Its not about Imus

onelongsong

mammasan wrote:

I'm not saying that what this said is right. It is just as wrong as waht Imus said. I think instead of focusing on the stupid comments that people make we should all just focus on making ourselves better so that the ridiculous stereotypes no longer hold any truth.

when you consider the guy is a shock jock; you must put his comments in line with comedians. comedians make comments about all races. lately; comments seem to be anti-white. it's funny how much power the media has given this imus dude. i'd never heard of him and now he's a household name. if he gets fired i'm sure someone else will pick him up.

macgyver06

Abuskedti wrote:

Its not even about race.

The issue should be... in my humble opinion

People rarely appreciate the influence television personalities have in this country. Something must be done. They have a significant impact on elections and every other important issue.

There is absolutely no accountability... it is a major facto for our deteriorating society.

deteriorating society??

explain this...lol

transforming to a world society is deteriorating???

lol...back to the books

soulsinging

Abuskedti wrote:

Well if you believe public opinion is not controled in a big way by the media, you are missing something.

I think Conservative radio should be held responsible for the catastrophy that has been the Bush Administration.

You can be sure they have keep the team rallied enough to re-elect that moron.

ooooooooh, i get it. we should only censor the beliefs you disagree with. if they're republican, keep them off the air becos abuskedti thinks they're wrong in their stances.

hippiemom

Drew263 wrote:

When I talk about the pussification of America..I'm not just talking about this one specific incident. But let's use it as an example...one of the girls said she was "scarred for life". How the fuck can someone with half a brain be scarred for life b/c a radio personality said they looked like nappy headed ho's? That's pathetic. Plain and simple.

And I'm not concerned about what people say about Imus..you're missing my point as a whole. My question is, why do we walk around looking for something or someone to offend us? It's b/c we've turned into a nation of emotional pussies..and this fact also goes along with what you're saying about the other influences from tv/media/etc. Why are we so easily brainwashed? Both sides are...so why? Pussification of America..that's why.

I don't think you really have to be looking for a reason to be offended in order to be offended by this. I suspect that if someone called your sister or your mother a whore, you'd be a little ticked off. That doesn't make you a pussy, that makes you a normal human being.

farfromglorified

Abuskedti wrote:

Well if you believe public opinion is not controled in a big way by the media, you are missing something.

I think Conservative radio should be held responsible for the catastrophy that has been the Bush Administration.

You can be sure they have keep the team rallied enough to re-elect that moron.

Shouldn't you be more worried about what's responsible for Conservative radio? I mean, since people are just reactionary robots and Conservative radio talk show hosts are driving them, you better figure out what's driving those talk show hosts. I bet it's PNAC.

Milestone

Abuskedti wrote:

Its not even about race.

The issue should be... in my humble opinion

People rarely appreciate the influence television personalities have in this country. Something must be done. They have a significant impact on elections and every other important issue.

There is absolutely no accountability... it is a major facto for our deteriorating society.

If Al Sharpton hadn't made such a big deal out of it.....most of America wouldn't have even heard about it. Sharpton and Rutgers crying made it into a bigger deal. Imus is a shithead, and most people knew that years ago.

Also, if anything, more people are now listening to Imus than ever before. If I was an advertiser, I'd jump all over the Imus show because there is about a million more listeners because of the racial crybabies.

Pacomc79

yes media has great influence Abu, absolutely, but legislating against thought is more scary to me.

Talk radio, gets bupkis for ratings. Ultimately more people heard about Imus in the apology than heard it in the actual show. True Rush and Hannity pull decent numbers but the vast majority of America don't listen to them or watch thier shows.

The majority of radio listeners are on the FM dial and the people who do listen to say Rush, already agree with him or furvently hate him.

I'd probably blame fundamentalists, Karl Rove, and the Democratic Party for the election of George Bush before I'd blame Talk Radio.

As for Hannity...I saw his show on while I was at the Gym last night and they were talking about the paternity of AN Smiths baby.....nice. O Reilly spats with Rappers over the insignificant. Anyone watching this crap has thier mind made up anyway.

Yes media has influence and you should check out Media Agenda Setting Theoreums I believe you would be facinated, but legislating against opinion (fairness doctrine etc) I feel are more dangerous.

Unfortunately we are simply inundated with stupid people who vote on the wrong issues. Media ultimately only reflects aspects of society in my opinion, while the media does certainly influence public opinion I don't see a way to really clean it up other than the public becoming more educated.

Stupid people in large groups generally cause most of the problems. The media are really only giving the public what they want, because that's how they get paid.


I simply see more problems occuring with legislation designed around trying to get the media to be fair.

Liberals generally don't listen to AM radio (the reason Air America just doesn't produce), there are plenty of outlets on the internet and television where they can get thier information.

I'd blame Karl Rove and fudamentalism most for the 2000 election

onelongsong

hippiemom wrote:

I don't think you really have to be looking for a reason to be offended in order to be offended by this. I suspect that if someone called your sister or your mother a whore, you'd be a little ticked off. That doesn't make you a pussy, that makes you a normal human being.

sticks and stones. if we all got upset when someone said something we didn't like we'd constantly be fighting amonst ourselves.
when i was in grade school we'd fight someone else that said something we didn't like. i've grown up.

Collin

Yeah that Michael Richards is a real ass.




Oh wait. This is an other completely ridiculous, insignificant incident, sorry continue.

RainDog

onelongsong wrote:

i remember free speech. now it's only ok for minorities to make comments against whites.

