Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WSJ: Behind the Fall of Imus, A Digital Brush Fire (Great Timeline Inside Story)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-13-07 04:16 PM
Original message
WSJ: Behind the Fall of Imus, A Digital Brush Fire (Great Timeline Inside Story)
Edited on Fri Apr-13-07 04:22 PM by RamboLiberal
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.

Yesterday, after eight days of dizzying activity, CBS pulled the plug on Mr. Imus's hugely successful radio show. One day earlier, MSNBC had canceled its broadcast of the show on cable TV. CBS had originally suspended Mr. Imus for two weeks, but succumbed amid an escalating national outcry and an exodus of big advertisers. "All of us have been deeply upset and revulsed by the statements that were made on our air," CBS Corp. CEO Leslie Moonves said yesterday in a written statement.

Mr. Imus, who didn't respond to repeated calls seeking comment, had for years been making outrageous and frequently crude remarks about risky subjects such as race, sex and gender, a style that millions of listeners had embraced. The media executives and advertisers profiting from Mr. Imus's popularity stood by him as protests occasionally surfaced. They usually subsided after a few days.

This time it was different. The target was a sympathetic team of young athletes. In the ensuing furor, the lucrative and often vulgar business of talk radio found itself running into new limits, as the Internet sent Mr. Imus to millions of PC screens, driving executives, advertisers and employees to distance themselves from his racist words.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB117641076468168180-7y8vXi_eMhvWtEoPiK397ZUoIBc_20070513.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-13-07 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. And That Scares The Wall St. Journal To Death, Doesn't It?
Edited on Fri Apr-13-07 04:28 PM by Demeter
Otherwise why even acknowledge that Imus exists?

Any sign of the sheep looking up sends chills down the wolves' spines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-13-07 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. No it doesn't. The WSJ is touting the fiction that Media Matters did the deed.
All by themselves. They led the charge.

That isn't what really happened.

The corporate media saw an opening to get rid of a pesky antiwar guy who had potential to impact their bottom line (the sponsors have Pentagon contracts--lucrative ones, too--GE, owner of NBC, has the biggest).

Imus is a Republican who reaches other angry, white male Republicans. He can, and does, change rightwing hearts and minds about the war when people on the left cannot.

He had to go.

If you think, for a minute, those war profiteering sponsors gave one shit about that basketball team, I have a bridge for sale in Iraq (only slightly damaged). They just used them as an excuse to unload a guy who has gone off the BushCo ranch. And it was, indeed, a perfect storm, because Imus's weak spot is his tendency to engage in brutal, insult comedy that isn't really funny, but appeals to that angry, white, male demographic.

Normally, they wouldn't give Al Sharpton fifty seconds on NBC. Suddenly, he gets all the time he needs to bellow angrily--same way with Jesse Jackson, or ANYONE wanting to weigh in on this issue, so long as they weighed in on the "I'm OFFENDED!" team. They needed to keep it front and center to fan the flames, and get others to pick it up in copycat fashion. As a side benefit, it crushed a bunch of other bad news stories about BushCo (Iraqi parliament explosion, bridge blowing up, troops dying, the Gonzales mess, the missing emails, and on and on).

See, they needed the pig killed, so they handed the butcher knife to the left, to give them a "victory."

But in the big picture, the only victory is seen by the pro-war sponsors, who get to keep, for now anyway, their ugly war and their obscene profits.

The Rutgers team, the victims, have said they didn't want Imus fired--but the sponsors didn't DARE wait until they weighed in. They had to strike while the iron was hot, so they wasted NO time getting rid of Imus, especially when they found out he was going to MEET with the Rutgers ladies. See--they didn't really give a shit what the Rutgers ladies had to say. Their opinion didn't count at all.

