First let me say I am not a Don Imus fan. Its just not my kind
of humor and that has nothing to do with politics or the objects
of his humor. Its just not what I consider funny. With that said
let me continue by saying I think the outcome of this mess is far
from just. Mr. Imus should not have said what he said just as
Snoop Dog should not say what he says in the lyrics of his music.
Mr. Imus calls it humor. Mr Snoop Dog calls it artistic
expression. Whatever you call it, it is in poor taste. The women on the Rutgers team are not at all what Mr. Imus called them. It is a fine team and if you look at the GPA's on any NCAA womens team they are stellar. The NCAA mens teams have a long way to go to even come close to the ladies GPA's. I have long been a fan of Tennessee and Pat Summits Program there. It is so much more than the game that is stressed in the womens programs. Things like respect, discipline, grades, rules, honor, and responsibility on and off the court are mandated. These programs are class acts. These women graduate at the top of their classes and in the case of Rutgers this years valedictorian plays for the team. So in the womens program the top ten is stressed rather than the 10 most wanted we all to often find in the mens programs.
Both Don Imus and Snoop Dog are wrong. When Snoop says its Artistic Expression what he fails to realize is that his listeners are often young men and his right to artistic expression become expression of a way of life for his listeners. It is how they view women. Maybe assessment on all sides irregardless of race needs to be honestly looked at.
And the sponsors, lol, the love to make a buck on these guys until it crosses that fine line and then its becomes Don who? Snoop who? Frankly I have a lot respect for Bigelow Teas who was to only Imus sponsor who didn't jump ship. All these huge companies supported Mr Imus' show for decades and made a lot of money. Where were their principles when he crossed other lines but there was no National Championship at stake? He didn't say in my opinion anything worse than he says daily. His mistake was his choice of forums. I am sure Don Imus will land on his feet as did Howard Stern. I also am pretty sure the satellite radio networks phone lines are burning up now trying to scoop up Mr. Imus for their programming.
When the Reverends Jackson and Sharpe care as mush about what is being broadcast over the airwaves daily using the same if not worse terms to describe women in Rap and other forms of music I will personally support any of their efforts. But, for now they must join the Hypocrite's Club right along with MS NBC, CBS, and the numerous sponsors of the Don Imus Show and let not leave out Snoop Dog and so many others too numerous to mention.
For now my advise is parents stop look and listen to all media that your children are exposed to. You are their best bet until other adults in the entertainment field get their acts together.
I want to leave you with this story which some of you may have heard. But it says it all when networks, sponsors and the like appear to be outraged by Mr. Imus' comments.
On a cold night a man was walking down a rural road. He comes across this snake and is amazed when it speaks to him. "Sir pick me up an put me inside your coat as if you dont I will surely freeze." Well, this guy isn't dumb. He tells the snake, "No your poisonous and if I do you will warm up and bite me and I will die." Well the snake implores him, "No kind sir I give you my word I will not harm you if you help me." Finally the man gives in, picks up the snake and puts him inside his coat. The snake warms up and bites him. The man rips the snake from inside his coat and throws him to the ground saying, " You gave me your word you wouldn't bite me." The snake looks up at him and says, "You knew what I was when you picked me up."
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 28
They also had a test that was given to black and white professionals who considered themselves to be non discriminatory...guess what....it was deep but it was there...I thought to myself at the time, I don't believe we can be a totally free of some type of discrimination....there is always someone that just rubs us the wrong way...but on a social scale, on a quality of life scale - we owe it to each other to fight it where ever we can...it is like a cancer and destroys more than it supports...and that goes for any color and any race...just my opinion...good article Carol...
The hip-hop/rap "artists" get a lot more leeway than everyone else does, regarding what they're allowed to say. I agree that it is not even close to being fair.
Are they getting special exemption because of their race or economic background? If so, that certainly doesn't seem right.
I also concur with a lot of people that Don Imus went beyond what is acceptable. I have never listened to his show, but if he's anything like Howard Stern, he's been outside of what should be permitted for a long time (perhaps his entire career), not just for this one highly publicized incident.
Regarding rap:
It seems that the rap genre is becoming a little artistic, or maybe I'm just starting to get used to it. Whatever the case, it still has lyrics that I find to be totally unacceptable. How radio stations are able to broadcast this stuff, without the FCC coming down on them, I have no idea. (This type of language was, not very long ago, cause to terminate a station's broadcast license, wasn't it?)
I believe that discontinuing Don Imus' show was the prudent thing to do, but I just don't perceive that it goes far enough, with others just as crass still being allowed to do their thing. It's my viewpoint that cleaning up the public entertainment industry is long overdue.
