Flame Away - But I think Imus Had the Right to "Say" Anything he wanted.

There is a reason I say this - believe it or not.

I am really afraid we are losing our right to freedom of speech. I don't agree with Imus. I don't like what he said. It was offensive to both women and women athletes. But I also don't think for minute that Imus thought anyone would take such an outrageous statement seriously.

But I am getting tired of all the social censoring of speech that is going on in this country right now. People being arrested for wearing a political T-shirt. People who say something politically incorrect being crucified. I hate that.

John Kerry makes one slip and is literally kicked out of the race. That is so wrong. And so detrimental to our society. Bill Maher says something no one likes - he is forced to apologise to save his job. It goes on and on and on. And I hate it.

I would much rather put up with people like Imus (after all I can simply not listen to the guy - and I don't because I find him offensive) than have to feel like I have to watch everything I say.

Society is coming down way too hard on people who say the "wrong" thing and I think it is a terrible precedent.

...He simply said one stupid racist comment. If you watch/listen to his show, you know what you're getting. CBS Radio and MSNBC know what they had. He's a comedy guy whose job is to bully his staff and bully his guests. That's what Imus does. And yes, he went overboard. He said something racist, sexist, and stupid!! She should have served his suspension, and NOT been fired. The facts are this: he bended over backwards to apologize, he said he'd tone it down, and he said he'd add black perspective to the show after his suspension. Then he was fired. Why? Mel Gibson still hasn't been banned from movie making. The guy from Greys Anatomy is still on television. Why Imus? Imus isn't even racist. We all know that from his past actions and past projects.

scripted and intentional. "One stupid racist comment". Hogwash.

yes.

But what I am arguing is that our society is censoring people who do not agree. And it is censoring people in a whole lot of areas - not just Imus or the other shock jocks. But also people who disagree with this adm., people who disagree with the Christian Church, people who disagree with the status quo.

Society is coming down way too hard on the people who have the guts to stand up and disagree.

I was just sick when Kerry just simply got knocked flat because of joke gone bad. That was ridiculous. John Edwards has commented on how careful he has to be to only say appropriate things - making it really difficult for anyone to really get to know him.

I am sick of society demanding apologies from people for the stuff they have said - that they have every right to say.

I kind of feel about this like I do about the KKK. I hate the KKK. I hate everything they stand for. But it is absolutely vital in this democracy for everyone (including Fred Phelps) to be able to say what they believe and not be crucified for it. (I do not think Fred Phelps has the right to picket funerals - he is stamping all over a lot of other people's rights when he does that.

When Imus said what he said, we didn't see some government Thought Police brigade kicking in his door. That's because we have free speech.

Imus — and anyone else — is free to say whatever they wish. But they do have to deal with the consequences of that, whether it be loss of income, reputation, or whatever else.

On edit: Sorry. Meant this as a response to the OP :blush:

No one would care if I got shit-canned.

I've watched Imus everyday for the past 3 years for both yuks and to listen to his distinguished pundits and politicians. I even like to hear the next idiotic thing "I-Fave" John McClown will attempt to couch ever so carefully. That said, Imus is the perfect person for the "Perfect Storm."

1. He's influential
2. Many of his guests are distinguished, high profile pundits and politicians
3. He's so wealthy, he doesn't have to work another day in his life
4. He likely can work again if he so chooses

In the examples you cite, I don't recall an hour long, nationally covered press conference featuring 18-20 y/o innocents and one amazing woman advocating for them.

If the idea is to encourage a national dialogue to raise the social awareness of stereotyping across the board--not limited to just race and gender--then let's have that format and leave Imus to his schtick.

Context Matters. I will continue to frequent stand-up comedy. This discussion will not impact my "sense" of humor. However, this humor belongs in comedy clubs, or on South Park, etc.. not mixed with political discourse.

One of my favorite comedians, Mitch Hedberg died a few years ago. He's funnier than Imus. I miss Mitch more than I'll miss Imus.

There are consequences when you make racist and sexist comments.

If you can't handle the consequences, don't say it.

And MSNBC has the right to fire him. The GOVERNMENT doesn't have the right to shut down his program or MSNBC. That's what free speech means. You can say anything you want, anywhere you want and you must accept the consequences of your words. Imus can take Bernard and stand on a corner in Harlem and call every passerby anything they want. They might not live to do it the next day, but that would be their right and the consequence.

Sanity and understanding of what free speech is.

Thank you! :toast:

However, he is not entitled to have someone publish what he says. TV and/or radio are effectively publishers.

The difficulty that I see is that as media is consolidated, the ability to be published is in the hands of fewer and fewer people. The government doesn't control what we say, but a few corporations are acquiring the power to control what gets published/broadcast/transmitted. Those corporations largely get ot control what we can know.

He promised years ago that he wouldn't do it again. He broke his promise. He's feeling the consequences of it now.

but not on the public airwaves. I for one am sick and tired of hate radio- and it looks like I'm not alone. Advertisers aren't going to put up with it either.

My hope is that this trend goes MUCH FURTHER and spreads to the Limbaugh's, Coulter's, Hannity's, Par Robertson's- pick one. They've polluted the airwaves and the public discourse long enough and it's time that they were held accountable.

I've never been an Imus fan. I never listen to Limbaugh, either - or Howard Stern.

But it is important in a free society to give a voice to those on the outer fringes. It keeps people thinking. Agree - disagree. It doesn't matter.

"But I am getting tired of all the social censoring of speech that is going on in this country right now. People being arrested for wearing a political T-shirt. People who say something politically incorrect being crucified. I hate that."

My sentiments exactly. Political speech must be protected in whatever form it takes.

