Olbermann defends himself re Imus; says Imus staff harassed women, others at MSNBC

[Berry Cool]

Can you stand one more (?) Imus thread? Oh well. If you're reading it, you can.

On yesterday's Dan Patrick Show on ESPN Radio, Keith Olbermann took the opportunity to defend himself from negative comments made about him by "Mike and the Mad Dog," the afternoon team on WFAN (the radio station from which Don Imus's show formerly aired) and Olbermann's role in the situation at MSNBC and Imus's firing there.

First, Olbermann knocked down the false argument that it was Imus's "First Amendment right" to say anything he wants on the radio (it isn't). Because the First Amendment has nothing to do with what you say on television or radio. (One wonders why this has to be pounded into people's heads so many times.)

Then he addressed Mike and the Mad Dog's criticizing him for not being open about his role in the Imus firing until Imus was out the door. Olbermann said he didn't wait that long to criticize Imus.

"No, I didn't. In terms of doing it publicly--yeah, I did. You do what you can do in that situation and not more. That's one thing I've learned about this business after many years in it. Many of the things that went wrong at ESPN were because I didn't understand that. Try to resolve the problem internally, give it a certain period of time, believe the assurances of your management--and if you can't, then go public if you feel you have to.

"You do not have to throw your own career under the bus to try to correct a situation. I've done that before. I made a mistake doing it. It was not fair to myself, and more importantly, it was not fair to the people who were the victims of the situation that I found myself in and they, more importantly, found themselves in.

"Again, I did not hear these criticisms specifically, so I cannot rebut it point by point--and if it's gotten passed down to me like a game of 'telephone,' forgive the inexactitude. But these things were problems, as somebody who worked at a network and there was another show on the network that was always on the edge--and always, to my opinion, over the edge--and I went to my management in 1998, the first time I was around--I said 'Are you sure we want to be putting this on?' Or, is there no curb, is there nothing to stop some of this stuff that was excessive even then--not necessarily racial, but in other ways--homophobic, or sexist, or just mean-spirited and personal. And I was assured, there were always conferences, and he was always going to dial it back.

"And then--came the time when we made a deal to bring the show to Secaucus, to the MSNBC headquarters--and that's when it became a real problem. There were people who were harassed--and I use the term broadly, as opposed to a specific set of sexual harassment things, although that was part of it. There were people who were harassed, women who were harassed there, by the whole staff of the Imus show, who went in and complained to the previous management at MSNBC. And the response to that was 'OK, we're moving your desks.' (laughs) So they had to move, rather than somebody wanting to touch Don Imus or the people there and say 'You can't do this anymore.' 'Cause there was no controlling him.

"And this problem accelerated over the years, and I, quite frankly, went in to management more than a year ago and said 'There's a breaking point coming, there's a tipping point coming here. It seems to be getting worse. They seem to be getting worse in terms of their behavior off the air and on the air, and we need to do something about that.'"

Patrick again brought up what he has said repeatedly to Olbermann, namely, that Olbermann would have been skewering Imus on air had his show been on Fox rather than on MSNBC, and Olbermann again acknowledged that. "As I've said many times, there is a practicality about this business, and a compromise that you have to make. There is not carte blanche--even though he (Imus) never held himself to these sorts of standards--there is not carte blanche in terms of dealing with other people with whom you work. You can't simply turn and fire off a gun in somebody's face. Although, again, they did that all the time on that show.

"They threw me under the bus a hundred times, at least. They threw people without any kind of 'chops' there, without any kind of weight, under the bus a thousand times. And I was more concerned with that than I was with the former. But there are practicalities. If you go to your boss and say 'Look, we have to do something about this' and they say 'Give us a little bit more time. We will. Please don't go public with this. We understand'--

"Even last Monday, when you and I first talked about this, the management at MSNBC and NBC--the guys I work for--said 'We understand if you feel like you have to say something. We think this is going to be resolved in a way that you will be satisfied with it. Please, if you feel like you can contain yourself and what you want to say until later, it would probably help defuse the situation and let this thing play out in a profitable'--and I mean that not monetarily, but 'in a productive way.' 'If you can stay out of this for the time being, it would be a help.' And so I deferred to them.

"Was I guilty of maybe not making as big a stink about this as I should have? Yeah. But you don't have free rein to shoot internally. Really, I feel like you don't, and I know, more importantly, and possibly the deciding factor and my primary defense about this is, if I had started to make Don Imus the Worst Person in the World when I first wanted to, which would have been--when did we start Worst Person in the World?--July of 2005--I would probably have done it within the first month at some point, for something he did.

"If I had done that, there would have been a constant battle. I would have been happy to join that battle with him (but) there would have been a constant battle involving the people who work for me--my producers, my staff--who have no business being trotted out. And they would have been mentioned by name on Imus's show. They would have been mentioned by name, there would have been problems involving them internally, there would have been complaints about them. I didn't think I had a right to do that. And I thought had a responsibility to my employers to go along with them, and after the management change about a year ago, I figured there was probably--something was going to happen. And finally, something did. Imus took care of it himself."

Even if I wasn't a fan of his, which I admittedly am, I would feel for Olbermann in this situation. Who hasn't been in a situation like this at work on a smaller scale? It's like Keith can't win for losing. He got a reputation in the past for conflicts with management and not "knowing his place." After many years, he finally comes to realize that falling on his sword for the sake of a principle is hurting him more than it's hurting anyone else. So he changes his tune and tries to be a "good employee" at MSNBC while still making his opinions known in a more subtle way about what he thinks is the untenable behavior of one of his "coworkers." And what does he get for it? He gets called a wimp, a wuss and a person who hates "free speech."

