So much for I-man's mea culpa...

[nhradiochild]

Alright, I have a few issues to bring up.

Let's start with the simple one. I don't want anyone to be confused about the fact that Sirius is not owned by CBS radio, merely represented by someone who once managed CBS radio.

Next, Holland, as much as your wisdom and knowledge permeates these boards, you are shooting yourself in the foot for being as vocal as you are in a personal fashion regarding Imus. The toll of freedom of speech can be just as present here as it is on the air. While you aren't badmouthing college basketball players, you are discrediting a legal course of action that Imus is within his rights to pursue.

While I very rarely ever enjoyed listening to his show (notice how I don't say "never"), I also believe that CBS radio is just as guilty as he is in this mess, and there's no reason why he has to have egg-on-his-face AND lose a huge chunk of money just because "CBS says so". If they were concerned about having to let him go and possibly default on their own contract, then they shouldn't have included the clause.

How this swings is anyone's guess. It seems to me that CBS could use any number of occurrances that they "warned" him, although not publicly so as not attract attention. Let the legal system run its course.

I'm glad Imus is off the air for a variety of reasons, not just because of his arrogance and alleged racism, and I'll be equally as glad that CBS doesn't get off scot-free either!

Finally, I really wish people would get off the Sharpton/Jackson kick. First off, from over here, it seemed like Sharpton was the only one really attracting attention. I think it's dumb that they spring-into-action when there's a media blitz about it. I think they pounced on a target-of-opportunity and due to that, won the battle. And I'm kinda glad to see some radio stations rethinking their own content (especially in the hip-hop realm) because of this situation. I just have to wonder where the activists were of a non-minority nature? Shouldn't someone else been able to spearhead this thing? Why did it have to fall upon the African-american figurehead to bring this cause to fruition? Almost like "reverse racism" if you ask me. I have to wonder if someone said, "We'd like to make a cause of it, but we wouldn't get nearly the backing without the 'racially-offended' card." So enter Sharpton (and yes Jackson too for all you who love to lump him in).

And if that were so, and they did speak out, what would your battle cry be then?

 

[nhradiochild]

One other thing I forgot to mention...

Since when did the FCC care about any words in Imus' ill-begotten phrase? Or even the phrase in general? I don't see how someone can say that the FCC all of a sudden has a case against Imus for it. It was a ghastly thing to say, but if you're going to say that THAT phrase or it's words are offensive to the point where it can't be uttered on the airwaves, then you're opening up a big can o' worms and at that point, "freedom of speech" really will take a hit.

Ironically, what got me to reading this set of posts was because I was checking out Mancow (self-appointed champion of free speech) after a rant on a Tucson board and I was going to post something about how weird it was for him to say on the LATE LATE SHOW on CBS how he didn't want to go on to satellite radio because he thought it was wrong for people to pay for what they got for free now, yet if you want to listen to him and can't find an affiliate then you have to pay a fairly hefty sum (just for HIS show mind you)... something to the tune of $8/mo just so you can listen online??

 

[Holland Cooke]

See how much more useful a THOUGHTFUL dialogue on this can be?

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?

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.

DISAGREE about the former; AGREE about the latter.

RE "in every major market of this nation:" Poke-around the-last-couple-weeks' archives of daily e-trades from Inside Radio and RadioInk. You'll read accounts of various group station owners purging urban stations' playlists. The Law of Unintended Consequences does seem to apply here.

YOU CHOOSE: View this emotionally, as the Speech issue I think it not to be. Or as analytically, as a Spock-like consultant unnerves the emotional by doing. Either way, we're seeing a defining of which-content-goes-on-which-media-platforms. I-man's gaffe has prompted a useful national conversation.

Since when did the FCC care about any words in Imus' ill-begotten phrase?

Never. And still not. As Chairman Martin reminded us, in the wake of I-man's utterance: “The commission has very limited authority whenever we're talking about content issues. To say that something is or isn't ‘indecent’ [for which stiff fines have been levied] is not the same as saying that it wasn't ‘offensive.’”

And even in the case of indecency, regulators are responsive, to public complaints, rather than pro-active "content cops." The burden remains on the complainant.