I agree with you "Wholeheartedly" on the fact that everything that has occurred with "Imuses" statement is fueled by the lost of dollars. The sponsors don't really care that he offended a group of young women that didn't deserve it. And as a "Black" female my self "It" is a statement that is offensive. And many of us dis agree with many of the lyric's used by some of the "Rappers" in their song's. And we also know that they are moved by the all mighty dollar. And even though we don't like it, I see the difefrence as Snoop doesn't name a particular person or group. Imus decided to choose a particular group of young ladies and take shot's at their character. And even though confusing, their is a difference. I have heard in the recent days member's of my community say "Imus" is probaly farmilar to H%$8. Since he married a young woman who obviously sold herself to a old man who had money. And one could call her a H*&5. Now if someone from the Black Community got on the airwaves and made that same statement she and he would probaly be upset! It would be based on unfounded acusations. All of the people that seek out Public Life need to watch what they say, whether in movies, music, or television. Sadly they are looked at as example's for our young people. I have talked to older and considered wiser Black's that don't agree with all the lyric's of the rap community. But they do agree with the fact that they have shown young people how to get out from under the foot of the promptor''s that robbed so many Entertainers in the 40, 50 up until. The kid's started producing their own CD's, showing that they could sale and market themselves. They have shown kid's how to set up small businesses and the need to educate themselves on managing their own business and money. And if this continue's their will be fewer Entertainer's dying broke, while the promoter is a millionaire. In this case Imus let the talk he use's behind closed door's or with his other white friends slip on the airwaves. He forgot to keep it "general" and got specfic his power got the best of him. And becuse he was messing with their money. The Sponsors dropped him. And as for Jackson and Sharpe I won't speak to their role because they don't speak for me....
Second--directing the remarks toward a group of college women is actually what got him in hot water--he's said as bad, if not worse about others, but since those people were in the public eye(politics, entertainers), it didn't bother anyone to this extent.
There is a difference between waving the "free speech" banner and understanding that the 1st ammendment does not protect you from being responsible about what you are saying.
With the filth being spewed by Columbia and Sony Records, I could not believe that anyone even noticed Imus.
Imus is an idiot and an insensitive jerk but so what! The world is full of them and they are only empowered when we give them attention.
Where is Jessie's indignant outrage when hip-hop and black comedians call me a white bread or cracker? (or worse)
What did Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson say that insulted anyone?
Imus exercised his right to free speech and the sponsors exercised their right to free speech. The end result was that Imus was fired. Even Imus had to know that this would be the outcome. Free speech is not free.
And i agree Mr Imus was exercising his rights and the penalty was too high. the sponsors didn't give a damn about what he said on a daily basis before why not ask yourself. i dont think they were at all honest.
Though, in some ways, I may have a deviation as to why I agree, the crux of the debate is quite obvious- Imus's firing plays out along racial lines; when in fact it is along Gender lines.
No one wants to admit that there is gender backlash that's raised it's ugly head the last few years [maybe as long as a decade now] and the only innoculated members allowed to spew any hatred seems to come from within the black community.
I've heard it once said that the reason that "African"-Americans can say what they say is because "... It's impossible for blacks to be racist; we don't have enough institutional power to be racist." [Cindi Sheehan- Florida State Congressional representative]
Hatred is hatred, and bigotry is bigotry- the deragatory remarks made by Imus deserved not only rebutal but rebuke. His 2 week suspension was certainly warranted and dare I say that a cut of his 2 weeks pay made out to a women's group as well as a general minority college fund would have been finally apropos.
Instead, we have what seems to be an endless debate concerning the neo-racist connotations of Imus's comments, when in fact the true deflection is pure gender bias. Imus thought he could get away with saying what he did because of his "entertainer status", his machismo and his 'notoriety'... He'd heard other entertainers get away with such rawkus insult throughout the years- Sam Kinneson, Andrew 'Dice' Clay, Eddie Murphy, Howard Stern- and I'm sure plenty of others.
Does his gender bias hurt him in the long run? Most likely. His age and the demographic group that would [willingly] listen to him has been stalwart, but declining since the early-to-mid 1990s. Only Imus fans actually listen to Imus- there's no 'new traffic' to speak of when it comes to him. His time- regardless of what people say he makes for a paycheck- in "Elvis Years" was just about up.
Now that he's had to swallow the bitter pill of his own arrogance and intollerance, he's about to hit the 'flushed' stage of his Elvis year.
Imus may have had nothing but the entertainment value of his statement meant.
But like most broad swept brushes, he's painted himself into more than just the one corner he's used to standing in [with his nose firmly planted].
Just as one very obvious example. A fat, middle aged white guy is perfectly free to go into the ghetto, find the biggest, meanest looking black guy there, you know the one with the prison tattoos all over him, punch him in the gut and call him a n***er. His freedom of speech allows it. There are, however consequences for his choice of words.
Every action, including the exercise of free speech, has a consequence of one sort or another. The constitution does not guarantee you freedom from the logical consequences of your choices.
I would answer: They called for all but the lynching of the 3 white guys who did NOT rape the stripper, for openers, Dear.
As Carolyn G so eloquently puts it - Don Imus got what Don Imus asked for.
Let's put this in another perspective for those of you who still want to thump the "Freedom of Speech" bucket:
Lets say Donnie the Geek didn't insult the gals from Rutgers. Lets say that instead, Donnie insulted... oh... one of the products made by each and every one of his sponsors. Called those products crap. Maybe even believed it. Really insulted the heck out of the products, on the air.
Would you say that the advertisers would have the right to pull their sponsorship from his show then?
What if Donnie were to have called his boss's wife a Cheap 2-bit Whore in front of the boss and his kids? Should Donnie keep his job?
Just like elections, our words have consequences. Just as Carolyn G. says - the Constitution doesn't protect you from the consequences.
Just because you CAN do something - doesn't mean you SHOULD.