 |
|
| Home · Reviews · Interviews · Contests · Blog · Forums · Follow Us On Twitter |
|
by R.J. Carter Published: April 11, 2007
But apparently, it is. And, probably, so are many other words and phrases that Carlin overlooked. Last week, mummified radio talk show host Don Imus learned the hard way that the only time you can use the phrase "nappy-headed hos" in the media is if you're quoting someone else who got into trouble for saying it. During some off-the-cuff commentary about the appearance of the Rutgers womens' basketball team, the phrase chuckled its way out of Imus's mouth, and into a media maelstrom that has stirred debate pitting racism against free speech. Imus is currently suspended for the on-air comments, but for some, that simply isn't enough. Al Sharpton -- someone who should know racism when he sees it, and read that however you will -- is calling for Imus's firing, going so far as to personally demand Imus sign resignation papers when the host appeared on Sharpton's own radio program to continue gushing his profuse apologies. Doing Imus no favors are his defenders, all of whom have done so under the banner of free speech. God forbid that Imus suffer a punitive consequence for what he said on the airwaves -- the chilling effect could limit the number of fart jokes and prank phone calls that comprise the repertoire of some radio shock jocks! Let's be clear: free speech is one of the holy tenets of our American society. But just because you are free to say it does not imply that you are free from the consequences of what is said. When the Dixie Chicks' front-lady Natalie Maines uttered her anti-war comments during a concert in the UK, she had absolutely every right to do so, in whatever venue was at her disposal. Conversely, every radio station and fan who disagreed with the comments were free to respond with whatever communication venue was at their disposal, which led to boycotts and the pulling of sponsorships. This is the same rabbit hole Imus now finds himself spiralling down, despite repeated comments that he realizes the comments were a mistake. Free speech in the media is a funny thing. You can intentionally call the American troops "mercenaries," as did NBC analyst William Arkin. You can intentionally deride a white billionaire's morals as bankrupt, a la Rosie O'Donnell to Donald Trump. But you cannot fly by the seat of your pants in a conversation and forget that the mic is open, particularly if the insult has a racial undercurrent. Now, with Don Imus, we now have a new "N" word, and a caution against using the "H" word. If Imus had said something like, "Them's some fugly looking ball-dribblers," he'd still have angered the accomplished athletes at Rutgers (who are basketball players, not beauty contestants, last I checked) with an unfair swipe, but he probably wouldn't have been more than a blip on the media radar, and certainly wouldn't be in his current state of affairs. So should MSNBC fire Imus? That's up to MSNBC. He's their employee, it's their company, and decisions relating to their retention or release of personnel are entirely their business -- because it's their sandbox that Imus is playing in. That's free enterprise, and it's also a holy tenet of our society. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 1997-2010 Burlee LLC. All rights reserved. | Reprints | Privacy Policy | Disclosure | About Us/Contact Us | RSS Feed |