El Rushbo's bellicose "blow job" outburst a couple years ago (http://hollandcooke.com/rushblooper.mp3) didn't cost him his job, or any of his affiliates a fine. Today, it still might not, if nobody complained. Arguably, Imus has said things even-MORE-offensive to black women, such as that crack that (was it Venus Williams?) "belongs in National Geographic, not Sports Illustrated."

But even just a year or two ago, "pre-YouTube," things were said-then-gone. But even in the said-then-gone era, crossing "the line" that George Carlin's "7 Words" were on-the-other-side-of was trouble...because, wherever that line is...Carlin's choice-of-words was, in the public's shared surmise, SO-far over it, that the content was deemed not-for-AM/FM. Which is why Carlin works on HBO now. And became a star there BECAUSE public sentiment ejected him from AM/FM. HBO benefits from definition.

If what-we-see-and-hear-on "The Sopranos" was on UHF/VHF, there'd be a posse. But not led by Jackson and Sharpton.

In addition to being something-we-all-own, over-the-air spectrum is convenient. A little TOO convenient, without barriers-to-access that ensure that children and everyone else who could be exposed to content opted-in, and didn't just stumble across it on the band that, for generations, we've used to distribute baseball games, hurricane and tornado warnings, and -- pre-consolidation -- local news.

If enough Imus fans miss him enough, he'll pop-up somewhere other than AM/FM/UHF/VHF. Or maybe even ON-AIR somewhere...if someone gives him a job there...and that will further this great big conversation defining what-goes-where.

What's eluding the name-callers posting here is that EVERYONE gets to talk, and say anything. You, me, Imus, The Klan, everybody. I actually DISAGREE with MikeFromDelaware that what-Imus-said should not "be tolerated." Free Speech can't be "a little pregnant." Where something/anything can be said is what's playing out before us now.

What we have witnessed is what the founders intended. Though regulators remain humble about Free Speech, any of us can empower the marketplace to weigh-in-on what-goes-where. If The Sopranos show up on a VHF station in Providence, it'll be Italo-Americans, not African-Americans, marshalling the outcry.

We, here, having THIS conversation, in a thoughtful fashion, contribute.

And YOU BET Imus has the right to litigate this. That too was something the founders baked-into our system.

He just seems to be getting bad advice. He invites the perception that his remorse was hollow. THAT didn't work, so now THIS. Meanwhile, he's probably got "as told to" writers banging out a book; and a publicist playing Barbara Walters and Larry King's producers off against each other...for an exclusive interview, JUST AS the book comes out.

The other night on CNN, when they were showing Larry King clips during the "50 Years" special, there was Tammy Fae, in that very same chair.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

Holland Cooke said: I actually DISAGREE with MikeFromDelaware that what-Imus-said should not "be tolerated." Free Speech can't be "a little pregnant."

What we are seeing, not just on the air, but out in society, is where one group of people can say an offensive term, like the "N" word, but if others say it, it's then considered hate language. That to me is the problem. A word to one group might be considered to be offensive, yet another group doesn't feel offended. An other example is the use of the words, God Da*n or using the name Jesus Christ as cuss words. This is offensive to Christians, both phrases are commonly used out in society and even in movies and books (so far over the air radio/TV have not started saying this, yet). I would agree with you Holland that the price of Freedom of Speech is that on occasions you will be offended. Yet on the other hand, shouldn't we respect each other. So the use of God's name as a cuss word shouldn't be done out of respect for those who hold that belief. Same for the "N" word. The interesting difference in these two examples, you won't hear Christians saying God Da*n, or Jesus Christ as cuss words, yet the African-American community use the "N" word quite extensively. Again, I challenge that community, if the "N" word is truly offensive then its time for that community to clean up their act. This would be a good place for the Reverends AL and Jesse to start saying something to their respective followers.

Now as far as what's said on the airwaves, there used to be a "broadcast code" that stations voluntarily followed, maybe its time for the industry (radio/TV) to come up with such a code so that there wouldn't be these offensive utterances. That would leave live shows in theatres, and movies, cable, satellite, and pay perview type cable where the more offensive programs could reside.

