Why did Imus get kicked off radio?

Question

For calling those women nappy headed h-- but when a black person called them nappy headed on the tonite show no one said anything.
Why the double standard?

Answer 1

I've answered Imus related questions so many times that I've started copying & pasting my previous answers. So I'm going to do that yet again.

But, first, to answer the initial question, "Why did Imus get kicked off radio?"---
The reason is this: The media wants ratings, so they re-air whichever stories have gotten them the most ratings. And then people react to public outcry. That's what I think happened in Imus' case as in many others.


Now for my previous responses:

(All of the comments below are answers that I gave to other Imus related questions.)....


To those of you who are suggesting that this issue is too old to be discussed :

People are free to discuss any issue that concerns them. If you don't like the question posted, you are free to not answer it.

------------------------------

To the young lady who mentioned "clumping people into one category" :

The article you posted by Tim Wise does just that.

Just a few examples:

"....white folks are incapable of blaming other whites for white racism and racist behavior."
----This statement assumes that ALL whites are, just as Mr. Wise said, "incapable of blaming other whites for white racism and behavior." Not all white people have the same thoughts, opinions, and feelings, just as not all black people have the same thoughts, opinions, and feelings.

"So please note, from virtually every corner of the white media (and from black conservatives who are quick to let whites off the hook no matter what we do)...."
----And here we see the assumption that every black person who is, what Mr. Wise calls, "letting whites off the hook" is a conservative.

"....the conversation has shifted from Imus's racism to a full-scale assault on rap music and hip-hop. In other words, it's those black people's fault when one of ours calls them a name. After all, they do it themselves, and of Imus really can't be expected not to say "ho" if Ice Cube has done it."
----Mr. Wise is assuming that all white people who are defending Imus are doing it for this reason. He is assuming that all of Imus' defenders are blaming black people for Imus' comments (and for such comments made by others).

Many people who are mentioning the type of rap music that includes racist and sexist remarks are NOT doing so in the spirit of blaming black people for Imus' comments. I, for one, have brought up the subject to demonstrate that double standards exist in this country. And I have acknowledged that they (double standards) are NOT one-sided, meaning that there are double standards that favor more than just one group of people.

I am not opposed to rap music, whether or not a particular artist is seen as being negative. And I am not opposed to Imus or any other radio show host who makes comments such as those that Imus made. I am a strong supporter of free speech regardless of what people say. If we limit free speech simply because people are offended when someone says something that is racist or sexist, what is to stop us from limiting free speech simply because people are offended when ANY type of prejudice is displayed via the spoken word?

What's the difference between someone referring to another person as a ''nappy headed ho'' and someone referring to someone as a ''deformed retard''? This is just an example of the point that I'm trying to make. No one has yet to provide me with a valid arguement. Everyone who I've spoken with has said the difference is that the first comment is racist while the other one isn't. So? They are BOTH comments which are based upon prejudice. Why does our society view certain types of prejudice as being "worse" than others? The fact of the matter is is that you cannot use racism as a valid arguement against ''spoken racism'' unless you argue against other forms of ''spoken prejudice''. To argue against one rather than ALL is ITSELF the act of being prejudiced (and hypocritical), as doing so is the same as saying, "It's acceptable to make prejudiced statements about some groups of people,but it's unacceptable to make prejudiced statements about other groups of people." This makes limiting free speech impossible if we are to expect to live in a society in which free speech is guaranteed by the law.

------------------------------

To those who argue that there is a difference between entertainment (such as rap, comedy, etc...) and "outlets for credible information" :

I have heard it said, more times than I can remember, that many rap artists, for example, are conveying their experiences. The fact that some people have this opinion means that those very same people consider them (rappers) to be credible (otherwise those people wouldn't believe that rappers are rapping about real-life experiences), which is an extremely large number of people. And some of those very same people who say the above about rappers have said that Imus shouldn't be permitted to make racist/sexist comments on the air since people listen to his show for credible information. This is a complete contradiction.