But Imus did something that was illegal. He slandered (libeled?) a group of private individuals - not politicians - not celebrities - not public figures. A group of young ladies who were simply competing in a college sponsored game. He insinuated they were sexually immoral and somehow inferior because of their race. Not to mention he implied that they were somehow hoodlums before making the other nasty slur. If someone on the radio called me, or my children such names, I would file a lawsuit.

It's called having standards. I would never want to sic the government on anyone for speech, but social pressure SHOULD be used to discourage some forms of speech. In fact, it's using your free speech to do so.

Imus has not had his free speech rights violated in *any* way.

long run create more division in the country.

I would have felt better if MSNBC had permitted
the Imus and the Rutgers Student Athletes to
have had their meeting. I think we know the
real reason they pulled the plug was Monetary
Consideration. (Advertisers).

Imus got to say what he wanted, and as a result an army of people that almost never get to say what they want, were allowed to speak AND be heard. Hooray!!

Imus can say anything he wants. That was never an issue. The only issue is whether MSNBC should continue to pay him 10 million a year to say something that angers their audience. MSNBC is under no requirement to hire everyone who wants to speak and pay them lots of money.

And why don't you think that people who are outraged by Imus should be allowed to express our anger, and suggest, even demand, the resolution we want? Is there some law or right that only Don Imus gets to say what he wants, but no one else does?

I don't understand your post at all.

He can go to any KKK rally or Republican fund raiser and tell all the racist jokes he wants without any repercussions. When he says it on a radio show then his employers have a right to send him packing and his advertisers have a right to pull their adds.

For example I have the right to say "fire his ass or I won't buy any of your sponsor's products". Free speech is a fundamental right. Indeed.

Unanswered hate on public airwaves was a major factor in both Bosnia and Rwanda. Unanswered hate on public airwaves can be lethal. Just coming out of the radio gives it more authority.

It's long been said that freedom of speech doesn't include yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater. Unanswered hate on public airwaves does just that. Using racial and sexual epithets and wishing death on people one doesn't agree with does just that.

Imus has the right to say what he wants to on the street, in his home, and going through his life. He can write handbills and paste them on lamp posts. He can be the sour old man who hates everybody. He can even start a haters' club and hold meetings.

This isn't a free speech issue. His advertisers knew that and bailed.

Trying to defend him by saying "he did it too!" in the form of other right wing haters won't work, either, just like it didn't work when we were five and got caught doing mischief with Sharpies.

Remember, he was in no danger of being fired, only of surviving a nominal suspension. He was out only because he lost advertisers. Had other advertisers stepped up, he'd still have a job.

He was wrong. He was over the line. Nobody was supporting him any more. It was time for him to go off the public airwaves.

Think about this...

Your white high school daughter's debating society finals will be televised on your local network.

She falters in the debate.

The teevee talking heads laugh at her and says she would have a better future as a bordello madame. The network says it was just a "joke" and lots of music videos portray young white women as sluts so why pick on them.

Is that freedom of speech or malicious defamation?

Think ahead for a minute: Your daughter has graduated cum laude from Princeton. She's applied for a job. Someone at the company remembers her name. Oh yea, the bordello madame - yuck yuck yuck - and they chuck her resume.

Think you should have stood up for your daughter's reputation?

Happy now?

Free speech my ass. This is just as much a rape - a battery - on innocent people as I have ever seen.

Society isn't coming down on Imus as someone saying the "wrong" thing. It's affirming that a code of conduct necessary in order to function as a civilized society.

He had every right to say whatever he wanted. Additionally, the people who were offended had every right to raise the hue and cry and get his hateful ass booted off the air.

Rights are beautiful things. :toast:

Julie

He can stand on any corner he wants, and say anything he wants...but the American people, CBS, and MSNBC, are not obligated to provide him a spot on the radio to do it...

You don't believe having a radio show is a constitutional right do you...?

Before I was self employed, if I had said anything even remotely like what Imus said, I would have been justifiably fired immediately...

Imus can spend more time on his charities.

isn't it?

slan·der (slăn'dər) pronunciation
n.

1. Law. Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
2. A false and malicious statement or report about someone.

And people have the right to stop listening to him, or to send him nasty emails, or to call him, as many have done on DU, a racist.

I do agree with one thing: it is getting too hard for people who make one "slip." One slip certainly wasn't Imus' problem.

the right to call MSNBC and Imus's sponsors and say that I disapprove of the Imus sponsorship and will stop watching their shows and buying their products because of my disapproval. Imus's sponsors have the right to stand by Imus or stand by the customers who complain.
MSNBC has the right to continue or discontinue Imus's show in response to such calls and sponsor reactions.

We ought not to pretend this is a free speech issue. This is EXACTLY how free speech is intended to work under our Constitution. Imus is free to say what he pleases and is free to face the consequences. If Imus is just barely outside the public consensus as to what is appropriate, he will face little repercussion (in fact, the controversy may well help his ratings). If Imus is far outside the public consensus as to what is appropriate, he will greater repercussions. The public consensus has spoken and Imus is still free to stand on the public street corner and say loudly and for everyone to hear:

(1) the Rutgers University women's basketball team is a bunch of "nappy headed hos."

(2) respected black journalist Gwen Ifill is just "a cleaning lady."

(3) Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post as "Boner-nosed ... beanie-wearing Jewboy."

(4) Hillary Clinton is a "buck-tooth witch Satan."

(5) "My goal is to goad people into saying something that ruins their life."

That last quote is a favorite of mine now. It should be used in high school English classes across America to teach irony from this day forward.

Chappaquiddick jokes again:

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2007/04/imus_in_the_70s.html