| Posted By |
Message |
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] |
Moehick
Ready for the sun!
Member since 5/05 30339 total posts
Name:
Properly perfect™
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by curliegirl
Thank you Emily! Who cares about the fact that he made a sexist slur against women? NO ONE!!!!!!
So, IMO, it IS a racial thing and it IS getting blown out of proportion. Not that I am following it all that closely, but is anyone standing up for the women in this case, or do we only care about the racial aspect of it?
I think it's because most of us just let the ho comment slide, but STILL can't let the racial part go.
I have said from the beginning that no one cared about the SEXIST slur
Yeah if he had just said ho nothing would have come of it
|
Posted 4/13/07 11:29 AM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
MsMBV
:P
Member since 5/05 28602 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by Moehick
Yeah if he had just said ho nothing would have come of it
Sadly, I agree.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 11:31 AM |
| |
|
~Colleen~
my loves...
Member since 5/05 9129 total posts
Name:
guess
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by Moehick
Yeah if he had just said ho nothing would have come of it
Sadly, I agree.
Sadly I'm also in agreeance.
I don't agree with his firing. I think what he said was wrong and he should have faced consequences but I think firing him is sending the wrong message wrt our 1st ammendment rights.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 11:34 AM |
| |
|
MrsS2005
Mom of 3
Member since 11/05 13118 total posts
Name:
B
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by MrsS2005
Freedom of speech is not completely unrestricted. CBS had a right to fire Imus. An employer can fire an employee whose comments substantially harm the employer's business. Radio programs profit from the ads they sell. Major sponsors removed their ads from the show. The loss of these sponsors harmed the program.
I don't agree with the decision, but CBS had a right to make it. I think the double standard is ridiculous, but everything is about money.
I am fully aware that CBS has the right to fire their employee, and although they have that right I think the manner in which they did it and the timing was horrible.
I also think that when you are in the business of media, in any measure, there are certainly ripple effects of what you do as a DJ, and also as a corporation. Society is changed, as well as what we can deem acceptable expression, when these types of tactics are used to "punish" and idea or thought (no matter how bad, controversial or offensice) that was stated in the public forum of media.
We are in a country where the government is SERIOUSLY considering altering the constitution to make gay marriage illegla, but they are not defending the First Amendment. It is just a scary change that we have coming. We are reverting back to a very old way of thinking and a very conservative, restrictive & "neat" little society. It a bogus facade that the government & corporations are actively pushing, IMO.
Reminds me of:
Brave New World
the society they created for Demolition Man (although I would not generally reference this movie other wise...)
Its ok to have mindless robotic citizens pre-destined to certain lives, as long as they don't think & don't disrupt the order of things Bad, very bad....
IMO, this should not be a First Amendment issue. There are limits to the First Amendment at school, work, etc. An employee cannot just say whatever he wants at the workplace and justify it b/c of freedom of speech. These limits have been in place for a long time.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 11:49 AM |
| |
|
MsMBV
:P
Member since 5/05 28602 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by MrsS2005
IMO, this should not be a First Amendment issue. There are limits to the First Amendment at school, work, etc. An employee cannot just say whatever he wants at the workplace and justify it b/c of freedom of speech. These limits have been in place for a long time.
I beg to differ, but this is exactly what the First Amendment is about. The right to free expression/speech is essential to have a properly functioning democracy (which we are already losing). The Media is not the same as other "jobs." It may seem unfair, but it is true, and without the safeguard of the First Amendment it would be very difficult to send important political & societal messages to the entire country (although the internet is quickly changing that). Furthermore, no one FORCES us to listen to any one media outlet or personality. If you (or anyone) does not agree with something someone says, simply change the channel & never go back. If enough people agree then the problem will take care of itself through the course of free enterprise. If the government in any measure were able to control & censor the media as they pleased we would be even more in the dark about significant issues than we are now.
