Political Correctness: Make a Judgment

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Nonsense Finn. Of course the advertisers are the customers. Think with your wallet for a minute: Idiot I employ says something that costs me big money (and may cost even more)= bye bye idiot.

Notwithstanding the fact that you responded to the least important point I made,

Mostly I was responding to "Right again!"

It is nonsense to suggest that his listeners as opposed to his advertisers are his customers? advertisers come and go. Without them, of course, there can be no show, but as long as there is a sizeable demographic of listeners there will be advertisers. They may not be P&G or Bank of America, but there will be those that want to tap into the strong demographic of Imus listeners. Do you really think for one moment that Imus advertisers who pulled out did not do so with incredible angst about the decision? In the end it may have made sense to do so, but by doing so, they (potentially) gave up quite a significant segment of consumers. Stern's listeners are probably more loyal than those of Imus, but there will be a backlash for those who feld the I-Man.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

even the most basic appreciation of the economics of broadcasting will understand that Advertisers are not forces of morality. They promote a product that will, in turn, promote their product(s).

I will bet you any sizeable amount of cash you choose that this is not the end of Imus. The audience for his "talent" remains tremendous.

If MSNBC and CBS had anything approximating balls they would have had no problem finding replacements for the scared rabbit advertisers that fled Imus on account of Big Bad Al and Jesse.

Imus, like that a-hole Stern, will find another outlet because in the marketplace his humor is a favorable commodity. In fact, he will likely attract an even more rabid following.

The real point of this is that this idiotic nod towards political correctness will not, by any means, bury Don Imus, but it will favor the positions of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Be that as it may (and I don't doubt it); it doesn't change the fact that canning him was a fiscal decision and the private enterprises that employed him rendered their judgment, based in turn on what their employer's (advertisers) bean counter's decided.
IMO, Sharpton and Jackson merely road the bus because it was heading their way anyway. Do you really think the outcome would have been any different if they'd stayed home? Hell, for the press feeding frenzy any black substitute would have sufficed. PC sells, too.

Yes I absolutely do believe the outcome would have been different if Sharpton and Jackson had not entered the fray. The press feeding frenzy followed Sharpton's involvement, not the other way around.

Whether it's out of morality (), political correctness (probably) or a TOTALLY trumped up misunderstanding (clearly not); the bean counters made a business decision and IMO a sound one. Why should CBS and/or MSNBC stand up for some idiot's right to be wrong if they don't want to? I doubt their decisions will prove to be against their best interests in the long run.

Fair enough. It was a gutless decision, but in a free market society we should be relying more on economic influences than variable notions of heroics. I never expected P&C , Home Depot, MSNBC or CBS to be heroic. They should respond to what they believe are market influences. I laugh, though, when MSNBC and CBS attempt to tell us they are, in fact, heroic, as they often do.

I further don't think you're on solid ground suggesting our collective skin has become too thin based on their decision.

OK you are entitled to your opinion. Obviously I disagree. There can be no doubt (I would argue) that we have entered a realm where:

A) To be a victim is to be valued
BA) Anyone can be defined as a victim

Again I reiterate, how could a craggy faced old fart like Imus with a throw-away comment like he made have stolen the moment from the Rutgers' team?

It's probably safe to assume that those women (who are clearly anything like the disparaging comments Imus made) would never have given a second thought to his inanity if Sharpton and Jackson were not hell bent to make hay from them.

Without for one second affirming the comments of Imus, to suggest that they are symptomatic of a disintegration of society or tantamount to the vilest forms of racism is simply ridiculous.

Something that I think might have goten missed in all this is that there are minorities of color and women employed at NBC, MSNBC and CBS who raised their voices in protest. Also, there are more blacks and other minorites now in positions of influence than there were when Imus first started his "act" 30-some years ago. One of the members of the board of CBS news is the former president of the NAACP. The times they might be a'changin'...

And "Why here, why now, why Imus?" are valid questions, I suppose, but "Why not here, why not now, why not Imus?" is also valid, IMO.

It's probably safe to assume that those women (who are clearly anything like the disparaging comments Imus made) would never have given a second thought to his inanity if Sharpton and Jackson were not hell bent to make hay from them.

While this administration is continuously eroding the rights of American citizens, this uproar only adds to our loss. Freedom of Speech is far too precious to let it fall by the wayside because of some cur shouting out his dirty opinions. I would support Don Imus all the way to the Supreme Court for his right to say anything at all on his show, as long as he hadn't broken a law and on this I'm not certain. Would the quote be considered libelous or slanderous? I certainly consider it to be so, but I'm not certain of the law. If the remarks are legally considered slander, then he should be gone. But as others have pointed out, there have been so many slurs by so many shock jocks that it seems ludacris, pun intended, to suddenly pick on Imus.