Another thing that Olbermann never said--but which I think he also could have raised as a point in his defense--is that he is not a member of the group of individuals at which Imus's insult that broke the camel's back was raised. He is a white male, not an African American woman, not even an African American man. If he grandstanded too strongly against Imus, he ran the significant risk of being perceived as having stuck his nose in a place where it didn't belong. When NBC and MSNBC had its meetings with employees to determine how they felt about the situation, I don't think Olbermann was on the invitation list. Black female employees, however, were on the list, because their perceptions and feelings were considered most important, given the specific statement that proved to be the tipping point. It even made sense for Al Roker to express his opinions on his blog because again, as a black man, his opinion carried a kind of moral weight that Olbermann's couldn't. Olbermann ran the risk of being told "Stay out of this. You're a white man and this is not your issue." Then again, if he said nothing at all, he ran the risk of being told "Oh, so you don't think this is important, do you, because you're white?"

I'm glad he's said what he's said now, because it only makes all the clearer that the problem with Imus wasn't just that:

--he "said this one racist thing."
--he "said this one racist and sexist thing."
--he "said something racist and sexist about fine upstanding young basketball players who did not deserve it."

Yes, he may have been fired because he "said something racist and sexist about fine upstanding young basketball players who did not deserve it," and someone caught it and exposed it endlessly on the Internet, and two men known for loving to strut the stage about racism issues picked up on it and set their teeth into it like a dog on a bone, and the resulting publicity created an advertiser pullout that made his firing inevitable.

But that isn't why so many people are HAPPY Imus got fired.

They are happy he got fired because he and his staff said many things that were racist, sexist, homophobic, mean, petty, personal and hateful; they said them about the powerless as well as the powerful; and they didn't just say them, they backed them up with their behavior. At least in the case of the people they worked with at MSNBC, whose lives they were making miserable.

MSNBC/NBC say they dumped Imus's show because they listened to their staff. I say, the only reason they really began "listening to their staff" in the first place is because the advertisers began jumping ship--it's clear from what Olbermann said that they had received complaints from unhappy employees for years and done nothing productive about it. "We're moving your desks"? Please!

But regardless of why Imus is gone, there are many people who were either happy or not sorry to see him go. And who would be happy to see others like him follow in his wake. I count myself as one of them.

[Neshanic]

1. Stern hated him..that has to count in there. Imus was grade A asshole.

[roseBudd]

11. I miss listening to Stern for free but I can just imagine what has been going on on the Stern show

in the last week. Stern has someone who imitates Imus's speaking style so I'm sure it was hilarious. That being said I do feel bad for enjoying Wendy the Retard, Gary the Retard and Beetlejuice. It could be argued King of All Blacks and the KKK guy Stern provides a forum for do the racist's bidding.

[Berry Cool]

12. You say Stern has someone who imitates Imus?

Dan Patrick himself does an excellent Imus. It's hilarious because the running joke on his show is that any imitation he does of anyone ends up sounding like Jimmy Stewart. Although once he tried to do Bill Clinton and Keith told him he sounded like Elmer Fudd on Quaaludes.

Patrick's Imus impression is excellent, though. Keith has joked with him, asking him if he wants a job hosting a morning show on MSNBC.

[roseBudd]

71. Fred does the Imus voice

[drbtg1]

34. Go to marksfriggin.com for Stern show updates

Here's a link for this past week:

http://www.marksfriggin.com/news07/4-9.htm

[sabbat hunter]

44. stern is an asshole too n/t

[marshall]

63. Olberman has obviously never been behind the scenes with Stern

If Stern treats women backstage the way he treats them when the mic is on, it's got to be worse than whatever Imus and his bunch did.

Didn't Stern's nasty behavior have some part in Dana Plato's suicide, after she appeared on his show and was throughly humiliated?

[Nevernose]

87. I was friends w/ her pimp, coincidentally.

At his other job, the non-misogynistic one, I was a trusted employee. Our kids played with each other, and we got along well. He could actually be a pretty decent human being, when he wasn't being a dangerous criminal.

He was still in love with Dana Plato, too. Even after he's written a very bad, thankfully unpublished book, even after he'd sold his story to the National Enquirer, even after he'd appeared on TV about her.

And no, he wasn't that Menchaca guy mentioned on Wiki -- I'm talking about the shithead who kept her high and working as a high-priced call girl.

I've lived an interesting life...

[jwirr]

2. Imus's history with women and minorities was not good. KO is right.

[loyalsister]

82. But he had the ranch....

doesn't that make him a nice person?


But, man, I have to say, this is just too good. The people who fired Imus decades ago NBC are now considering doing it again for his racist remarks about some women basketball players. But not about to lose a financial opportunity NBC has bumped Imus’s audience up to the Today Show where the network can skim “I-man” eyeballs by exclusively showcasing a perverted jousting match between Imus and Al Sharpton and Matt Lauer and NBC itself.
That’s Entertainment.

This is an inside assesment of Imus from years ago. Brutal.

http://www.johnhockenberry.com/Blog/DBB237B8-4631-4C98-...

Don't know if this has been posted, but it is sure worth a read. The inner workings of NBC offered in this piece are very interesting.

[wtmusic]

3. Comeuppance/karma does work once in a while

no matter how much they try to prevent it.

[riverdeep]

58. Does it?

This stupid turd is seventy or close to it. That's longer than a lot of people live. Unless his last few years are real bad, I'd say he's probably avoided the karma train. More than likely, he'll do just fine, cashing in on his 'renegade' status as the ultimate in political incorrectness with the racist, misogynist fuckwits that pop up like mushrooms after a rain all across this fine land.

On the other hand, he's had to live with himself these years, that can't have been easy.

[Timmy5835]

61. avoided the karma train? I think not.

The guy has had failed marrages and drug problems. He made it to the platform just fine...poor guy.

[goclark]

4. K and Recommend ~ this is an important voice

to hear from.

I respect Keith. He is ,IMO, the BEST in the business.


Imus and his entire crew were " Good Ole boys" Gone Wild.