As far as CBS's right to fire him, they were well within their rights to fire him, however it sends a bad message to all media, as well as open the door for mass censorship.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 12:44 PM |
| |
|
MsMBV
:P
Member since 5/05 28602 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
I want to add that I do agree & acknowledge that Free is a relative term, and that with the First Amendment there is not a say whatever you want attitude. However the restrictions are very clear & narrowly defined for a reason - to eliminate the growth of censorship.
Many other countries in the world have far less censorship in their media, public, government-run and paid alike, and their societies are not crumbling from mass-hysteria. It is because they trust listener-responsibility & do not view them as delicate mindless emotional time-bombs. People are actually allowed to decide for themselves what they want to see/hear, and adjust their choices accordingly.....
|
| Posted 4/13/07 12:46 PM |
| |
|
Kara
Now Zagat Rated!
Member since 3/07 13217 total posts
Name:
They call me "Tater Salad"
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by alnem
For those that are upset he was fired...are you upset because you thought what he said wasnt THAT bad? Or are you upset because its been taken too far? And if the latter, what do you think should've been done to him?
I am upset because although what he said was stupid & offensive, he has the right to say it. The networks that he was contracted with should have worked harder to protect his right to expression on his show. I think it is dangerous territory to begin firing people when their job is protected by a constitutional right.
BTW I think Imus is a tool & personally do not like him, but that I why I chose not to listen to his show.....that is how it is supposed to work....
As a lawyer with quite abit of experience with First Amendment rights, I have to comment on this whole first amendment issue. (And I preface this by saying I'm a big believer in our right to free speech!)
First, I preface this by saying, YES, I agree that if you don't like something offensive, you just don't listen to it -- you don't ban the speech altogether.
HOWEVER, we can't use this situation to continue to perpetuate misinformation about 1st amendment rights. Free speech protects your speech (with limited exceptions) from being prohibited by the government. It does not protect you from the consequences of your actions or your employer's response to your actions. Imus's free speech rights weren't violated. He can say "nappy hair ho" all he wants now. The government can't stop him... but being on the radio isn't a right. (And I won't get into the myriad of exceptions to free speech when it comes to television and radio)
As much as I TRULY believe this was a HUGE overreaction to the whole thing, in essence, this really did work how it was supposed to. Sponsors pulled out. No sponsors, no money coming into his show. If the sponsors pull out, the radio station's supposed to still let him stay on? Why? They'd fire anyone who couldn't command sponsorship.
I think the whole thing is ridiculous and won't even get started on Jackson and Sharpton b/c they annoy me (and cause more racial tension than Imus ever did).
I think everyone - especially the media - overreacted to this whole thing. Now, instead of turning it into any sort of constructive discussion, we've turned into a tense media circus. No one wins in this situation.
As for the sexism part of it... I don't think this is worth getting all up in arms over. Howard Stern has built his entire career on being sexist. Let's target the real problems - not the one big mistake. (And what Imus said was stupid and he should have apologized, but Howard Stern is continually ignorant in the name of free speech. Makes me want to puke... but I'd never pull him off the air! I just don't listen to him...)
Message edited 4/13/2007 1:40:12 PM.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 1:24 PM |
| |
|
Kara
Now Zagat Rated!
Member since 3/07 13217 total posts
Name:
They call me "Tater Salad"
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by MrsS2005
IMO, this should not be a First Amendment issue. There are limits to the First Amendment at school, work, etc. An employee cannot just say whatever he wants at the workplace and justify it b/c of freedom of speech. These limits have been in place for a long time.
I beg to differ, but this is exactly what the First Amendment is about. The right to free expression/speech is essential to have a properly functioning democracy (which we are already losing). The Media is not the same as other "jobs." It may seem unfair, but it is true, and without the safeguard of the First Amendment it would be very difficult to send important political & societal messages to the entire country (although the internet is quickly changing that). Furthermore, no one FORCES us to listen to any one media outlet or personality. If you (or anyone) does not agree with something someone says, simply change the channel & never go back. If enough people agree then the problem will take care of itself through the course of free enterprise. If the government in any measure were able to control & censor the media as they pleased we would be even more in the dark about significant issues than we are now.