If life were fair, no one would say such awful things about anyone, but life isn't fair. For people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to get on their self-righteous high horses is blatant hypocrisy. Hopefully, they will start coming down on the rappers who have made millions on that same derogatory, racist and sexist language.

It would be wonderful if they all would agree to not aim their remarks toward people who have done nothing to deserve them, such as the Rutgers team or any person or group who is not making money or gaining power from being in the public eye. The talk about the Rutgers team is true, they are talented scholar athletes; but any young person, regardless of his or her background or mental ability, should never be subjected to that kind of mean-spirited language, spewed from the mouths of the most salacious jerks on the air.

To me, anyone who is a celebrity or who is in politics is fair game. If they aren't tough enough to take mindless insults, they shouldn't be out there in the limelight. Young people who are just trying their best should certainly be on a "Do Not Disturb" list aimed at these arrogant loud mouths. That would be ideal, but when has anything in life been ideal?

My ambivalence is showing…I hate what was said, yet I feel obligated to protect freedom of speech even when it is filled with idiotic, demeaning, racial references that do nothing but show the filth that lives in the minds of these loud mouths.

What I do agree with is O'Bill. The money spoke, not the public. If the companies that buy ads had not pulled out, Imus would still be selling his form of "entertainment" on television and radio, believe me, the execs would have found a reason to keep Imus. Regardless of the president of NBC saying that money did not enter into their decision, only outrage at the insults directed toward the Rutgers team, nothing he could do would ever disguise the hypocrisy dripping from his lips.

Maybe it is time to start paying attention to Iraq again and to the "surge" of blood pumping from soldiers and citizens of Iraq.

Finn wrote:

Quote:

It's probably safe to assume that those women (who are clearly anything like the disparaging comments Imus made) would never have given a second thought to his inanity if Sharpton and Jackson were not hell bent to make hay from them.

Those women, who were clearly nothing like the comments Imus made, would very much certainly so given a second thought to the comments without Sharpton and Jackson's influence. You give not enough credit to the many black and minority employees of MSNBC and CBS who gave rise to a very big stink about those comments. You give not enough credit to many people of all stripes to whom this, for one reason or another, was the last straw for Imus. And you give way more credit to Sharpton and Jackson than millions of thinking black people do.

Diane wrote:

While this administration is continuously eroding the rights of American citizens, this uproar only adds to our loss. Freedom of Speech is far too precious to let it fall by the wayside because of some cur shouting out his dirty opinions. I would support Don Imus all the way to the Supreme Court for his right to say anything at all on his show, as long as he hadn't broken a law and on this I'm not certain. Would the quote be considered libelous or slanderous? I certainly consider it to be so, but I'm not certain of the law. If the remarks are legally considered slander, then he should be gone. But as others have pointed out, there have been so many slurs by so many shock jocks that it seems ludacris, pun intended, to suddenly pick on Imus.

If life were fair, no one would say such awful things about anyone, but life isn't fair. For people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to get on their self-righteous high horses is blatant hypocrisy. Hopefully, they will start coming down on the rappers who have made millions on that same derogatory, racist and sexist language.

It would be wonderful if they all would agree to not aim their remarks toward people who have done nothing to deserve them, such as the Rutgers team or any person or group who is not making money or gaining power from being in the public eye. The talk about the Rutgers team is true, they are talented scholar athletes; but any young person, regardless of his or her background or mental ability, should never be subjected to that kind of mean-spirited language, spewed from the mouths of the most salacious jerks on the air.

To me, anyone who is a celebrity or who is in politics is fair game. If they aren't tough enough to take mindless insults, they shouldn't be out there in the limelight. Young people who are just trying their best should certainly be on a "Do Not Disturb" list aimed at these arrogant loud mouths. That would be ideal, but when has anything in life been ideal?

My ambivalence is showing…I hate what was said, yet I feel obligated to protect freedom of speech even when it is filled with idiotic, demeaning, racial references that do nothing but show the filth that lives in the minds of these loud mouths.

What I do agree with is O'Bill. The money spoke, not the public. If the companies that buy ads had not pulled out, Imus would still be selling his form of "entertainment" on television and radio, believe me, the execs would have found a reason to keep Imus. Regardless of the president of NBC saying that money did not enter into their decision, only outrage at the insults directed toward the Rutgers team, nothing he could do would ever disguise the hypocrisy dripping from his lips.

