My LTTE: "Imus in the Cross-hairs"

[hiaasenrocks]

I realize that I'm probably in the minority here at DU on this specific issue, but I've always viewed DU as being pretty tolerant towards those who engage in reasonable dissent from the majority opinion.

Anyway, here's my LTTE:

I used to listen to Imus quite a bit. As the years go by, I listen less frequently. Not because I have anything against him. I'm just getting to the point where I find him less interesting and less funny than I previously thought him to be.

I'm thankful that I know how to change the channel. Maybe we need a national seminar on this. Then anti-Rosie O'Donnell people can choose to not watch The View, and anti-Imus people can choose to listen to something else. If this happens and the market subsequently sends these people to the same place that failed sitcoms go to die, so be it. I really don't have a problem with that.

As a writer working my way toward making it my profession, I like to think I'm a free speech absolutist, though I admit to having a passing desire to punch certain people in the mouth sometimes, just as I'm sure some feel the same about me.

I just don't like the idea of a group of people being able to shut down debate by being louder than the target of their opposition.

I guess that comes from my disdain for—and I'm using this word loosely, I know—fascism, in all forms, including that which seems to sometimes stem from an organized group of people who have decided someone else's speech isn't as valuable as theirs and that it's their civic duty to bully someone off the air or off the pages.

If more people learned how to use that tricky little TV remote or radio dial, we'd be in better shape, in my opinion.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Some good points there

I've never listened or watched this Imus person, and am only vaguely aware of some remarks he made which from my limited perspective appeared to be, at the very least, tasteless and impolite. But you've hit the nail on the head--the way to stop those whose words you don't like is to stop listening to them and to encourage others to do the same. The only exception to the free speech rule, as I understand it, is that a person cannot advocate violence that would cause another's harm or do something that would cause people to be in danger needlessly (crying "Fire" in a crowded theater when there is no fire).

[spooky3]

11. the DU lawyers know better than I that there are more exceptions

such as threatening violence against a politician.

Imus can share any opinions he wants on his own time without interference from the government--that is what is meant by free speech--but he is not entitled any more than you or I am to be paid to say whatever he wishes and to have it broadcast.

[hiaasenrocks]

20. Good post. And you haven't missed much by missing Imus. n/t

[Bluebear]

2. Calling a team of African American women "nappy headed hos" is not "debate"

And defending his big fresh mouth in the interest of "free speech" and calling people who want him fired as "bullies".... Eccch. Yeah I would say you are in the minority here.

[CatWoman]

3. and to take a page from Imus' book

he's also full of shit.

Signed,

a nappy-headed ho

[Bluebear]

4. Thank you.

Since when is using racial epithets "debate".

[hiaasenrocks]

7. Since when? Since never, according to me. I didn't say it was.

See my first response to your post, or just re-read what I originally wrote, and you'll see that I never said Imus' words were "debate." I referred, outside the LTTE, to my opinion and debate.

[bmbmd]

27. Nobody talks like that

unless their heart is full of hate.

[hiaasenrocks]

5. I didn't say that was debate. I was referring to *my* comments.

I wasn't defending Imus' words, any more than I was defending Rosie's. I think that's pretty clear. And if their words aren't "speech" what are they?

What is your view on this issue? What, if anything, should happen to Imus and his producer? And if you suggest taking some sort of action outside of boycotting, would you mind explaining your recommendation and also telling us where you would draw the line? Would it involve deciding who was offended by which comments, on a scale of importance or something?

[Bluebear]

8. No, actually it is not cleaar at ALL in your LTTE.

It just sounds like more "if you don't like it, just change the channel" rhetoric. My view? If i owned the station he would be fired, as I would not pay a racist to broadcast his views. That's not stifling anyone's freedom of speech.

[hiaasenrocks]

13. Okay.

Please cite the portion of my LTTE in which I said that Imus was engaging in "debate."

[hiaasenrocks]

30. Still can't find it all these hours later, huh? That's what I thought.

It would be nice if you had simply addressed what I actually wrote instead of making up crap and responding to something I didn't say.