As far as CBS's right to fire him, they were well within their rights to fire him, however it sends a bad message to all media, as well as open the door for mass censorship.
I don't have time to type it all up, but the fact that the media occupies the public airwaves is exactly the reason why it's regulated more so than other forms of speech. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but it is what it is, and it's been that way a long time. (Plenty of good info on the internet about the first amendment)
However, again, a private company firing an employee isn't a first amendment violation. It's a PRIVATE company.
This isn't opening the door to mass censorship - it's merely perpetuating the self-censorship that has been occurring for decades in society. People think what they hear and see on the news is accurate, but it's not. It's all biased. We think there are so many news outlets on tv and radio and print, but the fact remains that the vast majority of them are owned by only a handful of large companies. Everything gets twisted... But that's a whole other issue.
Like I said, I think he should NOT have been fired... but I don't think his firing is a major threat to free speech. There are so many other huge threats to free speech, I wouldn't use this incident as any type of free speech example.
Message edited 4/13/2007 1:33:42 PM.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 1:30 PM |
| |
|
MrsS2005
Mom of 3
Member since 11/05 13118 total posts
Name:
B
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by Kara
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by alnem
For those that are upset he was fired...are you upset because you thought what he said wasnt THAT bad? Or are you upset because its been taken too far? And if the latter, what do you think should've been done to him?
I am upset because although what he said was stupid & offensive, he has the right to say it. The networks that he was contracted with should have worked harder to protect his right to expression on his show. I think it is dangerous territory to begin firing people when their job is protected by a constitutional right.
BTW I think Imus is a tool & personally do not like him, but that I why I chose not to listen to his show.....that is how it is supposed to work....
As a lawyer with extensive experience with First Amendment rights, I have to comment on this whole first amendment issue.
First, I preface this by saying, YES, I agree that if you don't like something offensive, you just don't listen to it -- you don't ban the speech altogether.
HOWEVER, we can't use this situation to continue to perpetuate misinformation about 1st amendment rights. Free speech protects your speech (with limited exceptions) from being prohibited by the government. It does not protect you from the consequences of your actions or your employer's response to your actions. Imus's free speech rights weren't violated. He can say "nappy hair ho" all he wants now. The government can't stop him... but being on the radio isn't a right. (And I won't get into the myriad of exceptions to free speech when it comes to television and radio)
As much as I TRULY believe this was a HUGE overreaction to the whole thing, in essence, this really did work how it was supposed to. Sponsors pulled out. No sponsors, no money coming into his show. If the sponsors pull out, the radio station's supposed to still let him stay on? Why? They'd fire anyone who couldn't command sponsorship.
I completely agree. I don't think this incident eroded free speech. Imus was not protected by the First Amendment b/c his statements substantally harmed his employer's business. Without sponsors, the show doesn't profit. His actions simply fell within one of the exceptions to free speech.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 1:45 PM |
| |
|
Kara
Now Zagat Rated!
Member since 3/07 13217 total posts
Name:
They call me "Tater Salad"
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Just to add to what you said, which I think I agree with... It's the fact that government wasn't involved that matters. The fact that he harmed his employer's business is relevant to why he was fired... but it's not a free speech issue because the government isn't really involved.
Imus's rights weren't violated b/c this is a private consequence. If the government stepped in and said "You can't be on the air." Then we'd have a potential first amendment issue.
Maybe I'm just repeating what you were saying... Apologies if I am.
Message edited 4/13/2007 2:05:18 PM.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 1:58 PM |
| |
|
MsMBV
:P
Member since 5/05 28602 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Kara I appreciate your response, and am glad that someone with experience & knowledge about the bigger picture has come into this with info.