[Botany]

5. Did I ever tell you that you are my Fav EDV?

Imus was a class A jerk.

From Steph Miller's show:

Imus had "them" fly his own chair when he did a show from another location ...
not that he needed it ... he just like using his "power.'

[TheCowsCameHome]

6. One of the MSNBC news women left because of his nonsense.

I forget which one, but she read the news during his morning TV/radio show at one time. It wasn't Amy Robach, but I do remember one quitting because of the way he was constantly picking on her.

[Evergreen Emerald]

39. He is a misogynist

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2005/05/don_i... /

Excerpt:

DON Imus didn’t like being called “a cantankerous old fool” by MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer on PAGE SIX. Brewer, a former news reader on Imus’ show, also said the I-man doesn’t know how to relate to “beautiful women.” “With that fat ass she’s got, she wouldn’t be one of ‘em,” Imus said on the air Friday. “That skank has to spend three hours with makeup in the morning … Who’s she kidding? . . . Plus, she’s dumber than dirt … Oh, my God, what a pig. But I was willing to cut her some slack and not say anything, you know, until - in fact, I didn’t say anything . . . That’s why they have those big double-doors there at MSNBC, you know, so they can get her fat ass in makeup.” An MSNBC spokesman said: “Contessa Brewer is a valued and respected employee. While Don Imus’ humor is often brilliant and provocative, we believe that this morning’s comments about Contessa went over the line. We have expressed our displeasure to Don.”

[Chomskyite]

74. Contessa Brewer?

n/a

[C_U_L8R]

7. Remember when Contessa Brewer was a regular on the show?

Good god those Imus creeps were so friggin abusive and mean.
Fortunately Contessa could hold her own and punch back... hard
But the awful things Imus and his stooges would say were just sickening... bah
Good riddance.

[exlrrp]

9. Good Riddance Bo Dietl!!

One of the reasons I never watched his show much was because of this unshaven bum. Were they trying to portray the ignorant drunken bum viewpoint? The thought of all these grown men giggling over these stupid comments is just disgusting.
No one ever mentions the topic of "Taste, Good and Bad" in all this--is that not part of our culture anymore?

[Patsy Stone]

22. This was one of the best side-effects.

See ya, Bo! You ass.

[medeak]

25. couldn't believe the hatred Contessa had to endure...

she never fought back that I saw...just recall saying "bless her heart" when he brought on his gossip bitch to cream her.

[medeak]

65. he called Contessa "fat pig"

forgot to say..along with "fat ass" ect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Imus

[Clark2008]

68. Fat?

You know - to most women, that's a worse insult than being called a bitch or the "C" word, particularly in today's "be thin to be in" society.

BTW, if Contessa Brewer is "fat," then I'm a cow and, when I'm not pregnant, I'm about as big as an ant.

[medeak]

76. she said of him:

"he has a problem with beautiful women"

good comeback. Got so tired and sick of his "fat" comments about so many women...emailed that he should take a look at his own pudgy son before calling others fat.

[PassingFair]

84. Here's a shot of the "heifer"

[suziedemocrat]

96. It really galls me when fugly old men disparage beautiful women's looks.

I mean, does he own a mirror?

[peacetalksforall]

8. Recommended. Many reasons. Most important to this post: People have to

know that this wasn't just the Rutgers' athletes. I was apalled by the way NBC employees and outside guests, mostely female, but not 100%, were treated. Imus is sick. Had he been healthy he would have thought about the example he set by simple thinking, especially after being called in so many times.

This article gave us more insight into Keith, but it also gave us more insight into NBC (or confirmed what we already knew).

NBC allowed Imus. NBC enabled Imus. Imus enabled others. Imus abused others.

There are so many people talking about his good works.

Well, slimy works were going on.

Because he is sick - split personalities. Delusions of rights and privileges.

Because NBC executives got yuks out of it.

Because of commercial reasons.
Because of WH reasons.
Because of Republican Party reasons.

All those reasons?

Whenever anyone tells you about his goodness and charity - tell them about the the co-worker abuse.
Whenever anyone tells you that he apologized, ask if he has apologized to the co-workers, yet.

[havocmom]

16. about all the charity... many officials thought 'the ranch' warranted looking into

two and a half million $ for about 100-300 kids per year? Imus was USING sick kids for a tax dodge for the lifestyle he wanted. IRS and others didn't see it as so very charitable. Looked pretty suspicious to the the folks who look at that stuff professionally.

[WolverineDG]

77. He just got brand new GMC vehicles too

They had some guy from GM on his show about 2 weeks ago & he was talking about how much he just loved his brand new, gas-guzzling SUV.

dg

[wisteria]

20. And you have personal knowledge of the employee problems or did you get your facts from KO?

You know, KO isn't God and he has an interest in promoting the bad side. So you are letting KO decide your opinions for you. KO airing his grievances was wrong and classless. I have stopped watching him because of this. Just who does he think he is slamming someone when they are down and out.

[Berry Cool]

35. I tend to believe what an actual insider said over what a non-insider says.

Crazy of me, I know, but I do.

I never said KO was God.

"He has an interest in promoting the bad side"? What interest would that be, pray tell?

I don't let KO decide my opinions for me. But I have come to trust the truth of what he says when it comes to things like this.

I see nothing wrong or classless at all in his airing his grievances. And what's more, I don't believe your "I have stopped watching him" shtick. I believe you are just using it to try to make yourself look more believable as a critic.

If Don Imus is "down and out," it is because he put himself there. You make him sound like an innocent lamb being kicked by big, bad Olbermann. It just doesn't wash.

[suziedemocrat]

97. IMUS down and out? His is very rich and he'll be fine. The Citibank workers about to be laid off

are down and out. Kids who are stuck in Iraq indefinitely are down and out. Children who lost their Father or Mother, parents who lost a child, and people who lost their soul-mate in Iraq are down and out. People in New Orleans who are still without homes are down and out. I'm sorry - I don't give a rats ass about Imus!

