10 April 2007

Imus in the Mourning?

If you are not aware of the recent drama surrounding Shock Jock host Don Imus, you really need to stop watching LOST, Idol, and 24 and pay attention to what's happening in the larger world.

Some thoughts...

Two Reasons Don Imus Is Getting What He Deserves:

1. He comes off as a bigot. A bigot towards “all people” (Spreading one’s animosity around equally is not the most savvy of arguments I might add) but a bigot nonetheless.

One national writer notes, “He has acknowledged using the "N-word" in conversation with a producer. He has referred to the "Jewish management" of CBS as "money-grubbing bastards." He has called Palestinians "stinking animals." And he has been quoted as calling former attorney general Janet Reno "the big lesbian" and a prominent black journalist as "the cleaning lady."


2. He targeted specific people. It is one thing to use humor (though what he said is ‘out of bounds’ for public humor in my estimation) towards different sub-groups in American culture; it’s another thing to target specific people: Rutgers female athletes.


One Reason to Fire Imus:

1. His original comment is reprehensible and his apology wasn’t much better.


One Reason NOT to Fire Imus:

1. We are all guilty of racism and stereotyping on some level. Whether it is subtle insinuations or blatant comments about who owns the party stores in Detroit—we are all guilty of turning people into straw men false constructions.

I’m not thrilled that the Rev. Al Sharpton is at the forefront of this discussion but it does not mean that Imus should not be held accountable for his demonstrative public comments. Imus can only apologize so much. It is up to everyone (regardless of color, socio-economic status) to name the mistake, learn from it, and move on.

One reporter shared these words with Imus:

Jeff Greenfield: "...But, it is true I think that your show makes fun of black people in a different way than you make fun of white people. Which is, when your comedic staple does "Ted Kennedy" he doesn't sound like "Hulk Hogan", who doesn't sound like "Dr. Phil" who doesn't sound like whoever else you're doing. But I think it is fair to say, and I just read this by one African American columnist who made this point today, that when you parody black people they all sound the same, sort of a nineteenth century mushmouth minstrel thing. And I think that comes from a more general notion, that like all comedic insult type humor, you look for the most obvious thing to parody. If some of us put on weight you make fun of that, but when that gets into the area of race, and I think that's what happened with this admittedly idiotic and hurtful comment you made yesterday, you look for the most obvious thing, and in this context, in this country when you do that with people's skin color it's at a different level of insult. And one of the things that I think would be really useful in the two weeks that you're off, is not to swear off making fun of black people who do dumb things, I mean you know if Barack Obama or Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson says things that are hypocritical, I mean the idea that Reverend Sharpton gets to decide what's a racially inflammatory remark kind of shows that God has a sense of humor, but you may want to think about how you do that in a way that isn't the most obvious stereo-typical comment to make about someone's skin color. That's what I think about that."
---


This is a great example of the way in which all of us share in the comments made by Imus. Imus is responsible for completely irresponsible dialog. His listening audience is responsible for being drawn to a personality who is notorious for the ways he belittles people of various, ethnicities, genders, etc. No doubt, Imus will also gain listeners now because of this. In our modern shock jock ethos there is no “bad publicity.” And…I am responsible because I have too often stayed silent on issues such as this, contributing to the degredation of women, minorities, and other targeted persons. We all share in this. We are all in this together.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

First off, my opinion of Imus is the same as yours.

Where things get confusing and puzzeling is this......

Richard Pryor was a "pioneer" and a hall of famer for comedians, when his whole routine was racist and stereotypical.

Dave Chapelle follows in his shoes and was praised by Pryor also.

Carlos Mencia also gets a pass for nothing but stereotypical humor.

When did the day come where everyone laughs at minorities making fun of all races and stereo types but if a white male says any of those things, he is to be fired and ridiculed??

I dont want to see white males given a "pass" for this type of humor, but I dont like to see the double standard either.

Tough topic but it needs to be discussed.

Anonymous said...

Adam, well said, I ran across this article great addition to this topic...

Imus Got His Trash Talk Pass Yanked, Now Yank it for Blacks Who Talk Do The Same -Earl Ofari Hutchinson is a political analyst and social issues commentator, and the author of the forthcoming, The Emerging Black GOP Majority (Middle Passage Press, September 2006)

Anonymous said...

Adam,

Great points to be sure. I think the issue with Imus was that he specifically and intentionally named a group of female athletes.

You raise great points about Pryor, Chapelle et al.

Chapelle's sketch where he plays a blind KKK leader (not knowing he's in fact black)is downright hilarious.

I've used clips from The Office in various presentations on "diversity."

I agree that black, white, brown, yellow and red need to be held to the same standard.

Hopefully, it is Christians who are leading the way (not being in the way as has been our sorted history) in this public ethic.

Anonymous said...

Elliot,

I'll check this out when I can. Thanks for suggesting this.

Anonymous said...

I heard a respected thinker on NPR note some reasons why this particular incident has caused so much controversy.

1. The women targeted were not celebrities, or people of great prestige, they were college student-athletes.

2. The use of the word "ho's" by two wealthy white men in reference to black women is especially inflamatory. The hypocrisy of hip-hop culture not withstanding on this note.

3. It was a rather slow news weekend (always a factor).

4. We are now in the "you tube" era where information spreads quickly and can be "instantly verifiable."

Interesting points I thought.

C. E'Jon Moore said...

Josh,

Check out my blog on this matter. I'd love to know your thoughts. I think we agree and disagree.