Maybe it is time to start paying attention to Iraq again and to the "surge" of blood pumping from soldiers and citizens of Iraq.

I'm incredibly torn.

You are so right and so wrong.

You must be reasonable (or maybe not).

There's no great distance between us here, Finn.

Probably not.

I couldn't agree more that it was blown way out of proportion, and that the ladies probably would have scoffed it off as "what a dick" if not for the feeding frenzy (and I, personally, wouldn't have cared less if it went that way).

I do think you're confusing correlation with causation as far as Al's mouth. Al Sharpton is going to climb any soap box he can find to point his finger at racism. The press doesn't rest at his beck and call. This story had teeth because Imus is an A-hole, the affronted didn't deserve it at all, and the hyper PC grasped a hold of it (including Al Sharpton) as something solid that the average American will actually listen to (unlike their usual overreactions). You give Sharpton WAY too much credit. The media went bananas because the more they did, the better it sold. Look at the Terry Schiavo frenzy to see how the media can feed mostly on itself. They don't require Al Sharpton to do it.

We disagree. Without Sharpton the Provacatuer, the Bigot, the Flim Flam Man, the Brilliant Interlocatuer there would not have been an Imus scandal. There is some meaning to this fact. That the Media followed the baying dog says nothing but that they are pack animals looking for an Alpha.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Diane wrote:

While this administration is continuously eroding the rights of American citizens, this uproar only adds to our loss. Freedom of Speech is far too precious to let it fall by the wayside because of some cur shouting out his dirty opinions. I would support Don Imus all the way to the Supreme Court for his right to say anything at all on his show, as long as he hadn't broken a law and on this I'm not certain. Would the quote be considered libelous or slanderous? I certainly consider it to be so, but I'm not certain of the law. If the remarks are legally considered slander, then he should be gone. But as others have pointed out, there have been so many slurs by so many shock jocks that it seems ludacris, pun intended, to suddenly pick on Imus.

If life were fair, no one would say such awful things about anyone, but life isn't fair. For people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to get on their self-righteous high horses is blatant hypocrisy. Hopefully, they will start coming down on the rappers who have made millions on that same derogatory, racist and sexist language.

It would be wonderful if they all would agree to not aim their remarks toward people who have done nothing to deserve them, such as the Rutgers team or any person or group who is not making money or gaining power from being in the public eye. The talk about the Rutgers team is true, they are talented scholar athletes; but any young person, regardless of his or her background or mental ability, should never be subjected to that kind of mean-spirited language, spewed from the mouths of the most salacious jerks on the air.

To me, anyone who is a celebrity or who is in politics is fair game. If they aren't tough enough to take mindless insults, they shouldn't be out there in the limelight. Young people who are just trying their best should certainly be on a "Do Not Disturb" list aimed at these arrogant loud mouths. That would be ideal, but when has anything in life been ideal?

My ambivalence is showing…I hate what was said, yet I feel obligated to protect freedom of speech even when it is filled with idiotic, demeaning, racial references that do nothing but show the filth that lives in the minds of these loud mouths.

What I do agree with is O'Bill. The money spoke, not the public. If the companies that buy ads had not pulled out, Imus would still be selling his form of "entertainment" on television and radio, believe me, the execs would have found a reason to keep Imus. Regardless of the president of NBC saying that money did not enter into their decision, only outrage at the insults directed toward the Rutgers team, nothing he could do would ever disguise the hypocrisy dripping from his lips.

Maybe it is time to start paying attention to Iraq again and to the "surge" of blood pumping from soldiers and citizens of Iraq.

I'm incredibly torn.

You are so right and so wrong.

You must be reasonable (or maybe not).

Well, it's not wonder you're incredibly torn, the lady Diane can center 9 out of 10 rounds of a .357 at 30 yards and yet she does not wear a Stetson which I am sure would clear things up for you making her all wrong.

Huh?

Cohabituation rules...

ossobuco wrote:

Cohabituation rules...

Idiotic; simpering; retorts don't rule... Or is the converse that they "rot?"

(Couldn't find a way to add more semi-colons)

"You get back here you pious candy-ass sidewinder. Ain't no way that nobody is gonna' to leave this town. Hell, I was born here, an' I was raished here, an' dad gum it, I am gonna die here an' no sidewindin bushwackin, hornswaglin, cracker croaker is gonna rouin me biscuit cutter."

"Made by Stetson especially for President Reagan" is stamped on the inside leather sweat band. Fur felt 4x beaver quality with a 4" brim, color silver belly.