The fact that everyone has to face is that it's impossible to enjoy complete freedom of speech while also choosing WHO is permitted to enjoy it and WHAT we are permitted to say. Such is NOT freedom of speech.

------------------------------

To the asker of this question:

No, you are absolutely NOT the only minority who feels as you do. I've heard several different opinions on the matter. Contrary to what several people are claiming, people of various races, and other groups, are expressing different opinions on the matter. My husband (a black man), for one, agrees with everything that I've posted in response to your question and other "Imus related" questions.

------------------------------

For those who are interested in reading more about my views on this subject, I am posting a couple of responses that I gave to other "Imus related" questions....


----Here's one of my responses:

YES! I completely agree with you... at least to a point. I wouldn't say that people are too sensitive. People have the right to feel however they want to feel. The problem is when they expect the actions of others to revolve around their feelings.

I'm posting the same answer I gave to two questions related to Imus' comment....

I agree with you that the situation was overblown. Frankly, since I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech, I don't understand why Imus' comment was even an issue.

Someone mentioned there being consequences to free speech.
Well, it really isn't a freedom if we have to face consequences for what we say.

We definitely ARE dealing with a double standard. Black comedians and rappers (not all, but many) are notorious for making comments that could easily be taken offensively by whites. Yet no action is taken. Little to nothing is said about it. Don't misunderstand... As I said, I am a firm believer in freedom of speech. Therefore I don't have a problem with what black comedians and rappers say any more than I have a problem with what Imus said. My point is simply that a double standard exists. And, quite honestly, I think Imus is being discriminated against. I seriously doubt that any action would have been taken if he was black and made a similar comment about a group of whites.

Double standards are present on both ''sides''. Despite the fact that nothing is said about racially charged music, black rappers, on the other hand, ARE ''blasted'' for their violent lyrics while we hear very little, if anything, from anyone other than evangelicals (not all, but many) concerning the content of heavy metal music. These double standards do nothing but "add fuel to the fire" of racism. And they exist in other areas as well, such as among men and women. The fire of discrimination will never be stomped out as long as our society supports people such as Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson who promote double standards.

I'm speaking for EVERYONE. People of all races, ethnicities, religions, etc..., will continue to experience prejudice and discrimination as long as this nonsense continues. To fight unfairness with unfairness is to fight a losing battle, which is one of the reasons why I disagree with affirmative action.

FCC regulation is irrelevant. Just as we are not forced to subscribe to satellite radio/t.v., we have the same choice to change the channel or turn off the t.v. or radio if we don't like or approve of what we see or hear. People are going to think and feel whatever they want to think and feel, and they should have the right to express it verbally whether or not others approve.

Why take offense to what Imus said? Can he force an employer to fire you? Can he force someone to assault you? Can a rapper force someone to shoot you? Can a comedian force your landlord to evict you from your home? Can a talk show host force you to gain weight? The answer to all of these questions is NO. I don't care what Chris Rock says, for example, because his jokes are just words. His words aren't going to force someone who doesn't like white people to physically assault me. I don't care what Ice Cube raps about, for example, because his music is just music.... It isn't going to force some deranged person to rob me. People such as these have no affect on an individual other than to cause a person to experience emotion. And what's wrong with experiencing emotion? You probably don't enjoy feeling sad or angry, but these are natural responses. What will become of the entertainment industry if censorship becomes completely emotion-based? Should programs and music be censored for offending the obese? Should they be censored for offending the handicapped? Should they be censored for offending people with disorders and addictions? After all, prejudice wears other ''shirts'' besides racism. But it isn't even about racism, because, like I said, it's solely about emotion. If a black woman were to call another black woman a ''nappy headed hoe'', is SHE racist? Nope, not unless she hates her own color/race for some reason. Would those who Imus offended be just as offended had Imus been a black woman making such a comment? Maybe. But, then again, maybe not.