Thanks for the "debate." :)

[spooky3]

6. MSNBC obviously thinks Imus' speech is more valuable than most

people's; otherwise, they would pay others what they are paying him. So are you calling them fascists?

Free speech does not give you a right to be paid and your opinions broadcast. People who do have those privileges have a duty to use them responsibly. Repeated racist and sexist speech, particularly by people who are in the dominant group, is not responsible.

[hiaasenrocks]

10. Paying someone for opinions is not the same as shutting down

the speech of others. I don't think your comparison is valid.

I agree that free speech does not (legally) give you the right to a platform. That platform is decided by demand. And you'll notice that that is exactly the remedy I called for: decrease demand.

[spooky3]

15. And the "demand" is expressed when viewers tell MSNBC of their

displeasure. Turning the channel is not the only legitimate means of expression. Since you and I do not have the ability to "shut down" the speech of others, but only to express concerns to the employers who make money from Imus and the publicity Imus' sexist and racist speech has generated, YOUR point is the invalid one.

This debate has already been carried on elsewhere; you may want to look into it to better understand why so few people share your views, if not to reconsider your own position.

[hiaasenrocks]

17. I've read some of the other threads

and some other websites. I've seen nothing that changes my mind about the importance of free speech in a free society.

Could you give me an idea of where you draw the lines in matters such as these? Thanks.

[Venus Dog]

9. I'd like to dress up like a pirate and talk about cadaver-looking and pasty faced fat old white men!

With little dicks. Can I have MY own radio show?

[CatWoman]

12. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

:rofl:

[hiaasenrocks]

14. If there's a demand for it, and someone willing to give you

the platform, sure.

[Venus Dog]

22. But old fat pasty faced white men own all the media

so I doubt I would EVER be able to sell it. And if I was ever able to somehow squeeze through all the Pillsbury doughboys to get my own radio show where I can call male football players faggots or whatever - you know, feeding into all those old stereotypes, I have this strange premonition that I would probably be called a lesbo bitch or the equivalent by the powers that be. I'm just guessing :evilgrin:

[hiaasenrocks]

23. As we all know, money drives the media in this country. So...

if there's a demand, someone would probably put you on the air to make a buck off of it.

Go for it. :)

[DURHAM D]

16. Pass a hat - I would drop in a few bucks to watch that show. n/t

[hiaasenrocks]

24. With some good writing, it could be funny. n/t

[Clark2008]

18. I'm a little torn on this issue.

As a reporter for 12 years, I, too, am a free speech absolutist, which is why I think boycotts are the best solution to inappropriate or intolerant speech: you're fighting speech with speech.

What Imus said was truly appalling, but I defend his right to say it - it's hardly the equivalent of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater when there is not a threat. I also, however, defend the rights of all those offended by what his said the freedom to call him out for it by using their First Amendment rights to scream as loud as they want.

As long as no one is throwing sticks or advocating violence, then it's all protected.

[hiaasenrocks]

25. We're probably not too far apart in opinions. Thanks for a good post. Now I'm off to

get some sleep. Got an early assignment in the morning that does not, thank goodness, involve covering this tabloid-type story. :)

[Straight Shooter]

19. Changing the channel is like a man bringing home flowers the day after he beats his wife.

Sorry, but the damage is done. I do believe in free speech, but I believe in responsible free speech, because I know that words can be hurtful and harmful. We have a nation which has been blessed with countless contributions from people of color, and yet they don't seem to be accorded even the slightest respect for their dignity on the airwaves when Imus, Rush, Coulter, Beck or Savage are on the microphone or at their word processor. Bear in mind those gasbags have a huge audience whose racist/misogynist views are then validated, so you get a self-perpetuating vicious cycle: "Imus said it on the airwaves, so I can say it in the parking lot to the black woman who I think stole my spot."