[peacetalksforall]

40. I observed it on tv. I noticed the corporate change in staffing. Recognizable females

who deliver the news on their own programs or in partnership. I heard him abuse them. I saw their faces. I saw and heard some of them try to defend themselves or question why he was doing what he was doning. Each person who suddenly disappeared was replaced by someone else as if in rotation to find someone Imus would accept or not abuse.

I heard him rant against 'xxxx = higher ups' who made this decision to have them read the news and sit there for the three hours. Maybe higher ups thought their female presence would tone things down. It didn't last - they all disappeared.

They had their own Imus In The Morning employees who shared in commentary - all gone - ashamedly abused in the eyes of me - a viewer.

I watched this happening. I heard this happening. Just as I heard the stories and solicitations for the products. And the McQuirk, Imus, and impersonator special put-downs and insults.

No, I wasn't in the executive offices. I have satisfactory eyesight and hearing. I have an idea of the inside of corporations and Human Resources guidlines and policies that they are supposed to follow. I am capable of recognizing abuse.

I just got caught up on the posts for this thread - some posters have already named some of those females.

So my question - has he asked for a meeting so that he can ask if he can apologize to them?

[spooky3]

53. very good points

[WolverineDG]

78. Imus is hardly "down & out"

He's got millions in the bank & a private jet. Many of his victims aren't so lucky.

dg

[femrap]

89. omg...I never watched his show, of course.

But the more I learn about him, the more I revel that he's off the air. I guess women didn't watch his show for the same reasons I didn't, but I had no idea he was so damn cruel.

What is actually pretty amazing is that a woman employee didn't hide his precious chair or steal his silly hat. Amazing what the women at msnbc put up with....damn.

[Leopolds Ghost]

91. If it wasn't just the Rutger's athletes, then apply the principle fairly.

Rush called the Duke LAX accuser a "ho" (March 2006)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

("Fire Rush and Glenn Beck Thread")

No "retroactive getaway free cards" allowed. Imus didn't get one.

No "Oh, but no TV personality or on-air sensitivity consultant thinks Rush should be fired, so I'm not going to go there." Time for a little consistency and independent thinking on our part. Turn off yer TVs and pick up your pens.

[spooky3]

10. k&r. It is always tough for whistle-blowers to know what to do and

how they can be the most effective at getting change made. Blame lies not with the employees like Keith who want to solve the problems but with management, who has the power to fix things but doesn't want to do so and allows more problems to occur.

Thanks so much for taking the time to transcribe and post this fascinating interview. I am not at all surprised to learn that people in this situation act in accordance with their racist, sexist, bullying comments made on the air. It is a very familiar story, and one of the key reasons why those who say "sticks and stones..." are completely missing the point.

I COMPLETELY AGREE with your next to the last paragraph in particular. I don't know how Keith managed to keep his silence when interviewing Capus (sp?), who was so full of shit I almost changed channels. The evidence, especially the timing, is overwhelming that it was only after the money started turning away that MSNBC did anything. Mgt. was lucky (the employees were not though; they paid the price) they weren't the target of discrimination lawsuits many times previously. As I posted on another Imus thread earlier this week (and got attacked for) there is nothing that exempts radio shows from the workplace anti-discrimination laws. Now that we know more about what was really happening, I find Capus's comments even more insulting to Keith's audience.

[Berry Cool]

14. I think I know how Keith kept silent when Capus was on.

And I also know why Keith will never say, point blank--at least not on the air where you or I will hear it--that Imus was fired because of the advertiser bailout, and not overarchingly because of the voice of the employees calling for his head. But he will also not say that it had nothing to do with the decision, because we are all not dumb and we all know that when it comes to broadcasting, it's all about the Benjamins.

Keith kept silent because of all those years when he DID speak up against his employers and suffered for it. Either he got fired, or his contract was not renewed, or he got suspended, or his situation at work became untenable and he had to leave, or his employers wanted to take him off the air and just pay out his contract, or whatever. And this time, this one time, he told himself: "I am finally on a roll. I have been with the same employer for four years, I have found a groove, and they are happy with me--so much so that I just got a four-year contract renewal and am making good money and set to get network exposure as well. And I'll be damned if I am going to blow all that now, just because Don Imus finally said something so stupid that even the rest of the world had to take notice."

Really, why should anyone else have had to lose a job simply because Don Imus or his crew did or said something stupid? Why should everyone who worked at MSNBC have had to either suck it up, leave, or risk being fired, just because Imus was allowed to do whatever he pleased there?

This time, Olbermann found a way to steer a middle course--to let some of his feelings be known while holding the rest of them back until management acted and he was free to say more. Good for him. Few others in his position would not have done the same, and had they not, they probably would have suffered more for it than it was worth.

[spooky3]

29. I completely agree. And thanks again. And just to clarify

I meant "I don't know how he managed to keep silent" in a figurative way, not literally to imply that he should have said something. I meant it in the sense of "I don't know how I managed to keep from bursting out laughing when that guy tripped on the banana peel at the library." Keith would have accomplished nothing good in the situation if he had grilled Capus, it was not his responsibility to do so, and those of us paying attention surely could evaluate Capus' remarks for ourselves. As I said, blame does not belong on the employees who are trying to do the right thing. It belongs squarely on the shoulders of the culprits and the management that enables them, so that they can make $.

[Berry Cool]

37. Thanks--you clarified, and I understand! n/t

[Cass]

13. Very interesting, thanks for posting this.

I can understand completely why Keith held off on making his opinion on Imus known publicly.