What it all boils down to is this:
Freedom of speech should be supported 100% regardless of emotional response. Double standards should be non-existent, and those supporting double standards should not be supported.


----Here's another one of my responses:

The people who are claiming that rap is being "picked on", so that others will have an excuse to continue making racist comments, are missing the point. Firstly, many of us who are discussing rap music are simply pointing out that double standards exist. And we are not claiming that ALL rap is negative. I, for one, adore rap music and listen to it more often than I do any other music genre. So I am very well aware of the variety of rap in the music industry.

Secondly, we are not claiming that double standards are one sided. Racist rap lyrics is just one example. I recently gave another example when I answered a different Imus related question: I made a point to mention that, while rappers are criticized for their violent lyrics, we hear little to nothing being said about the content of heavy metal music (with the exception of the many evangelicals who complain that it's "satanic"). As I said, we are not claiming that double standards are one sided. I agree with the young lady who mentioned those who complain about remarks made by black comedians while not complaining about remarks made by white comedians. Double standards are wrong regardless.

Why would you be offended if a black person makes a negative remark about whites while not being offended if a white person makes a negative remark about blacks? Why would you be offended if a man makes a negative remark about women while not being offended if a woman makes a negative remark about men? If such is the case, you are prejudiced. Sadly, there is an abundance of prejudiced people in this country, and throughout the world, resulting in the existence of double standards, discrimination, intolerance, etc...

Concerning whether or not people should be permitted to make offensive remarks without consequence: I've said this before, and I'm saying it again.... YES, I believe so. People are going to offend others. Should we censor programs and music for offending parents? The obese? Blondes? Alcoholics? For example, can you imagine comics being prohibited from making "dumb blonde" jokes? Where do we draw the line? The answer is that we CAN'T draw lines concerning freedom of speech. It is impossible to avoid double standards when limiting the exercise of freedom of speech, because those lines are always going to be based upon prejudice.

"So it's ok for someone to make racist or sexist comments," you may ask. Well, it isn't nice. Nor is it nice for someone to make ageist comments. And it isn't nice for someone to make negative remarks about the sick, the poor, people of other religions, etc... But the fact of the matter is that words are just that... WORDS. Words are not actions. But when we discriminate and support double standards, we are putting into action the very words that we claim to dispise. When we do this, we become the very people whose attitudes we dislike.

Answer 2

becuase that was a "shut up" thing. I'm black, but your right. Black people can call their own people all types of h o e s and nappy headed n i g g a z, but when somebody else says it, it is oh so bad. The first girl that answered your question is the one that really needs to shut the f u c k up because she don't know $h!t about ALL white people. I know that they did that just to shut up the black people just so we can stop naggin about being treated wrong. However, he should have known that there were going to be consequences. So thats his fault

Answer 3

Al Sharpton is authorized to spit venom because of the fact he has an aim audience and back-up. I do disagree with Imus saying what he reported. although I disagree together with his being fired. If everybody who reported something nasty grow to be fired we would be overun by using toddlers who won't be able to communicate yet. Al Sharpton is conscious he's risk-free because of the fact he's a black, political parent. in spite of his twisted justice. No i'm no longer prejudice the two, I ensue to be a minority.

Answer 4

Because Imus was white, and remember kiddies, "whatever you say, being white, is never fu**ing right!!" (at least to a lot of blacks in our society)

And people wonder why there is so much racism in America. Just take a look around and they'll see.

Answer 5

Your guess is as good as mine. I heard a black comedian say the other night not to believe white people are not racist. They just know all the right things to say to make you think they are not. There is no winning in this situation.

Answer 6

Once the sponsors left the corporations jumped ship, too. Why? Because they are spineless followers whose thoughts are controlled by money.

Answer 7

it doesn't matter in either case.. everyone should have self respect and if you are a public figure you have a much higher responsiblity to what youre saying.

Answer 8

who was this guy? im with the news in hollywood. plz email me at [e-mail]