They got rid of Imus as soon as someone told them to--remember that two week suspension? The order must have come down that the two week punishment wasn't good enough--he needed to be silenced permanently. But they didn't shitcan him for the causes of racial or gender equality at all. They did it to ensure that a voice against the war, who resonated with angry, male GOP likely voters, was silenced. Permanently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-13-07 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. You Sound Plausible--It's Chilling
The WSJ cannot win this game anyway--Dubya's peed in the pool. So let them have the tantrum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-13-07 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. P and G is on the TOP 100 Pentagon contractor list.
GE, that OWNS NBC, is one of the top contractors. http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=16

CEO: Jeffrey R. Immelt
Military contracts 2005: $2.2 billion
Defense-related contributions in the 2004 election cycle: $220,950*

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/AIRC04057.xml&headline=DOD%20Continues%20To%20Invest%20In%20Aircraft

The top five companies involved in such work, according to the analyzed contracts and contract modifications were -- in descending order according to total contract amounts -- Lockheed Martin, Boeing, United Technologies, General Electric and Northrop Grumman.

The year's figure represents a small slice of the aircraft investment pie the Pentagon has been baking through the past few decades -- and of what it plans for the future.

GAO analyzed tactical fighter costs from 1976 through the present and projected out to 2011, normalizing the data to express costs in fiscal year 2007 dollars.

"The total investment for research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) and procurement during this time period approaches $1 trillion in constant dollars," the agency said in its report, "Tactical Aircraft: DOD Needs a Joint and Integrated Investment Strategy"

http://www.publicintegrity.org/wow/bio.aspx?act=pro&ddlC=23

Iraq contracts
GE's reconstruction activities in Iraq were not disclosed in documents the Defense Department provided to the Center for Public Integrity in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Media sources, however, indicate that GE has or had post-war business dealings in Iraq. For instance, it was reported in April 2003 that GE Energy Rentals Inc., a division of GE Power Systems, was supplying temporary electrical generators to the U.S. military in Iraq. GE Energy Rentals, based in Atlanta, rents power generators, heating and cooling equipment and light towers. It was launched as a separate division in June 1999. The company refused to divulge the value of the contract.

Afghanistan contracts
The documents the Center received from the Defense Department revealed that GE was awarded a contract worth $5,927,870 from the U.S. Army Engineer District, Philadelphia, for "gas services." News releases available on the Defense Department's Web site, however, go into greater detail. For example, the contract is a firm-fixed-price contract awarded in February 2003 to GE Energy Rentals Inc. to provide prime power services at Bagram and Kandahar airbases. The contract is to be completed by Nov. 30, 2004. Seven bids were solicited for the contract in December 2002, and two bids were received.

Government ties
Before joining GE in 1993, Kenneth V. Meyer, a vice president of GE Aircraft Engines, was a major general in the U.S. Air Force and served as director of Air Force contracting at the Pentagon and chief of staff for Air Force Systems Command.

Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary Benjamin W. Heineman Jr. served at the Department of Health, Education and Welfare from 1977 to 1980, completing his tenure there as assistant secretary for planning and evaluation.

Sam Nunn, a GE director since 1997, was a Democratic U.S. senator from Georgia from 1973 until his retirement in 1997. He served as the chairman and ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.

Francis S. Blake, a former senior vice president at GE, served as deputy secretary of energy from May 2001 until he resigned in April 2002. He played a key role in the formation of President Bush's controversial national energy plan, but resigned after less than a year on the job. He attracted criticism for holding a series of policy meetings that were dominated by energy industry representatives. Prior to joining GE in 1991, Blake had been general counsel at the Environmental Protection Agency during the final three years of the Reagan administration and, prior to that, deputy counsel to former Vice President George Bush and deputy counsel to the Presidential Task Force on Regulatory Relief.

Former CEO Jack Welch was a George W. Bush supporter and a major Republican contributor. Two weeks before his inauguration, Bush invited Welch and other CEO's (including Enron's Ken Lay) to Texas for a summit. Bush reportedly considered Welch for a Cabinet position and, in the summer of 2001, sent members of his administration to lobby the European Union in support of GE's proposed merger with Honeywell, which the EU ultimately rejected.

Throughout 2001, California Congressman Henry Waxman accused Welch of intervening in NBC's 2000 election night coverage and pressuring the network to prematurely declare Bush the winner. Welch admitted he attended an election night party at NBC's headquarters and that he cheered for Bush but denied interfering with coverage decisions.....