Anyway, the NBC news president (I can't remember his name) was talking about his decision to fire Imus the other day on MSNBC and he said something that really struck me which you mentioned in your post....he had made his decision to fire Imus based not only on the public's opinion of this but, even more so, based on what his own NBC employees were saying to him. That made me stop in my tracks and realize that they had a big problem on their hands with this guy and this wasn't just an isolated incident. I agree with you that it took the advertisers jumping ship to get them to act but that statement made it clear they had ongoing internal problems with Imus and should have acted much sooner.

This wasn't a case of Imus and his sidekicks saying shocking offensive things as an act (not that that would be okay) - they are the real deal because their behavior on and off the air backed up their words. The incident involving Contessa Brewer on the Imus show posted here describing the vicious harassment she endured from Imus and his sick sidekicks was one example; but its become clear this sort of behavior was an ongoing problem. No one should have to endure the type of harassment this guy was dishing out to those sharing the workplace with him. He should have been let go long ago.

I would be a very happy person to see other similarly offensive talking heads taken off the public airwaves. There's just no excuse to use racist, sexist and bigoted remarks to sell a product.

[C_U_L8R]

15. Every person in media has an opportunity

to help lift popular culture and humanity to new heights
and equally, to drag it right down into the sewer.
What these people do with their 15 minutes of opportunity
is up to them - it's their personal legacy. Don Imus
and others like O'Reilly, Hannity and Coulter don't seem to
mind that they're simply an ugly stain on society.
A brief but very ugly stain. It's fascinating that THIS is
what people CHOOSE to do with their life's work.

[Cass]

27. Very well put and a great comment on this whole sordid mess. nt

[wisteria]

17. I also thought KO comments about Imus were classless and un call for.

It seemed he had a personal grudge against Imus. This type of personal attack when a person is down is dehumanizing and despicable. Sure seemed like KO just had to get some attention and air some dirty laundry that should not be public knowledge. That he kicked Imus around when he is down like this seems to indicate just what type of man KO really is. I have lost a lot of respect for him and his opinions. He seems to be getting just a little bit to self righteous. He had better watch that ego and his mouth, it could end up costing him too.

Real lack of class, honestly.

[Bucky]

21. If you read the full text of the post, you'll see exactly what that "personal grudge" was.

Olbermann didn't like Imus because he was a sexual harasser and a bully. And yes, what an ass Olbermann is for being bothered about such trivial things.

[wisteria]

28. Oh, so KO is judge and jury and is a real saint. Sorry, I just don't buy all of this

crap. KO was still classless and needed to keep his opinions to himself. It is bad to be denouncing someone who can't even defend themself. This amounts to a one sided opinion. Sorry, but he was wrong to do this. I have lost respect for the man. This wasn't and isn't his crusade to carry forth. He sounds like he wants some of the attention for being a good guy. He shouldn't of said anything without Imus there to defend himself. Was Imus even asked to reply to KO accusations? This stinks and it smacks of further dehumanizing a human being. MY gosh, the man was married with a wife and child and they seem to be well adjusted and supportive. Mrs. Imus doesn't strike me as the they type of woman to live with an abuser or sexist pig.
Oberman is trying to capitalize on this- a very classless thing to do.

[spooky3]

31. How do you know what the truth is?

Why are you so quick to judge what is "classless", and engage in all sorts of speculation about his motives with absolutely no evidence whatsoever?

Every single incident that Keith described very well could have happened and they are entirely consistent with the pattern of remarks made on the air. These kinds of incidents go on in many workplaces, and if you don't believe it, you don't know much about workplaces.

[terisan]

36. Imus can write letter to the editor or op-ed at NYT. What is wrong with dialogue?

I think Imus is remarried with wife and child plus 4 children from first marriage.

[peacetalksforall]

47. Since you questioned my credentials earlier in this thread - I'll

question yours by saying that you don't seem to have much of an idea of employee rights AND responsibilities within a business. Somone referred to KO as a whistleblower. In actuality, there was nothing to give a whistle about because there was nothing hidden in about the abuse.

So let's pick on Al Roker now.

[spooky3]

52. just to clarify

whistle-blowers try to get wrongdoing stopped by reporting it to people they believe have the power to stop it. There may be many whistle-blowers, and there may be other people who are aware of the wrongdoing and do nothing. The wrongdoing is not necessarily a secret or hidden. In fact, if you look at most of the famous cases of wrongdoing that eventually get made public, almost always there are multiple people aware of it and at least one of them tried to get it stopped but was ignored or worse. Keith was very definitely a whistle-blower.

[Garbo 2004]

50. Imus' treatment of MSNBC's Contessa Brewer was very public. n/t

[Batgirl]

55. "it is bad to be denouncing someone who can't even defend themself"

You mean, sort of like when one of the most prominent and powerful voices in broadcasting used his public platform to utter racial and misogynistic slurs against some college kids who don't have their own radio show to "defend themself" on?

"This stinks and it smacks of further dehumanizing a human being"
You mean like how Imus honored the humanity of a group of accomplished student/athletes by dismissing them with a racist insult?

Obviously I lack the proper humanitarian instincts that would allow me to understand how Imus is some kind of downtrodden victim.

[WolverineDG]

79. I wouldn't be surprised if she filed for divorce

He picked a vicious fight with her on the air the last time he was at the Ranch. She was on to talk up the "Greening the Cleaning" & her new book, but he tore into her for something. She was visibly pissed.

dg

[Skidmore]

32. So I guess Imus is a hero and it's okay for him to kick people around

on a regular basis because he such a good guy and has been so mistreated.

[gaspee]

103. Oh please

seriously... just... please. Give me a break on defending poor, poor, Don Imus. Imus is the one who is, has been, and always will be classless. I love how you continue to discount his deplorable treatment of his women coworkers over the years. Unfricking believable.

[ProSense]

18. Here is the link to the program:

Keith's Defense

[Bucky]

19. Imus's staff is in on this. One of his on-air stooges threw out the word "jigaboo" first

The problem was the whole tone of the show. The boss set the tone, but his underlings ran with it and started taking things too far. I'm glad Imus got fired, but that guy who said "jigaboo" on air needs to be fined and run out of the industry permanently.