Calvin Moore

www.thoughtsfromtheareopagus.blogspot.com

Anonymous said...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1815474/posts
Jason Whitlock always has something to say.

I am not an Imus Fan (Though one things sorely missed is that he was fired int he middle of his fundraiser marathon to help underprivaledged kids and SIDS babies) also not a Reverend fan (Jackson or Sharpton)
I am severly disappointed that these 2 "Men of God" are calling for his job and saying nothing of forgiveness and grace. I think this makes THEIR message corse and abrasive...Street Preacher if you will.

Is it fair to say that Imus is Racist? Is it fair to say Sharpton and Jackson are Racist? I heard Shawn Hannity this morning talking about Forgiveness from a biblical prespective. I was disappointed that Hannity was saying that and not a Reverend
What about Free Speech? Is Free Speech only allowed when it does not offend us?

Anonymous said...

Sorry could not figure out how to hyperlink

"Jason Whitlock: Imus Isn't the Real Bad Guy
Kansas City Star 4/11/07

Thank you, Don Imus. You’ve given us (black people) an excuse to avoid our real problem.

You’ve given Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson another opportunity to pretend that the old fight, which is now the safe and lucrative fight, is still the most important fight in our push for true economic and social equality.
You’ve given Vivian Stringer and Rutgers the chance to hold a nationally televised recruiting celebration expertly disguised as a news conference to respond to your poor attempt at humor.

Thank you, Don Imus. You extended Black History Month to April, and we can once again wallow in victimhood, protest like it’s 1965 and delude ourselves into believing that fixing your hatred is more necessary than eradicating our self-hatred.

While we’re fixated on a bad joke cracked by an irrelevant, bad shock jock, I’m sure at least one of the marvelous young women on the Rutgers basketball team is somewhere snapping her fingers to the beat of 50 Cent’s or Snoop Dogg’s latest ode glorifying nappy-headed pimps and hos.

I ain’t saying Jesse, Al and Vivian are gold-diggas, but they don’t have the heart to mount a legitimate campaign against the real black-folk killas.

It is us. At this time, we are our own worst enemies. We have allowed our youths to buy into a culture (hip hop) that has been perverted, corrupted and overtaken by prison culture. The music, attitude and behavior expressed in this culture is anti-black, anti-education, demeaning, self-destructive, pro-drug dealing and violent.

Rather than confront this heinous enemy from within, we sit back and wait for someone like Imus to have a slip of the tongue and make the mistake of repeating the things we say about ourselves.

It’s embarrassing. Dave Chappelle was offered $50 million to make racially insensitive jokes about black and white people on TV. He was hailed as a genius. Black comedians routinely crack jokes and we all laugh out loud.

I’m no Don Imus apologist. He and his tiny companion Mike Lupica blasted me after I fell out with ESPN. Imus is a hack.

But, in my view, he didn’t do anything outside the norm for shock jocks and comedians. He also offered an apology. That should’ve been the end of this whole affair. Instead, it’s only the beginning. It’s an opportunity for Stringer, Jackson and Sharpton to step on victim platforms and elevate themselves and their agenda$.

I watched the Rutgers news conference and was ashamed.
Martin Luther King Jr. spoke for eight minutes in 1963 at the March on Washington. At the time, black people could be lynched and denied fundamental rights with little thought. With the comments of a talk-show host most of her players had never heard of before last week serving as her excuse, Vivian Stringer rambled on for 30 minutes about the amazing season her team had.

Somehow, we’re supposed to believe that the comments of a man with virtually no connection to the sports world ruined Rutgers’ wonderful season. Had a broadcaster with credibility and a platform in the sports world uttered the words Imus did, I could understand a level of outrage.

But an hourlong press conference over a man who has already apologized, already been suspended and is already insignificant is just plain intellectually dishonest. This is opportunism. This is a distraction.

In the grand scheme, Don Imus is no threat to us in general and no threat to black women in particular. If his words are so powerful and so destructive and must be rebuked so forcefully, then what should we do about the idiot rappers on BET, MTV and every black-owned radio station in the country who use words much more powerful and much more destructive?

I don’t listen or watch Imus’ show regularly. Has he at any point glorified selling crack cocaine to black women? Has he celebrated black men shooting each other randomly? Has he suggested in any way that it’s cool to be a baby-daddy rather than a husband and a parent? Does he tell his listeners that they’re suckers for pursuing education and that they’re selling out their race if they do?

When Imus does any of that, call me and I’ll get upset. Until then, he is what he is — a washed-up shock jock who is very easy to ignore when you’re not looking to be made a victim.

No. We all know where the real battleground is. We know that the gangsta rappers and their followers in the athletic world have far bigger platforms to negatively define us than some old white man with a bad radio show. There’s no money and lots of danger in that battle, so Jesse and Al are going to sit it out."

Anonymous said...

Kyle,

Thanks for sharing. His article has sent major waves through the sports and larger news world. Everyone is referencing it.

He makes many good points, paints with too broad a brush in others--overall an interesting perspective that should be heard on all this.

Fundamentally, I am interested in how Christians should act/respond in contrast with people who do not profess Jesus as Lord. Though I'm as big a fan of understanding culture as there is, I also want to ask the question "what is the church doing about racism, sexism, elitism, or any other 'ism'?" I do not expect others to address injustice (though sometimes the others do a better job than those inside the church) but I do expect the church to line up behind the teachings and life of Jesus.