-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
So much for I-man's mea culpa...
- Thread starter Holland Cooke
- Start date
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Good for Imus!!!
I hope he wins every penny he's asking for.
I hope he expands his suit to include Mr. Jackson and Mr. Sharpton.
And everyone who works in talk radio today should be hoping for the same things.
I hope he wins every penny he's asking for.
I hope he expands his suit to include Mr. Jackson and Mr. Sharpton.
And everyone who works in talk radio today should be hoping for the same things.
Radio_Realist said:Good for Imus!!!
I hope he wins every penny he's asking for.
I hope he expands his suit to include Mr. Jackson and Mr. Sharpton.
And everyone who works in talk radio today should be hoping for the same things.
I'm confused. But I'm am often confused by some of the logic on this board. Did Imus have a contract with Jackson and/or Sharpton too? It would be a funny first amendment lawsuit if he's including Sharpton and Jackson's first amendment rights of free speech.
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Did Imus have a contract with Jackson and/or Sharpton too?
No, but since when does reality have anything to do with filing a lawsuit? If he doesn't include them in his suit against CBS, he could file a separate suit against them for defaming his character.
The great thing about lawsuits is that they don't have to have any merit to be filed, and the defendant still has to pay for a lawyer to defend himself, even if the charges are bogus. The threat of lawsuits is one of Mr. Jackson's main tactics when he shakes down businesses for "contributions".
It's amazing what one can learn by listening to news/talk radio.
No, but since when does reality have anything to do with filing a lawsuit? If he doesn't include them in his suit against CBS, he could file a separate suit against them for defaming his character.
The great thing about lawsuits is that they don't have to have any merit to be filed, and the defendant still has to pay for a lawyer to defend himself, even if the charges are bogus. The threat of lawsuits is one of Mr. Jackson's main tactics when he shakes down businesses for "contributions".
It's amazing what one can learn by listening to news/talk radio.
Maybe it WAS "time."
Helluva note to go out on.
Faux pas, then apologize, then grovel, then get canned, then sue.
And if the come-out of the suit is that the-contract-will-be-performed, he'll collect a pile of money and CBS can keep him off anyone else's air? Some legacy.
Helluva note to go out on.
Faux pas, then apologize, then grovel, then get canned, then sue.
And if the come-out of the suit is that the-contract-will-be-performed, he'll collect a pile of money and CBS can keep him off anyone else's air? Some legacy.
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Faux pas, then apologize, then grovel, then get canned, then sue.
See, like you keep saying, the system works!
See, like you keep saying, the system works!
A sad finale.
NOW you get it.
Good.
'Hard to believe YOU would acknowledge I got ANYTHING right.
Or that explaining-what-I-explained on that Ditto thread was unrelated to my opinion.
("Why do feelings matter?")
Now that we're past THAT...
For those old-enough-to-remember circa-1972 WNBC Imus, his choice now is a sad last act (http://www.radioink.com/HeadlineEntry.asp?hid=137775&pt=InkHeadlines).
If litigation forces performance, he'd be sitting in his deluxe apartment in the sky, surrounded by piles of cash, not-heard-on-radio? After all the mea culpa, that's his preference?
That RCA album he released back in '72 was how many will prefer to remember him.
Radio_Realist said:See, like you keep saying, the system works!
NOW you get it.
Good.
'Hard to believe YOU would acknowledge I got ANYTHING right.
Or that explaining-what-I-explained on that Ditto thread was unrelated to my opinion.
("Why do feelings matter?")
Now that we're past THAT...
For those old-enough-to-remember circa-1972 WNBC Imus, his choice now is a sad last act (http://www.radioink.com/HeadlineEntry.asp?hid=137775&pt=InkHeadlines).
If litigation forces performance, he'd be sitting in his deluxe apartment in the sky, surrounded by piles of cash, not-heard-on-radio? After all the mea culpa, that's his preference?
That RCA album he released back in '72 was how many will prefer to remember him.
The big problem here is suing CBS/Viacom -if- you want to angle for a gig on Sirius (CBS/Viacom) or XM Radio, which could soon also be CBS/Viacom. (So many reasons why a satellite merger is such a bad idea... and now here's another).