[suziedemocrat]

98. Yes - I found the word "jigaboo" enormously offensive!

Yet it never seems to get mentioned. Maybe because they don't use "jigaboo" in Rap music, so they can't use the "They use the word themselves" defense.

[DeepModem Mom]

23. Thank you, Berry! K&R!

[wisteria]

24. All speech is covered under the First Amendment- so now KO is a Contitutional lawyer? n/t

[Left Hook]

26. There are exceptions

Imus was fired by a company, thus doesn't qualify as government as stated by the constitution. Imus will be back on the radio, I see him head to XM.

[wisteria]

30. No, they are in talks of merger. They don't want and can't afford any controversy now.

Imus may well be done for good.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

54. Geez, I hope he can feed his family. Maybe

he'll have to sell his $30 million dollar house in CT. My heart just bleeds for him.

Unfortunately he will find some other forum on which to spew his venom for you people who seem to find it amusing and witty.

[Left Hook]

56. He is good friends with Mel Karmazan

and George Parsons. What controversy could possibly affect pay radio? Opie and Anthony had a couple fuck at the St. Patrick Cathedrial, they were fire from terestrial, but was hired by XM almost imediately. Even after the merger, he, and I guarantee this, will be hired for satellite radio. The columnists have money on this. I wonder what Sharpton would think if Imus was hired on XM/Sirius. hmmm

[tkmorris]

66. The lengths you are going to.....

It is really creeping me out how far you are going to defend Imus. You passed anything logical a long way back.

[Justice]

100. You took the words out of my mouth!

[terisan]

33. I think CBS comes under FCC regulations regarding speech, no?

[Berry Cool]

41. Of course they do.

This is not a free speech/First Amendment issue, and people who keep repeating that it is are entirely misguided. It is an issue of whether or not an employer has the right to fire an employee, or whether or not a network has the right to cease broadcasting, views and speech that they find objectionable. They do.

Imus is free to find another employer to broadcast what he has to say...if he can. He is also free to stand on the streetcorner and say it out loud, or publish it in a blog, or buy a printing press and print and distribute it, or buy a radio or TV station and broadcast it over his airwaves. The government cannot throw him into prison for that. And he has not been thrown into prison for this. He has only been fired. Period.

There is no Constitutional right to do whatever you want on the job and not get fired.

[spooky3]

38. Those lawyers will tell you Keith is right. Check this out:

There is plenty of evidence on the (free) web that will help inform you about the Constitution. Here is one example:

The First Amendment by its terms applies only to laws enacted by Congress, and not to the actions of private persons. Supp.15 This leads to a ''state action'' (or ''governmental action'') limitation similar to that applicable to the Fourteenth Amendment. Supp.16 The limitation has seldom been litigated in the First Amendment context, but there is no obvious reason why analysis should differ markedly from Fourteenth Amendment state action analysis. Both contexts require ''cautious analysis of the quality and degree of Government relationship to the particular acts in question.'' Supp.17 In holding that the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is a governmental entity for purposes of the First Amendment, the Court declared that ''he Constitution constrains governmental action 'by whatever instruments or in whatever modes that action may be taken.'. . . nd under whatever congressional label.''Supp.18 The relationship of the government to broadcast licensees affords other opportunities to explore the breadth of ''governmental action.''Supp.19

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendme...

[Lerkfish]

42. um, not really. you're misunderstanding the concept of the first amendment

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Lerkfish/22

[Berry Cool]

45. Thanks to all who are clarifying the meaning of "First Amendment free speech" here.

I cannot believe the number of blogs you can go look up right now on Technorati that say "Imus has been fired, free speech is dead." Apparently a lot of people did not get such good grades in their high school civics class, or they would know the difference between First Amendment right to free speech (i.e., the government can't punish you for saying whatever you like) and the rights of an employee. Which, when it comes to saying whatever he pleases on the job, do not exist. His "freedom" is in the fact that if he doesn't like the restrictions on his speech at his workplace, he is "free" to seek another employer.

[peacetalksforall]

48. Are we humans or citizens first. Decency trumps Free Speech.

Discipline trumps Free Speech. The Constitution is about Fair Speech.

[CC]

86. I think they quite teaching

civics a generation ago. How else could *co get away with what they do?

Thanks for the run down on what KO said Berry. I never could stand Imus so he never lasted on my tv or radio for more than a second. He had his own culture of hate he spewed and I refuse to listen to any of the hate spewers.

[Bucky]

43. Imus has the right to speak his mind. The question was whether he has the right to keep his job.

In the end, MSNBC's management decided to exercise their right to turn a profit.

This is not a story about people's rights.

[Triana]

46. Bingo....(n/t)

[ProSense]

51. It's about hypocrisy and money

MSNBC seems shocked Imus is a shock jock.

Obama is calling for Imus to be fired, but thought it okay to promote his book on the show.

Olbermann calling out Malik Shabazz for calling Michelle Malkin a political prostitute when he himself has referred to Ann Coutler as a man.

Olbermann using the excuse that it's okay to call out other network personalities but not his own in order to protect his staff.

I heard what the president of MSNBC said, which was that staff complained that they were not comfortable with the on-air comments. Maybe he was lying and Olbermann is telling the truth.

"Media Matters"; by Jamison Foser

Don't think twice: Media inured to subtler smears, pervasive sexism

Now that MSNBC and CBS Radio have both dropped Don Imus, and the Rutgers basketball team has accepted his apology, Imus himself is no longer the most interesting thing about the controversy he touched off with his racist and sexist comments about the team -- if he ever was, that is.

