then we should do the same thing with a lot of guys on the right (like Michael Savage).

The problem I have is not the fact that he said it -- but that he said it over the public airwaves.

[The Mexican]

We'll have to agree to disagree, Admin Todd, but that's radio. It's for public consumption. If someone doesn't want to hear it, he or she doesn't have to tune in to it. Like I said before, the media could have consciously engaged in trying to resolve some social conflicts by having reflective, meaningful discourse on other major issues, like in Cornel West's book Race Matters, where he describes that the African-American youth has this learned perception of nihilism, and how together as a nation we can give back hope to people. This had potential, and it was lost in the sensationalism-style of reporting on it. I agree, though, to some extent, you have people like Jerry Falwell in that major circle of hardline, ultra conservative evangelicals that blame the the nation's or the world's problems on minority groups--from feminism to civil rights activist movements. And, like Bill Maher said, because they have a suit and are not yelling from a bullhorn on a street corner, they are considered legit and not to be held accountable. Action should happen, but it very much depends on the degree and extent of what is being said, and whether the person, he or she, comes clean about why he or she said it and why say it.

[George]

The problem I have is that Imus' ugly ass face is on every channel and every web site. And did you see that this almost indirectly got Gov Corzine killed last nite. He's lucky if he ever recovers from the accident.

[The Mexican]

Yeah, I abhor the sensationalism of this story, as with Anna Nicole Smith. There is some meaning in her case, but thanks to the fourth estate, the news networks can almost always distort the true message. In ethical theory class, the debate on Anna Nicole Smith was akin to the after-death message of Terri Schiavo. Now, completely different cases, but there was a similar message being sent out from the two cases: mainly two, 1) has the person made his or her wishes known to spouse, family members, friends, co-workers, etc (and, if not, be sure to discuss what is to happen to you, your assets, who you want in on concerns regarding your death, etc.) and 2) are the wishes of the deceased or mentally-incompetent being granted and held to what the person had intentionally called for (and, if not, why or for what reasons or whose beliefs on the matter are most relevant for substituted judgement, etc.). Anna Nicole Smith made it very clear what she wanted, and the fact her mother tried to trangress her daughter's wishes was a blow to the deceased woman, like her or not. It's too bad we don't receive these messages without further rumination, and instead, we're given this sensationalism so that the story permeates into every facet of life whilst the original meaning is lost in overblown translation.

And yes, George, I did read about that. That's very unfortunate for Governor Jon Corzine. I hope he recovers speedily and can get back to his job. He has many very serious, nearly-fatal injuries like broken sternum, broken collarbone, broken thigh bone, fractured lower vertebrae, etc.

[It never ends]

Racism is hate and anyone who practices racism is guilty of a hate crime. Day in and day out minorities have to deal with hate crimes yet white's do not.dehumanize, enslave, then change the way slavery is practiced. From physical to economical and then lie about what's being done. Laws are created with loop holes, so it appears as if a stand is being taken against racism however when any minority tries to get justice he / she falls short. The reason they fall short is not due to racism not existing but the fact that they have to go to other racist individuals to get justice. One racist will not find anything wrong with racist actions practiced by the other. How can a culture of people say that they believe in god yet violate his laws? Murder women, children and other innocent people then justify there actions by dehumanizing and placing blame. Creating a system that oppresses them and all the while pretend and deny that it's happening. That's evil. The funny thing is other countries know how the white euro culture behaves and they are economicaly bleeding america. United we stand applies to whites only and all whites know about racism because it's taught in the home. From the coded language used to the physical and mental conditioning. I dare anyone to try and disprove me.the only way you can do that is with words, lie.

[It never ends]

Racism is hate and anyone who practices racism is guilty of a hate crime. Day in and day out minorities have to deal with hate crimes yet white's do not.dehumanize, enslave, then change the way slavery is practiced. From physical to economical and then lie about what's being done. Laws are created with loop holes, so it appears as if a stand is being taken against racism however when any minority tries to get justice he / she falls short. The reason they fall short is not due to racism not existing but the fact that they have to go to other racist individuals to get justice. One racist will not find anything wrong with racist actions practiced by the other. How can a culture of people say that they believe in god yet violate his laws? Murder women, children and other innocent people then justify there actions by dehumanizing and placing blame. Creating a system that oppresses them and all the while pretend and deny that it's happening. That's evil. The funny thing is other countries know how the white euro culture behaves and they are economicaly bleeding america. United we stand applies to whites only and all whites know about racism because it's taught in the home. From the coded language used to the physical and mental conditioning. I dare anyone to try and disprove me.the only way you can do that is with words, lie.