[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
And this is how in the year 2007 we began to lose our Free Speech…[/quote]
I don’t think this is about free speech in the traditional sense. The FCC hasn’t taken any action, and neither has any other governmental agency or arm. The courts aren’t even being used to enforce some sort of social policy through a tort case.
Essentially, Sharpton, Jackson, et al were using their free speech to criticize Imus and call for a boycott. A boycott is also an exercise of free speech. Advertisers pulled back, and Imus’ two private corporate employers, CBS and NBC, respectively, decided to terminate him per provisions of his contract.
Now, that’s completely aside from any underlying argument about the merits of any complaints and/or responses.
Imus’ comments were stupid and regrettable – his apology was ill conceived and defensive – whoever advised him to go on Al Sharpton’s radio show should be summarily fired – and the response is overblown.
I don’t want to just repeat stuff that’s already been said, so allow me two minor takes of my own.
First, I find it hard to get too worked up about the fact that Imus essentially got screwed over by his employers. On a personal level, I hate his show, and there is a fat chick in my apartment building who constantly wants to watch it in our apartment gym on the mornings when I go in there to do some cardio – she sits on the exercise bike, pedals at about 2 mph and talks to no one in particular about Imus. I’m not going to miss that.
Also on a personal level, he is a creepy, androgenous, mummified little bully with dubious analytical skills whom some people quote as a font of wisdom – kind of like Howard Stern, but not as funny.
But he still got screwed, by employers who weren’t thinking about their own long term interests but were instead bowing to a politically correct tempest in a teacup. Howard Stern got it right - Imus should have made one brief apology and then told all the hustlers to stuff it.
He made millions for CBS and NBC, had decent ratings due to the dubious tastes of his audience, and the people he pissed off weren’t part of his audience’s demographic. Of course, if Imus himself had handled it more adroitly it probably would have gone away and he could go back to making them money – now he’ll probably go to Sirius or something.
On the “racist” charge: “Nappy headed” in and of itself, is about as racist as “dark skinned.” It’s a descriptive term related to a racial characteristic that is not in any way derogatory.
In fact, it’s actively promoted by at least part of the black community - a book search on Amazon.com with key phrase “nappy hair” returned 767 results:
Nappy Hair by Carolivia Herron, Going-Natural: How to Fall in Love With Nappy Hair by Mireille Liong-a-Kong, Sculptured Nails and Nappy Hair by Lincoln Park, Nappy Hair 101 by Ayana Hardin, Happy to be Nappy by Bell Hooks, to name but a few.
In the context of what he said, it was obviously meant as part of a derogatory comment - particularly as it modified “hos” - but the level of reaction seems quite unjustified. It is not the same thing as if he dropped an N-bomb - it’s not even in the same ballpark, in the same city, or the same geographical region.
Sharpton and Jackson are cheap hustlers, and it is unfortunate that this incident gave them a chance to attention-whore themselves out yet again.
One small point of light, depending on your own proclivities: The Democrats lost a key point of outreach to get their message out to white male independents, who make up the bulk of Imus’ audience.
See this LAT piece: Democrats have lost a soapbox with firing
Imus loved to pretend he was serious and have Democrats (and Republicans - but they have more outlets to that audience) on his show.