But getting all legal up on your corporate masters didn't seem to hurt Stern, so I guess in the end there will be a settlement.
But getting all legal up on your corporate masters didn't seem to hurt Stern, so I guess in the end there will be a settlement.
"I guess in the end there will be a settlement. "
Safe bet.
But bet-AGAINST the Sirius/XM merger.
And when-not-if that deal is off, and Mel can revert to being-Mel, there STILL might not be a seat for I-man @ Sirius, because they're just-plain-out-of-do-re-mi.
I-man's smoothest move would be to give any settlement cash to his kids-with-cancer 501C3...minus all the executive perks that embarassed him a while back.
Safe bet.
But bet-AGAINST the Sirius/XM merger.
And when-not-if that deal is off, and Mel can revert to being-Mel, there STILL might not be a seat for I-man @ Sirius, because they're just-plain-out-of-do-re-mi.
I-man's smoothest move would be to give any settlement cash to his kids-with-cancer 501C3...minus all the executive perks that embarassed him a while back.
E
evnlee
Guest
Re: Maybe it WAS "time."
He needs to sue the pants off Viacom/CBS to set a precedent that you caanot ask a talk host to push the boundaries and be 'outrageous', and then fire them when they go to far.
Good for Imus, even if he never returns he will cost them loads of $$$ in legal bills.
it occurs to me this is not the first time Imus has been fired, so to say this is how he is 'going out' is somewhat incorrect.Holland Cooke said:Helluva note to go out on.
Faux pas, then apologize, then grovel, then get canned, then sue.
And if the come-out of the suit is that the-contract-will-be-performed, he'll collect a pile of money and CBS can keep him off anyone else's air? Some legacy.
He needs to sue the pants off Viacom/CBS to set a precedent that you caanot ask a talk host to push the boundaries and be 'outrageous', and then fire them when they go to far.
Good for Imus, even if he never returns he will cost them loads of $$$ in legal bills.
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
But getting all legal up on your corporate masters didn't seem to hurt Stern, so I guess in the end there will be a settlement.
Considering how old Imus is, and the probable size of his settlment, sitting around doing nothing with at least $40,000,000 in the bank ain't exactly a bad fate. Hell, if he got bored he could buy his own radio station and still have enough left over to pay the electric bill.
Considering how old Imus is, and the probable size of his settlment, sitting around doing nothing with at least $40,000,000 in the bank ain't exactly a bad fate. Hell, if he got bored he could buy his own radio station and still have enough left over to pay the electric bill.
I'm not a fan of Imus's show, I only listened a couple of times when it was available in Philly on WPHT. However, I think that CBS radio shouldn't have caved in to the demands of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson either. Imus was fired on the morning of the day he was going to meet with those college girls to apologize. Why couldn't CBS radio wait, at least until after his visit with those women to see how they reacted to the I-man's apology. He appeared on Sharpton's show and apologized. The original 2 week ban was an appropriate action for CBS radio to take as Imus did step over the line.
My guess is with Imus meeting with those college girls to make amends and with THEM, the people who were directly insulted accepting his apology, the sponsors would probably have come back. Essentially the problem had been resolved and all that needed to happen was for Imus to complete his 2 week ban. Of course Sharpton and Jackson would have continued to rant and rave pushing for CBS radio to fire Imus, which leads me to believe that CBS radio was being "politically correct" in spite of the fact they wanted Imus to push the envelope, and apparently had said so in Imus' contract. What phoney-baloney hypocrites. So even though I don't like the style or language Imus uses on his show, it would appear that CBS radio has wronged him and should be sued by Imus. The other apect of all of this, which has been commented on too, is Viacom which owns CBS also, I believe owns BET which airs rappers who are saying far worse than what Imus said. Yet, Al and Jesse aren't ranting and raving for CBS or Viacom to pull the plug on BET or fire the rappers, etc. Again, what hypocrites. Sharpton now apparently is making some noise about rap "music", (I use the term music loosely), but again he's aiming at executives and not those "artists" ( I use the term artist loosely), but with Imus, Sharpton and Jackson went after the artist not the executives. I wonder why? Sounds like more hypocracy to me.
