Althouse on the Imus contract dispute: "CBS wanted him to do it... "

Althouse:

'CBS wanted him to do it... CBS wanted to encourage him and wanted him to feel totally protected.'
So said Imus's monumental lawyer Martin Garbus.
Legal Battle Brews Over Imus Contract With CBS - washingtonpost.com

It sounds like a great contracts case. High stakes too. The contract was worth $40 million, and he's going to claim other damages, covering "reduced income for Imus's private businesses and charities, as well as his future earnings in broadcasting."

See Ann's blog for discussion of a great contracts case.

Life Post-Imus

Recommendation to the Recording and Broadcast Industries:
A Statement by Russell Simmons and Dr. Benjamin Chavis on behalf of the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network
April 23, 2007

The theme of the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network (HSAN) is "Taking Back Responsibility." We are consistent in our strong affirmation, defense, and protection of the First Amendment right of free speech and artistic expression. We have recently been involved in a process of dialogue with recording and broadcast industry executives about issues concerning corporate social responsibility.

It is important to re-emphasize that our internal discussions with industry leaders are not about censorship. Our discussions are about the corporate social responsibility of the industry to voluntarily show respect to African Americans and other people of color, African American women and to all women in lyrics and images.

This week's portion...

Parshat Tazria-Metzora 5767
April 21, 2007

This week's double parshah describes the process of determining whether or not a person is a leper.

All things considered, I prefer Imus.

Nora Ephron: Not About Imus

From The Huffington Post
So now people are blogging about not blogging about Imus, and blogging about that.

Finishing up: The collected wit and wisdom of Don Imus

From Slate Magazine: I'm pretty much ready to let go of the Imus topic--I can't quite figure why I've given it this much attention already. But for those desiring some final words, Timothy Noah of Slate has collected some:

Don Imus' long-standing acceptance by the political establishment is a contemporary illustration of 1940s socialite Perle Mesta's famous advice about how to draw Washington's power set to a soiree: 'Hang a lamb chop in the window.' Politicians like John McCain and Barack Obama, and famous TV journalists like Tim Russert and Cokie Roberts, are no more standoffish than their predecessors; the only difference is that the lamb chop has been replaced by a microphone....
In the unlikely event that McCain, Oliphant, and others don't know who they're dealing with, let's review some of Imus' remarks (if you prefer, riffs) from the past...

Once more, with feeling: Rutgers Players Accept Apology From Imus

From The New York Times:

“We still find his statements to be unacceptable,” the coach said. “And this is an experience that we will never forget. These comments are indicative of greater ills in our culture. It is not just Mr. Imus. And we hope that this will be and serve as a catalyst for change. Let us continue to work hard together to make this world a better place.”

Make it so.

Off the Air: The Light Goes Out for Don Imus

From The New York Times:

In a memo sent to CBS employees announcing Mr. Imus’s dismissal, [CBS Chief Executive Lester] Moonves said: “This is about a lot more than Imus. As has been widely pointed out, Imus has been visited by presidents, senators, important authors and journalists from across the political spectrum. He has flourished in a culture that permits a certain level of objectionable expression that hurts and demeans a wide range of people. In taking him off the air, I believe we take an important and necessary step not just in solving a unique problem, but in changing that culture, which extends far beyond the walls of our company.”

A fascinating proposition. A hypocrisy meter may be in order. Let's watch and listen, and perhaps learn something.

Don Imus Memorial Posting: Some of us will miss some of your show

Thanks to Donna R. Divine for forwarding the following posting in response to my inquiry about why Imus is--or was--able to attract so many A-list guests. Since a high proportion of my own (male) friends probably were high school nerds who worked on their high school papers (although I suspect more of us taught than took SAT-prep courses--then called "tutoring", and I'm not so sure about jock-envy), I suspect the speculations offered below are not entirely without basis.
Since both Donna and I had some trouble with the associated link, I hope the original blog editor and guest writer won't mind this substantial excerpt from TigerHawk.
The Unifying Theory of Imus
By TigerHawk at 4/09/2007 02:59:00 PM
[Editor's note: This is a guest post by Paul Budline, a writer and documentary maker living here in Princeton. He is more than a little irritated at Don Imus.]

Many years ago, after some deliberation, I developed a theory of why so many media middleweights, and even some genuine heavyweights, regularly pay homage to Don Imus (usually kowtowing by calling him the "I-Man.") Most of them are proud liberals who would never utter anything that could be construed as racially insensitive. Yet they call in, knowing full well that as soon as they depart Imus and his flunkies will revert to their vile and infantile humor, straining for laughs at the expense of Catholics, blacks, women, Hispanics, etc. So what can explain the apparent hypocrisy? My hypothesis: like so many things in life, it all goes go back to high school.

Let's face it. Guys like Frank Rich, Jeff Greenfield, Howard Fineman, and Tom Friedman were never the cool kids. They were probably writing for the school paper, taking SAT prep courses, and getting stuffed into lockers in their spare time. These nerdy kids gazed longingly at the comely cheerleaders and heroic football players; and from a distance, they somewhat envied any small time hood who might be found in their no-doubt leafy 'hoods.

With Imus, they finally get the chance to hang out with a genuine bad boy - the kind of guy who was leaning on his '56 Chevy, a Pall Mall dangling from his scowling mouth. ...