I am still afraid that because the companies involved are such huge and influential companies not only in the marketplace, but in government as well. They did not do the right thing by not defending their employee and I perwsonally believe that there are other repercussions to come that are not just invovled in the private side of what has happened. It seems to me that when it appears that society is accepting and even expecting now that what appears to be Revs Al & Jesse coming forward & insisiting he be fired, then MSNBC & CBS seemingly oblige (to the public) then it can open the door, IMO for the public to expect this to become standard.
Do I think that the mass media is going to become like the days of "Pravda" in Russia overnight, no I don't, but we should, as a people be more open to differing ideas. I think the sponsors pulling their advertising were not clever - why? Because listenership of the Imus show increased during the past 8 days and they would have gotten more bang for their advertising buck, IMO.
I am just glad that there is now an open dialogue among people that shows that not all americans agree on what is proper or offensive, allowable, or PC. I think it is great that the public, in general, feels so strongly about this one way or another that they are compelled to dissect it and talk about it.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:28 PM |
| |
|
SweetestOfPeas
J'taime Paris!
Member since 3/06 32345 total posts
Name:
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
I just want to add that there are FCC rules & regulations that must be adhered to. why do you think Howard Stern was fired so many times?
you want to exercise your freedom of speech? great! go to the mall and speak. but when you're on the air, there are rules!
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:34 PM |
| |
|
SweetestOfPeas
J'taime Paris!
Member since 3/06 32345 total posts
Name:
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:35 PM |
| |
|
Elbee
Zanzibar
Member since 5/05 10767 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
I just want to expand on this ... the airways are PUBLIC property ... even though stations own the licensing rights to certain frequencies, the airways are PUBLIC space (just like regular TV) ... and the FCC and goverment regulate public airways. Period. They get to make rules for what can be said on Public airways - what anyone can hear.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:38 PM |
| |
|
SweetestOfPeas
J'taime Paris!
Member since 3/06 32345 total posts
Name:
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by Elbee
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
I just want to expand on this ... the airways are PUBLIC property ... even though stations own the licensing rights to certain frequencies, the airways are PUBLIC space (just like regular TV) ... and the FCC and goverment regulate public airways. Period. They get to make rules for what can be said on Public airways - what anyone can hear.
I understand - but the key word is that they are regulated. he's not the 1st DJ/shock jock to ever be fired, and he won't be the last.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:41 PM |
| |
|
MsMBV
:P
Member since 5/05 28602 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
Not to stir the pot any further but have you seen some of the language that is allowed on TV? I personally am all for it, but it is getting very bold indeed.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:41 PM |
| |
|
SweetestOfPeas
J'taime Paris!
Member since 3/06 32345 total posts
Name:
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
Not to stir the pot any further but have you seen some of the language that is allowed on TV? I personally am all for it, but it is getting very bold indeed.
yep - you hear the words b*t*h and @ss a lot now.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:43 PM |
| |
|
MsMBV
:P
Member since 5/05 28602 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
Not to stir the pot any further but have you seen some of the language that is allowed on TV? I personally am all for it, but it is getting very bold indeed.
yep - you hear the words b*t*h and @ss a lot now.
And I have heard the word "Ho" too
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:50 PM |
| |
|
SweetestOfPeas
J'taime Paris!
Member since 3/06 32345 total posts
Name:
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
Not to stir the pot any further but have you seen some of the language that is allowed on TV? I personally am all for it, but it is getting very bold indeed.
yep - you hear the words b*t*h and @ss a lot now.
And I have heard the word "Ho" too
me too, but not "N" and not "J"
|
| Posted 4/13/07 2:52 PM |
| |
|
Kara
Now Zagat Rated!
Member since 3/07 13217 total posts
Name:
They call me "Tater Salad"
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
Posted by Elbee
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
I just want to expand on this ... the airways are PUBLIC property ... even though stations own the licensing rights to certain frequencies, the airways are PUBLIC space (just like regular TV) ... and the FCC and goverment regulate public airways. Period. They get to make rules for what can be said on Public airways - what anyone can hear.