If CBS and Viacom wanted to show how "serious" they are about cleaning up their airwaves, they should ban all rap "music" from any CBS owned and operated station and from BET, etc. Of course they'd lose more money so that won't happen. Again, more hypocracy.
My guess is with Imus meeting with those college girls to make amends and with THEM, the people who were directly insulted accepting his apology, the sponsors would probably have come back. Essentially the problem had been resolved and all that needed to happen was for Imus to complete his 2 week ban. Of course Sharpton and Jackson would have continued to rant and rave pushing for CBS radio to fire Imus, which leads me to believe that CBS radio was being "politically correct" in spite of the fact they wanted Imus to push the envelope, and apparently had said so in Imus' contract. What phoney-baloney hypocrites. So even though I don't like the style or language Imus uses on his show, it would appear that CBS radio has wronged him and should be sued by Imus. The other apect of all of this, which has been commented on too, is Viacom which owns CBS also, I believe owns BET which airs rappers who are saying far worse than what Imus said. Yet, Al and Jesse aren't ranting and raving for CBS or Viacom to pull the plug on BET or fire the rappers, etc. Again, what hypocrites. Sharpton now apparently is making some noise about rap "music", (I use the term music loosely), but again he's aiming at executives and not those "artists" ( I use the term artist loosely), but with Imus, Sharpton and Jackson went after the artist not the executives. I wonder why? Sounds like more hypocracy to me.
If CBS and Viacom wanted to show how "serious" they are about cleaning up their airwaves, they should ban all rap "music" from any CBS owned and operated station and from BET, etc. Of course they'd lose more money so that won't happen. Again, more hypocracy.
MikefromDelaware said:I think that CBS radio shouldn't have caved in to the demands of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson either. Imus was fired on the morning of the day he was going to meet with those college girls to apologize.
NBC didn't cancel Imus because of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Imus was cancelled after American Express and General Motors threatened to pull all their ads off the show.
If the Reverend Al and Jesse hadn't been making such a stink about it, my guess is those sponsors wouldn't have pulled their spots, so yes Sharpton and Jackson had something to do with the I-man getting sacked by MSNBC.
If it wasn't Jackson and Sharpton, it would've been someone else.
AS A SOCIETY, we have more conscience than to permit what Imus said on over-the-air-radio.
AS A SOCIETY, we have more conscience than to permit what Imus said on over-the-air-radio.
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Imus was cancelled after American Express and General Motors threatened to pull all their ads off the show.
And American Express and General Motors threatened to pull their ads because of pressure from Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jacskon. Therefore, the root cause of the chain of events that happened in response to the comment that Imus made was the pressure from Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson.
AS A SOCIETY, we have more conscience than to permit what Imus said on over-the-air-radio.
We do not know that for a fact. As a society, we weren't given the opportunity to decide whether would would continue to tune in Imus or not. The ability to make that decision and express our approval or disapproval by using our radios' tuning knobs or on/off switches was stolen from us by Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson.
Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson infringed upon our civil rights. We were denied our fundamental right to choose for ourselves by those two charlatans.
And American Express and General Motors threatened to pull their ads because of pressure from Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jacskon. Therefore, the root cause of the chain of events that happened in response to the comment that Imus made was the pressure from Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson.
AS A SOCIETY, we have more conscience than to permit what Imus said on over-the-air-radio.
We do not know that for a fact. As a society, we weren't given the opportunity to decide whether would would continue to tune in Imus or not. The ability to make that decision and express our approval or disapproval by using our radios' tuning knobs or on/off switches was stolen from us by Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson.
Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson infringed upon our civil rights. We were denied our fundamental right to choose for ourselves by those two charlatans.
GOOD NEWS! 'Last time I'll entertain you on this. Then, YOU get the last word.
AS A SOCIETY, we have more conscience than to permit what Imus said on over-the-air-radio.
Fact: Imus won't be on AM/FM radio Monday morning. Or Tuesday.
Tune-in all you want, wherever he shows up next. That may even BE on AM/FM somewhere, if someone else syndicates him after, he's done litigating what-he's-apologized-for-doing. If it's not over-the-air, it could be on satellite or online/podcast. He could show up SOMEWHERE, and you can listen THERE.
If he doesn't, you won't...just like I don't get to watch TV shows I used to like, but not-enough-others-did for the shows to avoid getting canceled. (Katie haters: pile on. That was "a softball.") What I wouldn't give for more "Secret Agent Man."
