|
|
|
|
Mycroft
Skeptic Friend
USA
427 Posts |
 Posted - 04/14/2007 : 21:01:20
|
quote:
At 6:14 a.m. on Wednesday, April 4, relatively few people were tuned into the "Imus in the Morning Show" when Don Imus referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed ho's."
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.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB117641076468168180-7y8vXi_eMhvWtEoPiK397ZUoIBc_20070513.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top/
I've never heard Imus in the morning and I certainly think the comment behind this controversy was in extremely poor taste, but I can't help seeing another angle on this.
Lots of morning radio hosts say shocking and outrageous things. This isn't a defense of what Imus said, I'm just pointing out that it's his job to be shocking and outrageous. It's what morning radio personalities do.
In whipping up this frenzy, isn't Media Matters playing a part in creating the sort of homogenized monotonous media landscape they claim will happen through corporate media ownership?
And then we have this:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704120010
quote:
It's not just Imus
On April 11, NBC News announced that it … has fired Imus and would cease broadcasting his radio show. But as Media Matters for America has extensively documented, bigotry and hate speech targeting, among other characteristics, race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and ethnicity continue to permeate the airwaves through personalities such as Glenn Beck, Neal Boortz, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage, Michael Smerconish, and John Gibson.
The article goes on to list specific quotes from each of these people they apparently feel are equally as outrageous with the clear implication that they think the rest of these personalities should be fired as well.
Does Media Matters really champion diversity? Or only “correct” diversity?
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 04:49:56 [Permalink]
|
Let me get this straight, Mycroft: Are you saying that shock jocks who attack people on the basis of "race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and ethnicity" are examples of this endangered "diversity" thing?
Me, I thought that varying flavors of "race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and ethnicity" were examples of where diversity lies, not in the very bigots who attack them.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 04/15/2007 : 05:19:34 [Permalink]
|
Would that it were only Imus. As it stands, the poor bastard is taking the heat for others of the ilk. quote:
It's not just Imus
On April 11, NBC News announced that it was dropping MSNBC's simulcast of Imus in the Morning in the wake of the controversy that erupted over host Don Imus' reference to the Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos." The following day, CBS president and CEO Leslie Moonves announced that CBS -- which owns both the radio station that broadcast Imus' program and Westwood One, which syndicated the program -- has fired Imus and would cease broadcasting his radio show. But as Media Matters for America has extensively documented, bigotry and hate speech targeting, among other characteristics, race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and ethnicity continue to permeate the airwaves through personalities such as Glenn Beck, Neal Boortz, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage, Michael Smerconish, and John Gibson.
I wonder, might this episode be an harbinger for the demise of obscene radio? One can hope.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 06:33:11 [Permalink]
|
THis whole thing leaves a bad taste, all the way around.
Very tasteles, definitly.
Tried in the court of public opinion bu Sharpton and Jackson. Please.... No room to talk on the subject by either of them.
I am happy he was fired, because there is no place for this in civil society, IMHO. However, the fact that people still look to Jackson or Sharpton for matters such as this smacks of the kind of hypocrisy, as their opinions on the matter are moot, as are the people who follow their lead.
Race as an issue in th form of what Imus said is bullshit. I am suppossed to be outraged by the impact of what he said on race relations? ROFLMAO. Those girls were maligned, true. but we are allmaligned by the focus of this, and the refusal to look at the jury for what they are.
It is also very funny and very sad that in the end, Imus lands a better deal, Sharpton and Jackson get another leg up on their bullshit platform, and the girls are forgotten.
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 08:40:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Does Media Matters really champion diversity? Or only “correct” diversity?
Shock jocks are not serious commentators. They do not inform people. Instead, they say what they say to build their careers as angry clowns. Those who agree with them listen to them to feel better about themselves. Those who disagree with them listen to feel the surge of their blood pressure increase. Everyone else who listens to them doesn't take them seriously and just enjoys being shocked by what they say - in other words, shock jocks are entertainment. They might talk about politics and go into some details, but they tell everything so incredibly slant, it cannot be considered any kind of informative analysis.
I think it is good if they are removed from mainstream airwaves simply because I want to live in a society that has higher standards for political discourse. My mother recently lamented that when she was younger people on the left and right argued and debated a lot, but they usually didn't hate each other. Tons of journalists and academics at this point have written about the increasing polarization of politics in the media. Shock jocks have contributed to the left and the right hating each other. And people who hate each other will not listen, will not cooperate, will not compromise, and have a hard time changing their mind even when they are obviously wrong. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Mycroft
Skeptic Friend
USA
427 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 14:15:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Let me get this straight, Mycroft: Are you saying that shock jocks who attack people on the basis of "race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and ethnicity" are examples of this endangered "diversity" thing?
In a sense, yes.
Imus is an idiot, and his comment wasn't funny. But ultimately freedom demands the freedom to make wrong choices. If we are restricted only to choices someone else deems as "correct", then we really have no freedom.