I understand - but the key word is that they are regulated. he's not the 1st DJ/shock jock to ever be fired, and he won't be the last.
And the government didn't fire him. This has nothing to do with the FCC or the government. He lost sponsors, so he lost his job. It's not about government regulation!
|
| Posted 4/13/07 3:21 PM |
| |
|
Kara
Now Zagat Rated!
Member since 3/07 13217 total posts
Name:
They call me "Tater Salad"
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by Moehick
Posted by MsMBV
Posted by curliegirl
Thank you Emily! Who cares about the fact that he made a sexist slur against women? NO ONE!!!!!!
So, IMO, it IS a racial thing and it IS getting blown out of proportion. Not that I am following it all that closely, but is anyone standing up for the women in this case, or do we only care about the racial aspect of it?
I think it's because most of us just let the ho comment slide, but STILL can't let the racial part go.
I have said from the beginning that no one cared about the SEXIST slur
Yeah if he had just said ho nothing would have come of it
To be honest, it's about time we let it ALL go. Being hypersensitive to this stuff is almost as bad as being overly de-sensitized and not caring.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 3:22 PM |
| |
|
SweetestOfPeas
J'taime Paris!
Member since 3/06 32345 total posts
Name:
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by Kara
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
Posted by Elbee
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
to add to my last post - do you really think what he said would be allowed on regular non cable (and by non cable I mean HBO type of shows, not MSNBC) TV?
I just want to expand on this ... the airways are PUBLIC property ... even though stations own the licensing rights to certain frequencies, the airways are PUBLIC space (just like regular TV) ... and the FCC and goverment regulate public airways. Period. They get to make rules for what can be said on Public airways - what anyone can hear.
I understand - but the key word is that they are regulated. he's not the 1st DJ/shock jock to ever be fired, and he won't be the last.
And the government didn't fire him. This has nothing to do with the FCC or the government. He lost sponsors, so he lost his job. It's not about government regulation!
I am sure that the words he used are against FCC regulations!
|
| Posted 4/13/07 3:23 PM |
| |
|
MrsS2005
Mom of 3
Member since 11/05 13118 total posts
Name:
B
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by Kara
Just to add to what you said, which I think I agree with... It's the fact that government wasn't involved that matters. The fact that he harmed his employer's business is relevant to why he was fired... but it's not a free speech issue because the government isn't really involved.
Imus's rights weren't violated b/c this is a private consequence. If the government stepped in and said "You can't be on the air." Then we'd have a potential first amendment issue.
Maybe I'm just repeating what you were saying... Apologies if I am.
I understand what you're saying and I agree. I was looking at it from a potential discrimination/wrongful discharge lawsuit standpoint (i.e. you retaliated against me b/c I exercised my freedom of speech). I'm not sure about other states, but CT extends some freedom of speech protections to private employees. Maybe CT is unique in this area. Of course, if there are no state laws protecting private employees' speech, employees have no recourse if they're fired.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 3:36 PM |
| |
|
Elbee
Zanzibar
Member since 5/05 10767 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
Posted by SweetestOfPeas
Posted by Kara
And the government didn't fire him. This has nothing to do with the FCC or the government. He lost sponsors, so he lost his job. It's not about government regulation!
I am sure that the words he used are against FCC regulations!
They are not. There are very little 'words' that are actually against FCC regulation .. which is why it is hard to say what will be deemed indecent and what will not. It's a case by case basis.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 3:39 PM |
| |
|
heidla
Me and the guys
Member since 5/05 4024 total posts
Name:
Heidi
|
Re: So I have a question regarding this Imus nonsense...
I think that with all that is going on in the world for this to be the #1 news story is disgraceful. He is a crocthy old man who obviously needs to think before he speaks, but last time I checked being a foolish a-hole wasn't a crime.
|
| Posted 4/13/07 4:15 PM |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] |