Staples has a HUGE GSA contract worth billions--they got slapped with a lousy four million dollar fine for not "buying American" but they are still in business. If you look up "Staples National Advantage" and "GSA" you'll get page after page of government entities that point people to that business as one that will process their government orders with no fuss. For example:

Staples National Advantage
45 East Wesley Street

South Hackensack, NJ 07606 - USA
888-212-7219
Supplier Of Office Supplies Under GSA Contract #GS-14F-0036K. Overnight Delivery On Over 6,000 Computer And Supply Items. Staples National Advantage Offers A Full Line Of All NIB/NISH Products Under JWOD.
http://www.fedpage.com/VendorList.asp?PageMode=SEARCH


The Windfalls of War: http://www.publicintegrity.org/wow/bio.aspx?act=pro&ddlC=152

Sprint Nextel will be bidding on a twenty billion (yes, with a B) dollar Pentagon contract very soon--gee, wonder if their loyalty in dumping Imus will pay off?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aECGO5bfbNNI&refer=home

Once upon a time, Imus was BELOVED by BushCo. Of course, that was back when Imus still supported this idiotic war.

Hell, lookie here--Cheney (Imus recently called him a WAR CRIMINAL) just loved the guy, called him the I-Man and everything (read the interview, note the Armstrong Williams reference--the same asshat who is all over the air dissing Imus the last two days) : http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/13/cheney-imus-humor/

FLASHBACK: Cheney ‘Has The Same Sense Of Humor’ As Imus
In the debate over Don Imus’ offensive comments about the Rutgers women’s basketball team, many bloggers and pundits have focused on the fact that despite Imus’ history of inflammatory remarks, politicians and media celebrities have continued to appear on his show over the years.

One big time politician, who has said that he likes to “listen to Don Imus in the morning,” has thus far escaped scrutiny for his relationship to fallen shock jock: Vice President Dick Cheney.

In January 2005, on the day of Bush’s second inaugaration, Cheney and his wife, Lynne, granted Imus a lengthy, exclusive interview, in which Mrs. Cheney affectionately referred to Imus as “the I-man.”

....


Fascinating, isn't it? The people who think this firing was about concepts like simple decency and fairness just have no clue what really goes on and how vicious it REALLY gets behind closed corporate doors. EVERYTHING is a goddamned business decision.

And this wasn't about the dimes and dollars they got from Imus listeners in a paltry little subset of retail sales...this was about Imus impacting the BILLIONS they got from the US Treasury in the furtherance of BushCo's Ugly Little War.

And anyone who thinks otherwise is just not stepping back and seeing the big, huge, ugly canvas, or sniffing the air around themselves and smelling a rather fetid rodent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-13-07 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Yep.
If I could rec your post I would.

I think some folks got played.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-13-07 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I KNOW some folks got played. Ironically, the Rutgers team weren't among them. They did NOT call
for the guy to be fired.

It's important to remember that.

The only ones wanting the bastard gone were the guys making money off the war.

The coach specifically said he shouldn't lose his job.

    "We, the Rutgers University Scarlet Knight basketball team, accept -- accept -- Mr. Imus' apology, and we are in the process of forgiving," Stringer said. "We still find his statements to be unacceptable, and this is an experience that we will never forget."

    She said that the team did not ask for him to be fired from his job by CBS Radio and MSNBC, which simulcasts his radio show.

    "It saddens me for anyone to lose their job," she said. "At no time did the Rutgers womens' team call for his job."

    http://www.wdsu.com/entertainment/11774670/detail.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
primative1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-13-07 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. My wife made a similar comment
Those kids from Rutgers were sure USED.
I am trying to figure the possibility of any one of them actualy listening to IMUS at 6:14AM to hear the insult.
Its like some guy at a bar calls me an ignorant pollock while I am across town asleep in bed. Do I care? So should someone wake me up and tell me about it, play the insult for days over the evening news and then tramp out every "cival rights" leader who makes a living feeling my pain?
People got used and they should be angry ... at the users
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC