Spitzer's Office Closes Its Inquiry Into Imus Ranch for Sick Children

Spitzer's Office Closes Its Inquiry Into Imus Ranch for Sick Children

By ROBERT FRANK
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
March 25, 2005; Page B3

The New York Attorney General's office last night ended its inquiry into the Imus Ranch, run by radio host Don Imus.

In a letter sent to Mr. Imus last night, Gerald Rosenberg, the chief of the office's charities bureau, said, "Based on the information you submitted to the Charities Bureau, we have determined that no further inquiries concerning the Ranch are needed at this time."

Yesterday's notice came the same day The Wall Street Journal published a page-one article that said the attorney general's office had questioned Mr. Imus about his personal use of the ranch and its accounting. The article said the inquiry was prompted by a delay in filing the ranch's financial filings and noted that the inquiry wasn't an investigation.

(snip)

---- Ian McDonald contributed to this article.

Write to Robert Frank at robert.frank@wsj.com

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB111171835547389539,00.html

to see why the Attorney General is backing off. That, and being the target of the I-man's scorn for hours on end.

Is there something stinky about the so called Imus Ranch? Yep. Will anyone join Robert Frank and do an investigative report? Nope.

I don't care for the guy because I think he is a jerk-off but I haven't seen any evidence that he is up to no good.

I think the guy likes to stroke his own ego with this charity, that probably spends too much money per child helped, but I doubt he is scamming money.

I'm mixed about my feelings about Imus. His show is moronic, but I see where there's definitely smoke and possible fire.

I'm not doubting Imus' committment to the terminally ill children he built the ranch for, but I can see how double dipping and favors are being traded here that sent the red flags...and might still turn up some sort of scandal.

Imus doesn't hide his shilling of his "sponsors" of the ranch...corporations that also advertise on his show that reaches several million 25-50 year old males...a target-rich demo. Getting Imus to shill your product on the air...which he won't hesitate to do (or pan someone he wants to shake down) is worth millions in free advertising. I've seen days where he'll go on and on about a sponsor or some tie in to the ranch...always making sure the sponsor is mentioned.

From one who worked in radio, this is a sticky issue as one could view these mentions or plugs as "entertainment"...part of the content of the show..."public service", as the ranch is a non-profit organization and these mentions are just like your PBS station's underwriter mentions...or a commercial where some sort of "consideration" (doesn't have to be cash...it can be a gift or free services) that would be considered revenue and income (where Spitzer comes in). You make the call.

benefiting from the charitable contributions and using the ranch for his own gain.

I guess it goes without saying that the advertisers give money to the jerk's charity so they can receive mention on his show. It's pretty obvious and he doesn't hide it. As a matter of fact, he makes jokes about it and flaunts his "power" regarding his ability to schill for a donor. I think it's kinda funny. I guess if Unilever wants to put up a couple hundred thousand bucks to get their name mentioned so be it. It's not like they are hiding anything ala Armstrong Williams.

Here's another quid pro quo. Imus does his show from the ranch several times a year. He does the program from a specially built studio that is operated by both MSNBC and Viacom (who syndicate his radio show) and you'll see customer plugs all around there.

Now Imus' mentions he's at the ranch "on vacation", but obviously he's working...and surely expenses incurred (airplanes, food, so on) are expenses that can be tied to the show...including Imus' personal expenses. A tax and contract lawyer could probably show us 1000 ways how you can mix numbers and move money...all legal...that smacks of cronyism, if not more.

While Payola...playing music for pay, is still sorta-kinda (wink wink) illegal on the airwaves, Plugola is this medium's mother's milk...especially in radio. Advertisers are always promised "bonuses" for signing long contracts or providing prizes or other goodies. This is different than Pundit Payola, but not far removed...and the justification Williams has used to cover up his scummy antics.

The real subliminal corporate media games are in their own cross-ownership conflicts and plugs. ABC/Disney stations plug Disneyworld, Disney movies and ESPN, and visa versa...Viacom meshes Howard Stern with CBS TV with Comedy Central to publishing and the blurred lines are regularly used to work for the corporate's bottom line.

said that if there was anymore of this sniping abut the ranch, he would "shut it down" because he didn't need the grief. Does he think he can shut down the ranch and keep it for himself? Sounds like it.

The ranch is doing a great service for children with cancer. If the guy wanted to learn more about it, he could have gone there. Imus said he would have welcomed the guy to come and stay there a few days. Imus also answered the points the reporter raised, quite easily. It doesn't take any talent to find fault, but this reporter did a poor job at that.