Blogger Spurs US Radio Host's Firing

jas_public writes "The Wall Street Journal reports on the controversial events which ultimately led to the firing of radio shock jock Don Imus. 'At 6:14 a.m. on Wednesday, April 4, relatively few people were tuned into the "Imus in the Morning Show" ... Ryan Chiachiere was. A 26-year-old researcher in Washington, D.C., for liberal watchdog organization Media Matters for America, he was assigned to monitor Mr. Imus's program. Mr. Chiachiere clipped the video, alerted his bosses and started working on a blog post for the organization's Web site.' The article breaks down how that viral video clip and word of mouth outrage reached the ears of the presidents of CBS and MSNBC, ultimately leading to Imus' dismissal."

Comments

this whle Imus thing is insane

[YrWrstNtmr]

In an off the cuff remark, Imus calls the Rutgers girls "nappy headed hos". Moral outrage, Al and Jesse crank up their publicity machine, Imus gets fired.

Meanwhile, rapper DMX uses lyrics such as "what these bitches want from a nigga", and "I fuck with these hoes from a distance", and we hear cash registers.
Just as racist, just as misogynistic, just as insensitive.

And this was a liberal watchdog group? Gimme a break. I thought the left at least gave lip service to freedom of speech.

Re:this whle Imus thing is insane

[The Iso]

The words he used don't matter. If he had called the Rutgers girls "ugly and loose," it would have been just as bad. The thing is that he attacked the looks and morals of innocent women who've done nothing to inject themselves into public discourse.

Re:this whle Imus thing is insane

[pla]

Moral outrage

No. Mock indignation, so everyone can try to look "less racist" than everyone else.

Even his worst detractors don't seriously consider him a racist - Just another shock-jock using racially-charged language to make a buck.



Just as racist, just as misogynistic, just as insensitive.

C'mon, hasn't Chris Rock taught you anything? We show racial insensitivity. They (and it doesn't matter which "they" you refer to), as a repressed minority, subvert our vitriol to sardonically weaken our merciless blows.



Gimme a break. I thought the left at least gave lip service to freedom of speech

Nah, the right pretends to care about the bill of rights. The left pretends to care about "the children". Neither really does, of course, but let's get our pack-delusions straight here. ;-)



And FTR, I don't listen to his show (though I have left it perhaps three or four times while scanning channels, to listen to one of his guests)

Re:this whle Imus thing is insane

[stinerman]

No, this is the nanny-state "why can't we all get along" PC left that conservatives like to think is all that makes up the Democratic party.

This is manufactured outrage pure and simple. No one really thinks Imus had an intent to cause anyone grief. Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson need their names to be in the headlines at all times because they're media whores; that's their job. And of course the white PC left had to be just as outraged to prove to everyone that they aren't racists.

Imus was was just making an observation that the Rutgers team was mostly black and looked like gang members due to their tattoos. He phrased it in a politically incorrect manner, which is what got him canned. I believe it was George Carlin who said that language is neutral. It is intent that makes something offensive or not. Imus's intent was to make the point that the Rutgers team was more butch than the Tennessee players in a humorous way.

Of course, as you say if black people use those words in a derogatory manner, society gives them a pass (in fact, popular black culture seems to encourage their use). Either words are ok for everyone to use or they are ok for no one to use. Double standards are bullshit, plain and simple.

I'm white. I'm liberal. I'm not a racist. I thought it was funny. Anyone who was seriously offended by his remarks needs to grow up.

Re:this whle Imus thing is insane

[YrWrstNtmr]

The difference with rapper DMX is that he is not employed by someone who will sack him for perceived outrage. His performance is measured in how many CDs he sells, not how many people he does not manage to offend.

Imus' performance is measured in ad dollars. Nothing more. Some majors pulled out, he got sacked.

Re:this whle Imus thing is insane

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you actually think "freedom of speech" means? Hint: It does not mean nobody can stop you from insulting people on company time. Every time such stories come up here, I'm really a bit put off by the stupidity of the "freedom of speech" yelling that comes up. If the guy had had to go to jail, your comment might makes sense. He didn't, so it doesn't.

Re:this whle Imus thing is insane

[argStyopa]

Agreed. But what troubles me the most from the above summary was the phrase "A 26-year-old researcher in Washington, D.C., for liberal watchdog organization Media Matters for America, he was assigned to monitor Mr. Imus's program."

So from the *very* beginning, this was not a case of listeners being morally outraged; it was a matter of a leftish organization waiting for a conservative radio talk show host to say something that they could use politically. Granted, everyone knows that both sides do this and on a purely tactical level, it was idiotic of Mr. Imus to GIVE them material to work with. But does anyone else object to this? Who *wouldn't* run afoul of the the Thought Police if they had people "assigned" to monitor their speech?

Ironic and probably surprising to some that it was the Left (generally positioned as the side most concerned with Free Speech issues) who issued this particular politi-fatwa.

Re:this whle Imus thing is insane

[TheoMurpse]

Warning, epithets are used for discussion purposes in this post:

The thing is that he attacked the looks and morals of innocent women who've done nothing to inject themselves into public discourse.

Except, you know, play basketball for one of the top teams in the nation. Imus's insults were no different than if he'd spoken ill of a B-list movie star. He didn't single out an individual, he insulted a famous team; this is analogous to insulting a person of similar fame.

What he said was idiotic, but the reaction was ridiculous. I mean, holy shit. He called them "nappy headed hos." The only part of that phrase that is an insult is "hos." Kind of by definition most of the girls on the team have worn their hair nappy before -- "nappy" describes the natural state of the hair of people of African descent.

Hell, the producer of the show fucking called them jigaboos, and nothing happened to him! Some people have wanted to get Imus fired for a while, and they used this time as the way to do it. Of course CBS has every right to fire him; I don't have much of a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is the hypocrisy coming from the liberals here. To speak in incredibly general terms, I've been gradually becoming a liberal the past few years, and this is one of those things that I really hate about many liberals in the US -- it's OK to speak your mind as long as you don't insult a minority. If Imus had called the golf team a bunch of bitches (80% of the team is white), nothing would have happened to him.

In summary, Imus called a bunch of black basketball players "hos." Some people raised a stink, and he got fired. So many people get away with so much worse every single day, and nothing happens to them. In my opinion, that's how it should be. The more you clamp down on racist speech, the more people will rebel. How many people do you think are talking today about "those fucking niggers who got Don fired"?

Re:this whle Imus thing is insane

[c6gunner]

Ironic and probably surprising to some that it was the Left (generally positioned as the side most concerned with Free Speech issues) who issued this particular politi-fatwa.

Not surprising at all, since "the left" is responsible for most of the speech repression in our society, as well as for the vast majority of university speech codes. The theory goes something like this: you're free to say anything you want as long as it's supportive of overthrowing the Bush administration, or wiping Israel off the map. If you fail to support those two causes, you're a neoconbushitlernazi and must be silenced ASAP.

Just look at the controversy you're talking about. Minority groups and traditionally "liberal" organizations were asking for this guy's head on a pole, while conservatives like Michelle Malkin were defending him. And Don Imus is a liberal!! This isn't a case of partisan politics, but it should be a clear indication of which political ideology is more supportive of free speech.

This is not a good thing

[eventhorizon82G]

This is certainly something that we, as a country, should not be proud of. It is a horrible sign of the times we live in that we have so-called watchdog groups hiring people to monitor radio and television broadcasts for "offensive" material for the sole purpose of attempting to rally their censorship team to fire the person who had the audacity to let loose an insensitive remark. What happened to the mentality of "I hate everything you stand for and have to say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."? Unfortunately this issue is endemic in the United States today. There are very large segments of the population of a wide range of ethnicities that cross party lines who simply are looking for any excuse to be offended and recoil in mock outrage; they are tearing this country apart at the seams.

Re:This is not a good thing

[CRCulver]

What happened to the mentality of "I hate everything you stand for and have to say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."?

That mentality is still around. People have a right to say what they want, the government is not getting involved here and imprisoning Imus. However, though Imus has a right to say whatever he wants, other people have the right to make their displeasure know and convince his employer that continuing to employ Imus would be detrimental to their business.

Lesson from this debacle

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a lesson to be learned from all of this. When the PC police comes after you for denigrating people of the wrong race, gender, etc ... show some spine! Apologies and visits with Al Sharpton, et al did nothing to prevent him from spiralling into unemployment. Now he is a loser in everyone's eyes. If he had said something like "I refuse to apologize! Looking back it was kind of a dumb thing to say but I say dumb things sometimes, so deal with it! Any harm on these girls is the doing of the media, not me, since they weren't listening to my show," well he'd still have a lot of enemies but he'd at least have the respect of the subset of Americans who believes you can call somebody with nappy hair "nappy-headed" without having committed some kind of capital crime.

"Blogging" is the most overrated thing ever

[Bryan Ischo]

It seems like every day there are two or three stories on Slashdot that try to hype up the importance of "blogging". Why, just because someone put a really retarded sounding name on the concept of writing web pages, is blogging such a hyped thing?

It reminds me of the early days of Slashdot, when *anything* having to do with Linux was featured in big bold headlines like it was a miracle. This has toned down a little bit over the years but even today the hype factor for Linux on this site is a bit annoying (and I am a huge fan of Linux, it's the reason I started reading Slashdot back in '97 - despite the hyping of everything Linux, it was a good place to get news when such news sources were scarce).

I can't shake the feeling that people who don't really understand "them Internets" hear a word that has no meaning - "blog" - and assume that it just must be something really cool and important. Because really, it isn't. I nearly hurled at the idiocy of it all the first time I heard the word "blogosphere".

Re:It should be obvious

[YrWrstNtmr]

This is also in the land that went bezerk over a nipple

This is the land where the media went berzerk over a nipple...

So, how does your own medicine taste?

[Anonymous Coward]

After the radical and rabid years of the forceful rigging of every media by the Moral Watchdogs of the Right, "Focus on the Family" et al., stomping everything that doesn't match their party rhetoric into the dirt, savaging the freedom of speech for decades, getting not just individuals fired but whole companies shut down, one, single, solitary Rightie Radio host steps down when he was obviously a few weeks from retirement anyway, and oh-how-you-all-yell now at the injustice.

Color you blue.

Yes, mob rage obliterating free speech *is* a bad thing. Good point. We'll remind you of that when the wholesale slaughter of the free media which you happen not to agree with continues tomorrow.

There's a framing alignment issue here

[Spirald]

I'm hearing a lot about this story from the perspective of Imus being singled out for saying "nappy headed ho", whereas others (insert random Hip Hop artist here) are not "fired" for saying similar things. This meme appears to be diverting much attention and energy from the both the actual cause of the outrage, and, conveniently for those politicians concerned, from an steaming pile of accumulating scandals in the US executive branch.

IMHO, the actual cause of the outrage is that Imus made an unprovoked derogatory slur on national media against a -specific- group of women, simply because they were female and black. This was basically a public sucker punch against an innocent group of actual, real life young women with parents, relatives and friends.

Can anyone here reasonably say that if a popular, well known personality, on national TV and radio, called your wife or daughter or good friend a (insert race specific stereotype) (insert culture specific derogatory slang for whore), you wouldn't want to defend them at least by complaining to their employer? What if this crap was directed against your team, business, or place of worship?

Somehow this is getting played into making folks look like they're supporting censorship, and it appears to be some sort of insidious dividing tactic that splits folks into the false dichotomy of "if you don't support commercialized hate speech, you support big brother censorship". Man, we are so getting played here.

The really scary aspect of this.

[joedoc]

When conservatives raised hell in 2004 regarding Ted Rall's racist depiction of Condoleezza Rice in one of his cartoons, the reaction was curious. The issue was largely ignored by most of the media, and the conservative commentators, websites and blogs that did rail against it were pretty much told to just shut up. Rall's cartoons are still carried by his syndicate and many newspapers.

Someone posted comments earlier about the alleged irony that a "liberal watchdog group" pulled the trigger on the Imus fiasco. But the real scary thing is the working of one sentence in the story:

A 26-year-old researcher in Washington, D.C., for liberal watchdog organization Media Matters for America, he was assigned to monitor Mr. Imus's program.

Wow. "...assigned to monitor Mr. Imus..."

Now, since my liberal friends and foes are always screaming about the alleged erosion of their constitutional rights, and some believe it's necessary to make specious claims, such as comparing George Bush and Hitler, doesn't it concern anyone that this "liberal media group" is "assigning" their staff to "monitor" radio personalities? Do you not have a picture of a room full of people, hunched over their desks with headsets on, pen in hand, jotting down any comments they perceive to be offensive to someone? Then reporting to some self-proclaimed arbiter of political and social correctness for action?

I have to wonder what else they plan to "monitor" if their like-minded compatriots ever regain full political power.

Re:Credit where credit is due

[debest]

It wasn't his comment that got him fired. Like you said, he's apparently said lots of similar (perhaps worse) stuff on his program before. If it was the comment that got him fired, then by that logic he would have been fired years ago.

No, here's what led him to getting fired...
1) He makes an inappropriate, racist comment.
2) Someone senses opportunity to make political hay and gets the mainstream media involved.
3) Sharpton and Jackson get indignant and get more media involved.
4) ** Major advertisers start pulling out of Imus' show **
5) Imus is fired.

Imus does *not* get fired unless #4 happens. To WFAN and MSNBC, this is strictly about money, nothing else. When the controversy started, they mostly just poo-pooed the critism of Imus. When the firestorm started in earnest, they suspended him for two weeks (hoping that this action would quell the controversy, and Imus could go back to being host of their top show). But when it didn't stop and the networks started seeing real dollar losses as a result of sponsers pulling out, it was over. No major sponsers were ever going to be associated with Imus ever again, and he instantly became an albatros to the networks' bottom line. Whoever replaces him permanently will probably not get the same ratings as Imus would have. Hell, his ratings now would be *huge*. But ratings aren't the issue: it's revenue, and if no one wants their name attached to Imus, he's toast.

All the racist comments in the world would not have gotten Imus fired. All the indignation in the world would not have gotten Imus fired. Money got him fired.

This article is baloney

[dirtyhippie]

As someone who used to work for Media Matters, I can tell you there is a whole lot wrong with this writeup in the WSJ.

For starters, there is nothing approaching blogging involved. Media Matters has hired a number of prominent bloggers to work with them, but an organization with offices on K Street in Washington DC, with a staff of about 50, is a far stretch from what folks think of when they think of a blogger. The researchers write their articles to a very precise formula, and then the editorial staff "correct" them and the process goes back and forth quite a number of times before anything is published. Not exactly what the image of the term blogger conjures up, but Media Matters sure likes when people make that mistake.

What's happening here is not Media Matters discovering this horrible outrage and then alerting the rest of the world to it - what's happening is Media Matters trying to take credit for Imus's firing because they monitored his show. They monitor dozens of shows per day, and pick up every off color comment like this and document it over and over again.

Now, if you buy the stereotyped liberal "whiner" point of view, this is indicative of the whole media being a bunch of foul-mouthed bigots. And said bigots having a whole lot of staying power for not getting shit-canned more often. But if you think about it for a second, it's really just Media Matters shooting a spray of bullets, pointing out every time anyone says anything off color, and then taking credit when people get outraged about it because they documented it "first".

The unfortunate thing is that lots of well meaning and powerful leftist funders give Media Matters money because they fail to see this subterfuge, or maybe because they are "whining liberals" themselves.

It's really more indicative of a more general problem in Washington DC - folks there think that everything that happens in our democracy can be traced back to some pressure group inside the beltway. They don't believe in this thing called "grassroots". I wish I could say they are fools, but reluctantly I must admit that they are frighteningly close to correct in many cases - but not this one.

Re:"Attacked" them? You sure?

[Megane]

Exactly... as opposed to Sharpton and Jackson, who actually ruined the lives of a couple of "rich white guy" lacrosse players (also college sports players) accused of rape, who not only got away with destroying their lives (as opposed to just hurting their feelings with a few badly chosen words), but Jackson is giving the accuser a free college education!

The moral of the story? You can say whatever you want and get away with it... if you're black. Otherwise watch out for the "hit squads" listening to your radio show at every hour, even when nobody else is.

Re:Please Explain

[NtroP]

Your statement implies that some thigs are only racist depending on the color of the speaker's skin.

Uh, yep. That's about the size of it. If a black man walked up to me and said "Yo, honkey, what up?" No one would think anything of it. Remember: Only white people can be racist. Only men can be sexist. Only straight people can be narrow-minded ("homophobic"). Did you not get the memo?

As a straight, white, male I'm fucked. All my beliefs, feeling and motives are suspect and to be derided. I'm guilty of all of these offenses before I even open my mouth. I have to come up with lame justifications every day that "my best friends are crippled, black lesbians", just to "defend" myself.

The saddest part is, simply by posting this sarcastic rant, I've already convinced everyone that I'm all of these things, and worse. Add to that the fact that I'm a Christian that believes in evolution and I've pretty much hated by everyone.

On the plus side, I don't use Windows.

All a business decision

[Simonetta]

My nonsense detector is going off with this latest Imus thing. I suspect that the media powers that be are about 1/3 concerned about what they superficially claim to be concerned with, that is the 'offensiveness and inappropriateness of the remarks', and about 2/3's concerned about getting out of the huge contract that they signed with Imus.
    They can't be making money off his show or they wouldn't have fired him. Plain and simple. Now that he has been 'fired for cause', there has to be some clause in his multi-million dollar contract that allows the radio corporation to get out of paying him. In America, you can usually find out what is happening in the background by following the money.
    I'm quite sure that after a month or two, Imus will be back on the air. Most likely through a satellite radio service like Howard Stern is. He'll be paid somewhat less than what he was on broadcast and a lot less than Mr. Stern (whose contract is choking the satellite radio company that signed him). But he'll be back.