No, it won't be as-convenient as tuning-in over-the-air radio if you have to negotiate that-extra-step of subscribing-to or downloading I-man's shtick, but that-extra-step hasn't seemed to daunt "Sopranos" fans.
I'm not "society" and you're not. We're individuals, with our opinions. Round up a bunch of others...ESPECIALLY advertisers...and your voice will be heard somewhere-other-than-here. If enough-of-y'all want more-more-more Imus ("demand"), he'll pop-up somewhere ("supply").
AS A SOCIETY, we have more conscience than to permit what Imus said on over-the-air-radio.
Radio_Realist said:We do not know that for a fact.
Fact: Imus won't be on AM/FM radio Monday morning. Or Tuesday.
Radio_Realist said:we weren't given the opportunity to decide whether would would continue to tune in Imus or not.
Tune-in all you want, wherever he shows up next. That may even BE on AM/FM somewhere, if someone else syndicates him after, he's done litigating what-he's-apologized-for-doing. If it's not over-the-air, it could be on satellite or online/podcast. He could show up SOMEWHERE, and you can listen THERE.
If he doesn't, you won't...just like I don't get to watch TV shows I used to like, but not-enough-others-did for the shows to avoid getting canceled. (Katie haters: pile on. That was "a softball.") What I wouldn't give for more "Secret Agent Man."
No, it won't be as-convenient as tuning-in over-the-air radio if you have to negotiate that-extra-step of subscribing-to or downloading I-man's shtick, but that-extra-step hasn't seemed to daunt "Sopranos" fans.
I'm not "society" and you're not. We're individuals, with our opinions. Round up a bunch of others...ESPECIALLY advertisers...and your voice will be heard somewhere-other-than-here. If enough-of-y'all want more-more-more Imus ("demand"), he'll pop-up somewhere ("supply").
"Don't call me homey unless you know me."Radio_Realist said:Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson infringed upon our civil rights.
OK "Sugar" lol lol lol.....
Holland Cooke said: AS A SOCIETY, we have more conscience than to permit what Imus said on over-the-air-radio.
So then you are saying that as a society we have no problem with rappers spewing their evil language and hatred over the airwaves, because they are still on the air daily in every major market of this nation? If that is the case then we as a society have a double standard, one for one group of society that looks the other way when they say evil and sick things on the air, while a different less tolerant standard for the other group of society. Sounds like we as a society are a hypocritical bunch.
Let's be totally honest. If the Reverend's Al and Jesse hadn't made Imus' comments such a big issue, it would have died un-noticed and he'd still be on the air and those sponsors would still be buying air time on the Imus show. First off, the network knew what sort of show Imus did, and so did those sponsors. Sharpton and Jackson embarrassed those sponsors by their rantings about it. So those sponsors not wanting their company names associated with this heated up issue that had racial overtones pulled their ads.
Don't misunderstand me, I don't think that what Imus said should be tolerated, but its wrong to hang one person and over look the hundreds of other performers who's "schtick" is even more offensive than what Imus said. If those words are offensive then they are offensive for all to say over the public airwaves, not just Imus.
So then you are saying that as a society we have no problem with rappers spewing their evil language and hatred over the airwaves, because they are still on the air daily in every major market of this nation? If that is the case then we as a society have a double standard, one for one group of society that looks the other way when they say evil and sick things on the air, while a different less tolerant standard for the other group of society. Sounds like we as a society are a hypocritical bunch.
Let's be totally honest. If the Reverend's Al and Jesse hadn't made Imus' comments such a big issue, it would have died un-noticed and he'd still be on the air and those sponsors would still be buying air time on the Imus show. First off, the network knew what sort of show Imus did, and so did those sponsors. Sharpton and Jackson embarrassed those sponsors by their rantings about it. So those sponsors not wanting their company names associated with this heated up issue that had racial overtones pulled their ads.
Don't misunderstand me, I don't think that what Imus said should be tolerated, but its wrong to hang one person and over look the hundreds of other performers who's "schtick" is even more offensive than what Imus said. If those words are offensive then they are offensive for all to say over the public airwaves, not just Imus.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.