Calling a group of basketball players "hos"? Excuse me. That's racist, it's sexist. It HURT those women, it hurt their fans, it hurt a lot of people of color, just as surely as if Imus had taken a firehose and turned it full blast on them.

It seems to me, in the interest of protecting free speech, we have forgotten about the interest of protecting the dignity of humanity.

Imus crossed a line. He poisoned the well of free speech. He needs to go.

[hiaasenrocks]

21. I don't disagree that the comments were racist. Not at all.

Will you tell me what specific "damage" you're talking about and what legal concessions Imus should make to those who were hurt by his comments?

Also, are there any other examples you can cite that should be included here? For instance, someone saying something that offends/hurts/damages someone in whatever way you're talking about, and what legal remedy you would go for?

[Straight Shooter]

26. The damage I am referring to is the damage caused by propagation of racism.

I really can't be any more clear than that, but if you want some examples, there are several threads on DU in which people of color specifically spell out precisely what kind of damage Imus has done.

The best way I can offer an explanation is the "death by a thousand cuts" example. We can all withstand one or two insults, but when you live in a poisonous atmosphere -- and racism disguised as free speech is certainly poisonous -- then it is damaging to the dignity of those who bear the brunt of the racism. This is not an abstract issue. Racism is on the rise again in America. It needs to stop. We are sliding backwards on the scale of civility in America.

Let people talk all they want in the privacy of their homes, or even on their street corner, but these people with a vast listening audience, who let anything fly out of their mouths, only serve to validate the vicious attitudes of Mr. Angry White Male and his ilk. That's the damage, and only a person of color can truly understand the impact. Mr. Angry White Male may now feel justified to pass someone over for a promotion because, after all, "It's just a nappy-headed ho." Call it a ripple effect.

Legal remedy? Fire Imus. He has a long history of comments like this. This particular comment is not the first time.

[Bluebear]

28. This poster calls this story "tabloid" above

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=604966&mesg_id=605172

So I don't think your well thought-out points are going to be embraced.

[Straight Shooter]

29. Far from a tabloid story.

I re-read the LTTE, and it sounds too apologist, like a little pat on the head, "There, there, just change the channel and you'll feel better, dear."

I meant what I said, that we are sliding backward on the scale of civilization. But I've read your posts on other threads and I know you understand just exactly what is going on with this situation, and why it isn't a matter of "free speech."

[hiaasenrocks]

31. I called your bullshit in post #13. That's what's got you so angry.

Try sticking to the point. Thanks.

[hiaasenrocks]

32. I thought you might have been talking about

specific, quantifiable damages upon which someone could attach a legal remedy (i.e. civil suit for actual damages, as in the case where substantial damages occur).

[femmedem]

33. Some damage or hurt is unquantifiable.

But that doesn't make it less real.

Imus legitimizes racism and sexism. The people who employ him legitimize racism and sexism. Changing the channel doesn't do enough to combat the hate they advance.

I would support calling his employers and writing his sponsors. I also believe there should be fines for broadcasting hate speech, with a denial of licensing for repeat offenders.

[hiaasenrocks]

34. The first sentence in your last paragraph is a good recommendation.

The last sentence is a bad one. The gov't should not be deciding what is "hate speech" and what is not. And, of course, there's the problem of the gov't being comprised of actual people...so you're safe as long as those deciding what is "hate speech" don't decide that your speech is hate-based.

That's the problem with those who are urging gov't action via the FCC. I oppose such action, just as I would in the case of someone who says something that religious people find "offensive" and "hate filled" or those who oppose Rosie for something she says that they find offensive, like the father-in-law of the dead soldier who got so much attention a week or so ago for speaking out against Rosie. He wants her taken off the air because he's offended. Should his wishes be granted because he's offended? What if he says she's engaging in hate speech? What if at some point we had a gov't that decided she was engaging in hate speech?

I don't want Rosie subjected to the gov't yanking her off the air, or even fining her for what she says. Same goes for Imus. Same goes for anyone on the Left, Right or in the middle. Period.