That's why the ACLU will go to the mat to protect the rights of Nazis and klansmen. It's not because they like them and approve of what they say, it's because they recognize a greater principle is at stake. That principle is that individuals should decide for themselves what is and is not acceptable speech.
In an ideal world, Imus would be off the air because his fans reject his racism and stop listening to him. Instead what we have is being targeted by a campaign from a small group of people who have decided for the larger group that he shouldn't be listened to; a scenario that closely mirrors what happened to the Dixie Chicks.
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Me, I thought that varying flavors of "race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and ethnicity" were examples of where diversity lies, not in the very bigots who attack them.
There is more than one kind of diversity. The kind I'm talking about is diversity of thoughts and opinions.
|
|
|
|
Mycroft
Skeptic Friend
USA
427 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 14:30:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Shock jocks are not serious commentators. They do not inform people. Instead, they say what they say to build their careers as angry clowns. Those who agree with them listen to them to feel better about themselves. Those who disagree with them listen to feel the surge of their blood pressure increase. Everyone else who listens to them doesn't take them seriously and just enjoys being shocked by what they say - in other words, shock jocks are entertainment. They might talk about politics and go into some details, but they tell everything so incredibly slant, it cannot be considered any kind of informative analysis.
Very much the same can be said about comedians. One could even argue that shock jocks are a kind of comedian.
The issue shouldn't be if you like them or not, but if you trust someone else making the decision for you if you're allowed to listen to them. For myself I don't remember if I've ever listened to Imus before, I wouldn't listen to him in the future if his show was brought back, but I'm more than a little disturbed that a relatively small group was able to whip up enough controversy about him that I will no longer be allowed to listen to him.
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
I think it is good if they are removed from mainstream airwaves simply because I want to live in a society that has higher standards for political discourse.
I agree. I just disagree that those higher standards of political discourse should be attained through censorship of any kind. I think a better way to achieve that is for people on both sides to try bridge-building instead of polarization. That means making an effort to see where the other side has valid points, and to try to understand where the misunderstandings and stereotypes come from.
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 14:55:51 [Permalink]
|
| Christopher Hitchens had a very interesting lecture on this topic. He essentially said the same thing as Mycroft and it is a point I tend to agree with. No matter which kind of speech you are talking about, who would you trust with the decision of what you should be allowed to hear. I think that if we think about it, the answer has to be "nobody but me myself is sufficiently qualified to determine what I should be allowed to hear". I know I can trust me with the decision to not listen to something. I'm very good at turning of the television or radio when someone else is on who isn't worth my time (which makes for me not watching tv or listening to the radio much). I don't want anybody else to determine this for me, nor would I want to determine this for anybody else. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 19:06:17 [Permalink]
|
Mycroft replied: quote:
That's why the ACLU will go to the mat to protect the rights of Nazis and klansmen. It's not because they like them and approve of what they say, it's because they recognize a greater principle is at stake. That principle is that individuals should decide for themselves what is and is not acceptable speech.
And the ACLU is right to do so, but those cases have nothing to do with the Imus firing. You are framing this as though it were a First Amendment case. MSNBC and CBS pulled the plug on Imus because of monetary concerns, only after sponsors dropped him. And those sponsors dropped Imus not because of his racism per se. but because of the potential of a boycott of their products, or at least a negative association of them with Imus. No governmental censorship was involved.
It was just business.
Unfortunately, it falls into the lap of people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to point out Imus' rascism, because others didn't. MSNBC and CBS just tried to give him a two-week suspension, hoping their cash cow would survive. Not just those two African-American activists, but everyone with a sense of decency should have been hollering for Imus' head. I thank Sharpton and Jackson for doing the necessary corporate jiu-jitsu.
Remember, folks, the phrase was "nappy-headed hos." That wasn't just a little racist, it was about as bad as words can get. Filthy said it best: These athletes are someone's children. Imus make the crack in the private sector, as a paid mouth for corporate interests. He who pay the piper calls the tune, and the ultimate payer is the comsumer.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 04/15/2007 19:09:41 |
|
|
|
Mycroft
Skeptic Friend
USA
427 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 21:07:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
And the ACLU is right to do so, but those cases have nothing to do with the Imus firing. You are framing this as though it were a First Amendment case. MSNBC and CBS pulled the plug on Imus because of monetary concerns, only after sponsors dropped him. And those sponsors dropped Imus not because of his racism per se. but because of the potential of a boycott of their products, or at least a negative association of them with Imus. No governmental censorship was involved.
I'm not framing it as a First Amendment case, clearly it is not. The corporate entities that fired Imus had every right to do so in exactly the same way corporate owned radio stations had the right to ban the Dixie Chicks when they became controversial. I'm not trying to claim these corporations didn't have the legal right to makes these decision, clearly they did.
However the issue of who decides what we are allowed to listen to is the same. I don't really want to listen to Imus, but neither do I want some political activist from Media Matters making that decision for me.
In a sense, it's even more insidious than government censorship. If the government does it, at least then I know who I can write to express my displeasure, and if they don't listen, I can vote against him and campaign for his opponent.
