Counter-point
My friend Tim wrote the following post in comments, and I thought they were worth putting on the front page.
As I have mentioned in a previous post, I have had longtime misgivings about Imus. Only minutes ago, I learned that MSNBC shitcanned him for good. I am not quite sure how I feel about that. Who is perfect? Who has never said anything inadvertently hateful? Who has never done anything inadvertently wrong? Not me, for one. As retarded as longtime frequent Imus participant Bo Dietel (for the record, I fucking HATE him) said, his characterization of MSNBC’s actions as “rash†is nothing short of apt. There are so many other things that Imus has done and said in his radio program in recent years that easily could have earned him early retirement — the show is a shadow of its former self. If you don’t like the guy, don’t fucking listen to him. My biggest fear about this latest development in the idiotic, mean-spirited, truly hateful shit that Don Imus (and, more damningly, his producer, Bernard McGuirk) said is the implications it has about the current state of free speech in this country. What are we supposed to do? Pretend that there are not hateful, stupid white people today that are living and wasting oxygen that smarter people could be using? What is this decision going to solve? Should anybody unafraid to mention the numerous good things that this particular radio host has done in his life start to fear for their own public hanging? What year is this? What country is this?
I will add more soon, but now I am too pissed off to go any further. Goodnight, free speech. Good fucking night.
—————————————————————
Another scary thing that I am trying to get my head around is that Imus is not exactly a liberal. Not to downplay the truly shitty, hateful nature of the comments that transpired on Imus’s show, but who will be next to go? Someone even more blatantly hateful like Rush Limbaugh, who spews bile and idiocy and bigotry far more hateful than Imus has done on a daily basis? Don’t get me wrong; that motherfucker’s next appearance in the media should be the bloody shit end of a snuff film. But what good are the airwaves if you aren’t allowed to learn about the true nature of the people that we walk among, regardless of whether or not you agree with them? As far as I am concerned, I would much rather know what people like Imus, Limbaugh, Howard Stern, and Bill O’Reilly really feel than not have the opportunity to see it. Everything in this country is NOT hunky dory in terms of race, class, opportunity, etc., but now I have one less source of proof of that. Who wants to remain in the dark? Not me.
The only lesson that I have learned from this railroad job is that there is even more proof now that our freedom is at stake now more than ever. And for all the talk about values and decency, the only thing that corporate media cares about is the bottom line and any potential liability to it. This is not about virtue. This is about liability and money. Sleep tight.
I have comments myself, in comments
4 Responses to “Counter-point”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
April 12th, 2007 at 11:23 am
I don’t see it as an abuse of free speech on the part of MSNBC, although I agree that you’re absolutely right that it’s a bottom-line thing with them as opposed to virtue. but you might also say that MSNBC is responding to their listeners and their advertisers who have every right NOT to be associated with what comes out of Imus’s mouth (or limbaugh’s or O’reillys etc).
“But what good are the airwaves if you aren’t allowed to learn about the true nature of the people that we walk among, regardless of whether or not you agree with them?â€
Interestingly, my father and i had a mirror image of this discussion. He claims that Imus isn’t a racist at all, but that he plays one on the radio: however, what Imus is, in his opinion, is a bully.
“Who is perfect? Who has never said anything inadvertently hateful? Who has never done anything inadvertently wrong? â€
I don’t know Tim: when you’re on the radio, your free speech is also limited: you can’t drop F-bombs, there are all sorts of regulations to adhere to. This isn’t a “mistake†on Imus’s part: this is part of a longstanding pattern of behavior. Gwen Ifill as the cleaning lady; Howard Kurtz as the “boner-nosed beanie wearing Jew Boyâ€. The Williams sisters “belong in national geographic.â€
It strikes me, and you may disagree, that when you’re behind the microphone and reaching literally millions of people, that your “free speech†is much more powerful than others’ free speech (I could sit here in my office and call the rutgers’ team the same things as Imus, and no more than 3 people would hear me).
the government doesn’t have the right to abridge your free speech, but it is widely acknowledged that employers DO have that right, especially when you are representing them. So you can’t go on the air at MIT and say “Mayor Menino’s a dirty wop and his wife’s a cunt.†You’d get kicked off immediately, and your claim of free speech would be laughed at.
What is remarkable to me isn’t that Imus got shitcanned: it’s that he (and Limbaugh and the rest) has been protected for as long as he has. The FCC goes after Janet Jackson’s tits, and people like O’Really who have seriously exploited the end of the Fairness Doctrine get away with murder.
I agree with the “don’t like it don’t listen to it†argument, but WTF? It’s not like Imus was attacking some public figure like a Clinton or a Hilton. He abused the privilege that he had, that privilege being a perch at MSNBC from which whatever was on his mind was amplified and sent to millions of households.
No one’s taking Imus’s free speech away: they’re taking his talk show host job away because his standard “royal asshole†schtick finally offended enough people that there was a shitstorm.
April 12th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
Your counter-counterpoints are well taken. I just worry about the slide that it signifies. Ultimately, what is going to happen is Imus will get a satellite show and get paid even more money than he makes now. I feel bad for the Rutgers players, and you are right about the implication that they are not public figures in the way that someone like George Bush is.
Imus’s apology (which has been repeated on a number of occasions), at least as I took it, seemed sincere and contrite. Yes, he has apologized in the past for similar infractions, and the question of hypocrisy does need to be raised and discussed.
I do temper myself on air due to the FCC; in fact, I can’t understand how in the 18 years I have been on the air I have never once dropped an F-bomb from my own typically filthy mouth (the one exception being the time that our transmitter was down and we were doing radio web-only, so I and the host of Breakfast of Champions took advantage of it and did an f-bomb filled crossover — “Are you fucking done yet?” etc.). I don’t object to the discourse that occurs when people (rightly or wrongly) get offended. That is healthy. What I object to is the concept that censoring something that does not violate the already too strict principles of the FCC is now okay. It’s a dangerous turn.
April 13th, 2007 at 9:39 am
So, get to the point will ya?
April 17th, 2007 at 12:52 am
Saturday Night live did a better job getting to the point than I did.