One of the more interesting aspects of the controversy is whether (and why) Imus' guests -- some of the most influential and respected journalists and public figures in America among them -- have, by their appearances on his show, tacitly endorsed his behavior. Time.com Washington editor Ana Marie Cox, a frequent Imus guest, explained this week how she came to overlook the "casual locker-room misogyny" of Imus' show:

<...>

Or when Chris Matthews compares Hillary Clinton to a stripper and refers to her as an "uppity" woman. Or when he says she looks "witchy." Or when he regularly asserts that "Midwest guys" are "not up to modern women as president" -- an assertion which, given his other comments about Clinton, one can only assume is a classic case of projection.

Or when countless mainstream journalists dismissively refer to John Edwards as the "Breck Girl." Forget for a moment the propriety of journalists' repeating GOP talking points in order to derisively describe a Democratic presidential candidate. What do these journalists imply about women when they use "girl" as a pejorative description?

more

It's not just the right! The notion that people who appeared on his show approved of his "behavior," is hogwash. This is a show format that MSNBC willingly brought to the airwaves and advertisers willingly paid for. Iow, it was acceptable to give this show a venue until now, and what about the ones that are still on the air?

Why did the advertisers bail so quickly? Why did MSNBC and CBS wait until advertisers bailed to fire their $50 million dollar host? Why didn't MSNBC and advertisers wait for the apology? Why is the WSJ pushing that this started with Media Matters? If so, when is the WSJ (and media) going to run with this?

Imus was fired, but to pretend it has to do with MSNBC and media's new found sense of decency his ridiculous.

[NYCGirl]

60. Obama was on Imus' show ONCE two years ago — quite a difference from some

of his rich white guy "regulars."

[ProSense]

69. So it was okay for

a rich (his net worth is more than Biden's and Dodd's combined) black guy to appear once to promote his book?

[NYCGirl]

70. Better than all those rich white guys who show up DOZENS OF TIMES. NT

[Berry Cool]

64. I already made many of your points about why MSNBC and CBS waited.

But when you say "Olbermann calling out Malik Shabazz for calling Michelle Malkin a political prostitute when he himself has referred to Ann Coutler as a man," you need to take into account that this is one of very few instances in which Olbermann has called anyone a name based on appearance. And give him credit--he hasn't been on Imus's show in the past 10 years, because he did not like the climate in which it took place.

"Olbermann using the excuse that it's okay to call out other network personalities but not his own in order to protect his staff"? Nonsense. Olbermann called out other network personalities because they were doing wrong things. His staff was not. He wanted to protect his staff. They deserved to be protected. How does that qualify as "excuse making"? It doesn't.

And for the record, Obama said he would not appear with Imus again, even before his show was canceled.

[ProSense]

67. Nonsense? Olbermann didn't call out personalities on his own network because

he wanted to protect his staff from the repercussions. Did you listen to his Olbemann?

How many times has Shabazz called Malkin a political prostitute more than once?

Also, I'm sure Obama knew about Imus' show before he appeared on the program.

It's simply hypocrisy.

[Berry Cool]

72. Uh, yeah, I DID listen to the broadcast. I am the OP. I transcribed it right here!

And that is why we have this thread!

My problem was when you said "Olbermann using the excuse that it's okay to call out other network personalities but not his own in order to protect his staff." I called that "nonsense" because you crammed words in his mouth that he didn't say, and then you called them an "excuse."

Olbermann did say that he held back somewhat on calling out someone from his own network, but it was only in part to protect his staff. One can also argue that the reason he said anything AT ALL was because he wanted to protect his staff, and didn't want to see it go on anymore.

But he did not say that "It's okay to call out other network personalities but not his own." He simply explained his choice and his decision behind not naming Imus Worst Person in the World. That was IT. Because otherwise, he had some pretty strong words about Imus--on his show, on Dan Patrick's show, and off the set--they just stopped at a public demand that he be fired or a WPITW nomination. That was ALL.

And I don't see that explanation as an "excuse." I think it was a good EXPLANATION.

And yes, he has called out other network personalities because they were doing wrong things. Just as he did Imus.

And it doesn't matter how many times Shabazz has called Malkin a "prostitute." He wasn't demanding extreme action against Shabazz, he was just doing a Worst Person nomination.

And so what if Obama knew before he went on? Is he not entitled to one dumb mistake?

To call this "hypocrisy" is absurd.

[ProSense]

80. It's hypocrisy. He didn't say it, but his response

to the question about calling out other network personalities and those on his own network was that he did not want his staff subjected to the repercussions of his actions. That may be fair, but he is calling out Imus after the fact and Imus isn't around to counter.

As far as Shabazz, maybe KO can do a segment naming himself worse person.

The notion that it was Imus was tolerated in order to spare people their jobs or criticism is laughable coming from KO.

It's hypocrisy.

[spooky3]

81. What matters more--getting the wrongdoing stopped

or making a big public statement about it and making problems worse?

Keith explained that he went to management to try to get the situation changed. He sized up the situation and saw he did not have enough power to get management to do anything, and that speaking out on his show would only make things worse, and STILL wouldn't get the problem corrected.

Lay the blame on management, and on Imus, and not on the people who tried but didn't have as much power as Imus.

[ProSense]

85. KO is reaming out

Bush in 15-minute commentaries, but doesn't have the power to call Imus out on his show? Give me a break!

[Berry Cool]

88. You don't deserve a break

if you truly believe that KO, as an EMPLOYEE of MSNBC, had the power to call Imus out on his show when management had specifically asked him not to.

No employed person has that much power.

If KO deliberately went against their wishes and did it anyway, they could have carefully weighed just how valuable he was to them. Which is pretty valuable, so he probably would have gotten several warnings...before they finally fired him. They might even have found an excuse for not having to pay out the rest of his contract--i.e., he violated company policy, whatever. And then where would he be? What would he have gained for himself or for anyone else?

Do you have a boss? Would you be allowed to stand in the middle of your workplace for 15 minutes speechifying about how one of your coworkers should be fired?