Whites are in power, so it's more socially acceptable to be critical of them. That's the way it's always been with power; and as such, terms like "speaking truth to powerlessness" don't exist - but your speech is still free. Are you upset that it pisses most people off when whites use the word "nigger" - or are you pissed off at the word itself and don't understand why blacks can use it without pissing whites off? Is "white people do this, black people do that" comedy really that aggravating?

onelongsong

i've been sick the last few days but i didn't see a thread about the o'rielly/geraldo fight. it too made news for days.

Abuskedti

Pacomc79 wrote:

yes media has great influence Abu, absolutely, but legislating against thought is more scary to me.

Talk radio, gets bupkis for ratings. Ultimately more people heard about Imus in the apology than heard it in the actual show. True Rush and Hannity pull decent numbers but the vast majority of America don't listen to them or watch thier shows.

The majority of radio listeners are on the FM dial and the people who do listen to say Rush, already agree with him or furvently hate him.

I'd probably blame fundamentalists, Karl Rove, and the Democratic Party for the election of George Bush before I'd blame Talk Radio.

As for Hannity...I saw his show on while I was at the Gym last night and they were talking about the paternity of AN Smiths baby.....nice. O Reilly spats with Rappers over the insignificant. Anyone watching this crap has thier mind made up anyway.

Yes media has influence and you should check out Media Agenda Setting Theoreums I believe you would be facinated, but legislating against opinion (fairness doctrine etc) I feel are more dangerous.

Unfortunately we are simply inundated with stupid people who vote on the wrong issues. Media ultimately only reflects aspects of society in my opinion, while the media does certainly influence public opinion I don't see a way to really clean it up other than the public becoming more educated.

Stupid people in large groups generally cause most of the problems. The media are really only giving the public what they want, because that's how they get paid.


I simply see more problems occuring with legislation designed around trying to get the media to be fair.

Liberals generally don't listen to AM radio (the reason Air America just doesn't produce), there are plenty of outlets on the internet and television where they can get thier information.

I'd blame Karl Rove and fudamentalism most for the 2000 election

Yes, we can't legislate against opinions... or thought.

shouldn't get hold of television and demand at least to differentiat between "News" and opinion.

Its seems our legislation is more concerned with the big business of television. I don't want to legislate against television.. but to enforce accountability for inaccurate comments -

I think it is possible to demand a separation between editorial opinion and news. with fines levied against offenders -

once a fine is levied due to a determination that guidlines were violated - the offender may be vulnerable to a lawsuit from anyone that can show loss as a result..

If this happens - the media would be force to clean themselves up...

boxwine_in_hell

hippiemom wrote:

I don't think you really have to be looking for a reason to be offended in order to be offended by this. I suspect that if someone called your sister or your mother a whore, you'd be a little ticked off. That doesn't make you a pussy, that makes you a normal human being.

The correct response by the Rutgers women's basketball team.

"Don Imus is a fucking idiot and we don't give a rat's ass what he thinks of us."

There and then we could all have moved on and been spared Al Sharpton's diarrhea of the mouth.

boxwine_in_hell

onelongsong wrote:

i've been sick the last few days but i didn't see a thread about the o'rielly/geraldo fight. it too made news for days.

Geraldo would beat his ass. That old man is ripped.

onelongsong

RainDog wrote:

Whites are in power, so it's more socially acceptable to be critical of them. That's the way it's always been with power; and as such, terms like "speaking truth to powerlessness" don't exist - but your speech is still free. Are you upset that it pisses most people off when whites use the word "nigger" - or are you pissed off at the word itself and don't understand why blacks can use it without pissing whites off? Is "white people do this, black people do that" comedy really that aggravating?

i actually think it's funny the way people dance around the subject. if you act like a niggar; i'll call you a niggar no matter what colour you are.
all this frenzy did was make imus famous.

RainDog

onelongsong wrote:

i actually think it's funny the way people dance around the subject. if you act like a niggar; i'll call you a niggar no matter what colour you are.
all this frenzy did was make imus famous.

And you will face the court of public opinion for those remarks. But I ask you, what is this definition of "niggar" (sic.) you speak of?

farfromglorified

Abuskedti wrote:

Yes, we can't legislate against opinions... or thought.

You sound disappointed.

Abuskedti

farfromglorified wrote:

You sound disappointed.

well, you have interesting hearing.

hippiemom

onelongsong wrote:

sticks and stones. if we all got upset when someone said something we didn't like we'd constantly be fighting amonst ourselves.
when i was in grade school we'd fight someone else that said something we didn't like. i've grown up.

Well, I didn't suggest that anyone beat him up. I only suggested that being called a whore on a nationwide tv/radio program is something that most people wouldn't respond to very well. There's a reason name-calling isn't tolerated on this board, and there's no reason it should be tolerated on the radio either. I'm not proposing legislation, but there's nothing wrong with reminding to people that if they don't want to support moronic behavior, they shouldn't listen to Don Imus, and if his employer wants to fire him that's certainly their prerogative.

onelongsong

RainDog wrote:

And you will face the court of public opinion for those remarks. But I ask you, what is this definition of "niggar" (sic.) you speak of?

in the 70's; my college dictionary's deffinition was: "lazy and shiftless".
although i haven't used the word; i feel the right to use it as long as it's used with regularity in society. the blacks have kept the word alive for a reason.
on the other hand; how is it a black can call me a cracker yet it's wrong for me to recipricate with a slang name for him? where is the equality in that?