    The other poster was right, Imus was fired because Euro-Americans are not allowed to say anything non-reverential about anyone who isn't Euro-American. African Americans can say anything about anyone, no matter how violent, libelous, or insane, just as long as they have a synthetic electronic drum beat in the background, use a loud angry voice, and frame their speech inside childish inane rhymes.

    Don't take these people seriously. Remember, we control the technology, and therefore we ultimately control the people who depend upon technology.

Blacks have opposed degrading lyrics for years

[Reverberant]

So, black rappers, black people, and other such and such groups are going to use some offensive slang ant it wont be counted as offensive, but when a white person uses them it will be SO bad an offense that it will cause them to be fired.

"Black people"? I'm black. My family and friends are black. We will not tolerate the use of those words in out presence. I think you meant to say "some black people."

Rappers? Yep, many do use those words. And believe it or not, both Al and Jesse, as well as many other influential blacks like Oprah, Rosa Parks, Bill Cosby and Chuck D have been been going after misogynistic and violent lyrics for some time

So why is this stuff so pervasive in rap music? This movie address the question, and the answer is simple: because it sells. Kirk Franklin and Yolanda Adams can produce all kinds of uplifting music, but as long as Eminem and 50 Cent sell 10 million albums, people are going to make music in that vein - and by the way, once a rap album crosses the 750,000 sales mark, it's not just black people buying it.

Just like in the Imus case: follow the money. The same people who are suing grandmothers are also the ones facilitating the production, marketing and distribution.

Re:Most women basketball players are hideous.

[NtroP]

the only race-conscious person you can think of is black

Uhmm. What I said was "We only have one person (out of about 120 at my building) that immediately springs to mind as "black"". I said nothing about them being the only "race-concious" person. We've got several people who spring to mind as "redneck", they flaunt their southern roots from their drawls, pickups and union jacks to their belt-buckles. If you had asked me if I worked with any rednecks, I'd be able to count them easily. We have 2 people who spring to mind as "Polish" (they're great people and I consider one of them my friend, but her polish accent is so thick you could cut it with a knife). If you had asked if I work with any Poles, I'd think of them. We have a *very* Puerto-Rican guy that who is iconic for playing the "Hey, I'm just a dumb Puerto-Rican..." and "What do joo know, white-boy...?" routine. That's what he's known for. It's his "shtick" (No offense intended to any Jews out there). If you had asked if I work with any Puerto-Ricans, I'd have said yes - but in this case if you asked how many, only one springs easily to mind, I'd have to really think about the others.

These are the people who draw obvious attention to their race, gender, orientation, or "subgroup". This is not necessarily a bad thing. It's just a fact. It's like that scene in City Slickers where the black dentists are talking to the other tourists and the younger dentist says "Yes, we're black AND we're dentists - don't make a issue out of it." and his father turns to him as says "Son, they're not making an issue of it. The only one making an issue of it here, is you."

I've been working for my company for more than 10 years and I swear, every time I have to go through the same, tired, "Race and Healing" seminar it drives me nuts. It seems we have an entire department who's only job is to point out how "different" we all are and how we (white people) can never fully understand just how oppressed everyone else is. Fuck! I never kept slaves. None of my ancestors did either. I dated a "person of color" when I was in college, english is my second language, I grew up in a non-American country and culture, and I'm married to a Polack. This doesn't make me a better person than anyone else. It just makes me who I am.

I'm tired of the insinuation by you ("...anyone who thinks that racism problem is a problem with blacks is ... well, pretty obviously white") that I must be racist because I'm white (or even that I am "white", as if my Dutch ancestry has no validity except to make me "white"). I'm tired of my employer making me sit through the same stupid seminar every year. Why do we have to go out of our way to point out how different we all are. And by different, they mean how "white people" are different from specific non-whites. Somehow they don't seem to include the Asians, Mexicans or Puerto-Ricans. I must be a total racist asshole, because I lose more and more respect for "minorities" every time I have to sit though that. The guy in the next office over does the same job I do, has the same education and certifications I do, gets paid the same amount I do, brings his dishes to the same office potlucks I do. How am I supposed to treat him? We get along great until that fucking class every year and then shit gets all uncomfortable for a while before we settle back to just being "friends, coworkers and competent professional who were hired to do a job". I know he hates it, even more so since he's not required to go.

It would almost make everything much easier to just fucking BE a racist. It seems to be what they want and expect from me.