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMoonerIt was just business.
Except it's not. It's businesses being manipulated by threats and intimidation to censor what the rest of us can hear. You approve of it in this case because you agree on the issues, but potentially this same kind of manipulation could be used to censor speech you favor. Can you imagine conservative Christian organizations threatening boycotts to get science shows that talk about evolution off the air? Or maybe trying to get shows that show gay relationships in a positive way removed? I can imagine that, and I bet you can too. I bet further that if/when it happens, you won't be saying ”It's just business.”
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMoonerRemember, folks, the phrase was "nappy-headed hos." That wasn't just a little racist, it was about as bad as words can get. Filthy said it best: These athletes are someone's children. Imus make the crack in the private sector, as a paid mouth for corporate interests. He who pay the piper calls the tune, and the ultimate payer is the comsumer.
Calling college athletes “nappy-headed hoes” is about as ignorant as you can get, but it's not so outrageous when you consider his job is to say stupid things.
But saying that the consumer is calling the shots here is just plain wrong. Imus has an audience, and his audience is fine with these statements. The one calling the tune here is Ryan Chiachiere and Media Matters, and they're doing it by whipping up a manufactured event to intimidate the ones that pay the piper.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 21:21:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mycroft
For myself I don't remember if I've ever listened to Imus before, I wouldn't listen to him in the future if his show was brought back, but I'm more than a little disturbed that a relatively small group was able to whip up enough controversy about him that I will no longer be allowed to listen to him.
What HalfMooner said. You can still listen to Imus, just go find him and become his friend. Nobody is preventing you from hearing whatever he might have to say, because he's still free to stand up on a soapbox outside CBS studios and talk all he wants, if he so chooses.
We've only banned a few non-spammers here at the SFN, and at least one of them tried to make a First Amendment issue out of it. But he was free to start his own Website anytime he liked. We certainly were not censoring him, as we have no power at all to do so.
Similarly, CBS Radio cannot prevent Imus from speaking his mind on any of a number of different sorts of broadcast media. But they are completely within their rights to assert their power to prevent him from broadcasting on their airwaves or their Websites.
And because Imus didn't immediately announce his intention to sue CBS Radio for breach of contract, I have to assume that the firing was legal, and written up in his contract. There's no censorship going on here: all there is is CBS exercising clauses within a contract that led to the termination of that contract, because Imus failed to meet the standards set in certain other clauses of that contract. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 23:12:10 [Permalink]
|
Mycroft said:
quote:
But saying that the consumer is calling the shots here is just plain wrong. Imus has an audience, and his audience is fine with these statements. The one calling the tune here is Ryan Chiachiere and Media Matters, and they're doing it by whipping up a manufactured event to intimidate the ones that pay the piper.
The show's sponsors started pulling ads. That had to be a major consideration in firing him.
I would agree that the response to his remarks is massively excessive, that firing him and the constant beating he is getting in the media are undeserved, but I can't say that the corporations he worked for don't have the right to fire him. He works under a contract, probably one with mutual escape clauses.
This is also not much of a free speech issue.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/16/2007 : 06:42:14 [Permalink]
|
Mycroft noted:quote:
Calling college athletes “nappy-headed hoes” is about as ignorant as you can get, but it's not so outrageous when you consider his job is to say stupid things.
Here's an idea for the networks to chew over: How about not hiring people to say stupid things? And who the Hell hires the genius programming directors who do so deliberately?
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 04/16/2007 : 06:59:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
And who the Hell hires the genius programming directors who do so deliberately?
It's what the market wants - to a point. The corporate sponsors are aiming to take the money of the people who want to hear stupid, but not too stupid, stuff said on the radio, and to get more corporate sponsors aiming for the same market, one needs to hire a programming director who knows his/her stupid inside and out. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 04/16/2007 : 07:08:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Imus is an idiot, and his comment wasn't funny. But ultimately freedom demands the freedom to make wrong choices. If we are restricted only to choices someone else deems as "correct", then we really have no freedom.
We are in complete agreement, here. But I would like to add that we also have the freedom to pay through the nose for those wrong choices. And this too, is as it should be.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 04/16/2007 : 10:23:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mycroft
You approve of it in this case because you agree on the issues, but potentially this same kind of manipulation could be used to censor speech you favor. Can you imagine conservative Christian organizations threatening boycotts to get science shows that talk about evolution off the air? Or maybe trying to get shows that show gay relationships in a positive way removed? I can imagine that, and I bet you can too. I bet further that if/when it happens, you won't be saying ”It's just business.”
Both of those have already happened, and it's just business. When it isn't just business - when it's public libraries and public schools being messed with - that's when it really matters. CBS Radio can bend to pressure from the Union of Singing Monks and choose to broadcast nothing but Gregorian chants for all I care. Having a wallet large enough to force the removal of a single commentator (or all of them, for that matter) from a privately owned radio network isn't censorship, it's sponsorship. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Corporate Media Homogenization