But back to Mr. Imus. Since his ... slur, I've been able to reach some of his enablers on the phone. Andrea Mitchell seemed genuinely upset by Imus' despicable phrase, but added that going on his program is "part of my job"; David Gregory was as dismissive and arrogant as he is in a White House press conference; and Howard Fineman was considerate and thoughtful. I spoke with Fineman just moments before he went on Imus Monday morning and lauded him for I-Manning up with his pitiful apology. "I'm a good person," Imus told his listeners and viewers, "who said a bad thing."

But he should never forget something very, very important. His guests, those former HS nerds, aren't there to converse with a "good person." They want the bad boy or nothing.

[Additional Editor's note: Unfortunately, my own high school experience was pretty much like that imagined for Greenfield, Fineman, et. al., up to and including getting stuffed into a locker (OK, maybe that was junior high school). I believe I have since overcome my need for acceptance from cool people ... but I know enough about nerd insecurities to agree that Paul is on to something...]

Dick Cavett reflects on Imus

Dick Cavett - Times Select - NYT Blog:

Nobody in his right mind defends what Imus said. Certainly not Imus. For decades, he has been an equal-opportunity offender. For many the combination of this style plus his contrasting high-quality guest list add up to the program’s quirky appeal. But it was inevitable that one day, as just happened, a land mine was stepped on by the risk-taking host. It shouldn’t be confused with Hiroshima.

Imus retooled his show and himself from an earlier persona, making it a program that welcomes a who’s who of guests. This very upgrading makes the blunder stand out in starker contrast than it would if his show were solely goofball, escapist entertainment.

Epitaph Watch

Imus Struggling to Retain Sway as a Franchise - New York Times:
By JACQUES STEINBERG

That Don Imus can be abrasive and offensive is undeniable, but he is also one of the most successful and influential pitchmen in the history of radio, if not broadcasting...
“He’s not a philistine,” Mr. Osnos said. “He’s not a bigot. But he was a jerk.”

Breaking News on Imus (not) in the morning

NBC News President has announced that MSNBC will drop the Imus morning simulcast.

In a statement, NBC News announced "this decision comes as a result of an ongoing review process, which initially included the announcement of a suspension... What matters to us most is that the men and women of NBC Universal have confidence in the values we have set for this company...."

The decision followed announcements earlier today that major advertisers had dropped their sponsorship of the Imus program and, in some cases, of all MSNBC programming.

And who said network executives could not show moral followership?

La-Crossing Duke and Imus

Charges against the three Duke lacrosse players once accused of rape and other offenses were finally, and properly, dropped today after an investigation by the North Carolina Attorney General. The A.G. decided not to pursue charges against their accuser. The local prosecutor, Mike Nifong, faces a disciplinary hearing before the State Bar.

I will accord Nifong the presumption of innocence, which he rather cavalierly seems to have denied to the accused. Nonetheless, from present evidence, he seems to have demonstrated the qualities of competence, forthrightness, and freedom from political considerations that would qualify him for a senior position in the Bush/Gonzales Justice Department.

All that said, and recognizing the costs and personal trauma wrongly imposed on the players by apparently false accusations and an out-of-control prosecutor, I am not inclined to lionize the players (or many of their teammates) as heroes. Their party, featuring hired strippers, was disgusting, and should be recognized as such, even if their actions were not criminal.

Just the kind of adolescent frat party environment that provides a receptive audience for the raunchier, racist and sexist side of a Don Imus routine. Probably also the breeding ground for future shock-jocks.

Perhaps someone can explain the schizophrenic (with no offense to the mentally ill intended) character of the Imus phenomenon: How can it be that the Imus show (and little else short of Charlie Rose), for all its offensive and insulting shtick, also provides a regular venue for intelligent, relatively prolonged, and relatively unpretentious conversations with so many thoughtful journalists, politicians, and authors? Playboy used to pay a lot for (mostly) bad pieces by marquee authors. What does Imus offer? Can't someone without all of Imus' baggage offer serious, informative, and intelligent conversation in the morning? (Yes, mostly I listen to--and contribute to-- NPR, but during pledge weeks?)

Imus' recent comments--like the Duke party a year ago--were sexist, racist and disgusting, and deserve the strong negative response they are now receiving. But our culture seems to have an inexhaustible appetite for coarse, insulting, and degrading performances by comedians, entertainers, sports figures, and politicians, among others. Maybe we, the public, deserve what we support, and what we get.

The Unpleasant Reality for Women in Sports

From The New York Times: By WILLIAM C. RHODEN

Linda Greene, a law professor at the University of Wisconsin and a founding member of the Black Women in Sports Foundation, said that Imus’s characterization of the Rutgers team resurrected “old stereotypes about African-American women that date from slavery, where stereotypes of promiscuity were generated to mask the systematic rape that was a concomitant of slavery.”

“In addition,” she said, “they also are consistent with the historical rejection of black women as beneficiaries of the feminine ideal.” ...

On the surface, Imus’s remarks were aimed at African-American women. But as Greene points out: “No woman who participates in sport, and no mother or father who encourages and supports that participation, can escape their animus. Beyond his bold and overt racism lie assumptions about the proper bounds of femininity, assumptions that Title IX and other civil rights legislation sought to shatter.”

Some thoughtful reflections on deeper meanings by a colleague.