[ProSense]

90. "If KO deliberately went against their wishes and did it anyway,

they could have carefully weighed just how valuable he was to them. Which is pretty valuable, so he probably would have gotten several warnings...before they finally fired him.

At least Imus would have been called out. Was it or was it not important?

Like I said, Imus was KO is saying he tolerated, while others on staff suffered, in order to spare a few people their jobs.

[spooky3]

94. guess we will just have to disagree about what the best way is to get

changes made, depending on the situation.

[spooky3]

104. the power TO GET THE WRONGDOING STOPPED

is what we're talking about. Not the power to "call out." I don't know how much more clearly this can be articulated.

Has Keith stopped Bush from his screwups and intentional wrongdoing on many fronts? Has he brought the troops home? If not, why aren't you blaming him for that too?

Keith "calls out" Bush to his bosses, namely the American people. So far they haven't taken all necessary action either. But he is doing his part, and the public is working on it, not as quickly as we would like.

Keith DID speak up about Imus, to the people who had the power to change it, and they refused. BLAME THEM. Blame the other white males who may have worked there who said nothing to management at all, if you must.

The American people didn't have any direct authority to fire Imus, as they do with Bush and others in his party. Keith correctly perceived that "calling out" on his show wouldn't work and would actually make things worse for Imus' victims.

[Pacifist Patriot]

73. Please tell me you are joking.

Surely there are no DU denizens left who believe the fallacy that all speech is covered under the first amendment. Black mark for the beak who taught you civics.

[flying_monkeys]

83. Yes, but only against GOVERNMENT interference.

It doesn't apply in an employment setting.


Go to your library and do some researching

[SemperEadem]

95. distribution/dissemintation of speech IS NOT A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT

There is no one who has said he has no right to say whatever he chooses. He can stand on his front porch and say whatever the fuck he wants to say and THAT is where his right begins and ends. What he DOESN'T have a right to is an expectation that his employer broadcasts/cablecasts or distributes/disseminates his speech. He doesn't even own the equipment, the studio or the license. Learn the difference.

[Catherine Vincent]

49. Keith is the real deal.

And that's why I like him!

[bleever]

57. Great post, Berry.

For this recap much thanks.

[riverdeep]

59. Sigh.

People are still making the free speech arguement? I could even understand if people wanted to say it sends a chilling effect throughout radio, but it has nothing to do with the first amendment.

To all those that think it does, tell you what, next time your job says to hand over your urine or you don't get the job or stay on the job, you tell them that's an illegal search and seizure and you're protected by the constitution. See how that goes down.

[riverdeep]

62. I wonder what the working environment at Fox is like?

We already know about Bill O'Loofah. Can you imagine an employee retreat with Bill, Neal Boortz, and Hannity?

[Seabiscuit]

93. The title of your post sent shivers up my spine. n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

101. Dangerous - High injury rate because of hands and fingers being stepped on

The knuckle-draggers are prone to this type on injury.

[july302001]

75. ethics

Money corrupts. It's clear from this essay that the Imus people had too much power and money. They've just aggravated and possibly harassed an unknown number of innocent fellow network employees who did nothing wrong except for being forced to share a workplace building.

On the corporate or institution level: It's better to start off with a set of values and an ethical frame of mind, than to learn them the hard way like MSNBC and CBS have. If they had started off with a decent set of ethics about what is OK on the airwaves, Imus (and certain of the other talk jocks) wouldn't have years of free reign to spew their venom and (also - incidentally) anger their fellow (innocent) employees.

During the last 10 years, talk radio has made me really wonder about America and what it stands for.

It's time for America to look at itself and decide whether venom, vulgarity and hated are worth $10 million a year, which is apparently what imus was paid. If America values division, racism, and vulgarity, then go ahead, put the "talkers" on a pedestal as has been done since R*shbot came on the scene.

On the other hand, if America's values are something better, something deeper, we need to dethrone these jerks.

If we just kicked three more of these bloated division-seeders off the air, we'd have a cool $20 or $40 million that could go to worthwhile things in the economy...like maybe giving that aggravated clerk-tpist an extra $1 an hour...

[fortyfeetunder]

106. I wish I could kick and recommend your post!

Good analysis!

[The Doctor.]

92. So the 'isolated incidents' are just symptoms of a disease bubbling up...

until it's noticed.

MSNBC took a hit on this, no doubt.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

99. I just finished reading Alberto Gonzales's screed in WaPo this morning. What a

difference between A.G.'s whine and K.O.'s heartfelt and articulate essay.

MKJ

[Faygo Kid]

102. It was a disgusting mishmash written for him. I was surprised to see it.

He's testifying before Congress this week, and some meaningless pap written for him by others appears under his name in the Post? He has a forum - a Congressional hearing. If I was a senator, I would be pissed that he spouts platitudes in the Washington Post days before he is to testify before a panel under oath.

Of course it may be that the Washington Post - pretty much a house organ of the Bush Administration at this point - offered him the space, and Rove OKd it.

[Jennicut]

105. What is up with Mike and Chris from WFAN? Are they for real?

Imus deserved what he got. Anyone else who blames KO for anything regarding this Imus mess is being just as ridiculous. Imus dug himself a hole and MSNBC was right to bury him. At least they fired his sexist racist ass unlike Fox, CNN and other radio stations who keep O'Reilly (Mr. Sexual Harassment himself)on, Glenn Beck on and Rush on and all the others. Ko did the right thing. Let the bosses handle it and the speak about what happened and what bothered him afterwards. I really don't care if Imus's family loves him. People who love people who abuse others are enablers. Imus was mean and nasty to others and karma came back and bit him in the ass. As far as drug use and failed marriages, no karma was needed. He did those things all on his own.

[Marie26]

107. Imus was a bully, on & off the air.

I am VERY happy to see him go.