 

[Holland Cooke]

I'm still not saying this clearly...

What we are seeing, not just on the air, but out in society, is where one group of people can say an offensive term, like the "N" word, but if others say it, it's then considered hate language. That to me is the problem.

I agree with you; and Jackson, Sharpton, et al, whose recent "funeral for The 'N' Word" made that point. They're saying that there should NOT be a double standard; and that the hurtful potential of that word outweighs its value as a term-of-endearment to those in the club. I have never used that particular word, even in conversation...though I recall how it had a different, almost-lyrical, connotation, back when Richard Pryor used it, in the fashion he did, in that incredible concert video he did in the 1970s. Pryor said-what-he-said in a more contextual fashion than the capricious way I-man said-what-he-said. And that was before all the cop-killin' bitch-slappiin' gangsta rap crap.

as far as what's said on the airwaves, there used to be a "broadcast code" that stations voluntarily followed, maybe its time for the industry (radio/TV) to come up with such a code so that there wouldn't be these offensive utterances.

That's problematic.
However well-intended that old Fairness Doctrine was, it stifled expresssion.
And it was of-a-time when there were fewer opportunites for expression than we have now.
Even with the outrage over I-man's gaffe, any reinstatement is unlikely.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

Maybe I'm mixing up the two things, but I didn't mean bring back the Fairness Doctrine where you'd have to give equal time as in Limbaugh's and Hannity's shows, etc would have to present both liberal and conservative points of view and have guests from both sides, etc. as was required in the past. What I meant was a broadcast code that would spell out what sort of words beyond the 7 words George Carlin gave us that the stations would avoid using, such as the "N" word, the "B" word, the "H" word, both " F" words, and other terms that are generally considered to be offensive. That shouldn't be problematic as there just are some words or phrases that offend most people or make people uncomfortable and should be avoided. Basically, any negative term for a particular group of people like racial slurs besides the "N" word, also negative terms for Italians, Irish, Polish, French, Germans, Japanese, etc. Negative words that demean people like the "F" word to describe homosexuals, etc probably should be avoided. That's what I meant. The stations not using the more offensive terms to describe people. That's how it used to be on radio/TV, so that shouldn't be problematic, just being more considerate of people. Also, notice how Hollywood keeps wanting to push the envelope. Notice how on many shows they now use the word "Frickin". All they're trying to do is get people used to hearing that so that eventually the "F" word can be used on the air. There is no reason to cheapen what goes on the air. The word Frickin does not add anything to the dialog.

I hadn't heard about Sharpton and Jackson having a funeral for the "N" word. If they did, that's great, and about time. They need to continue to hammer that point to their communites. I think most of us would agree, it's time for that word to disappear from the American lexicon.

 

[nhradiochild]

Sometimes, I am my own worst critic...​

Finally, I really wish people would get off the Sharpton/Jackson kick... I think it's dumb that they spring-into-action when there's a media blitz about it. I think they pounced on a target-of-opportunity and due to that, won the battle.

No, Radiochild, that's not necessarily true. They could be fighting the fight all along and you only hear about it when the media blitz ensues.

(For the record, this is the first time I've argued with myself on these boards, lol. ;D )

 

[Radio_Realist]

Basically, any negative term for a particular group of people like racial slurs besides the "N" word, also negative terms for Italians, Irish, Polish, French, Germans, Japanese, etc. Negative words that demean people like the "F" word to describe homosexuals, etc probably should be avoided. That's what I meant.

And while you're at it, also ban any use of any statement that takes the Lord's name in vain. And any statement that offends anyone with any sort of handicap. Since the word "blind" makes some people feel bad, you must say "visually impaired". And since being short can be considered a handicap, people like Danny DeVito must be referred to as "vertically challenged".

And since the Normans conquered the peace-loving people of England by force, all words in the English language of Norman origin must also be purged, as that simply perpetuates the principle of right of conquest. All programming on the radio in English must only use English words with Anglo-Saxon roots.

Since the native peoples of Mexico were forced to learn Spanish by the Conquistadores, all programming in Spanish must also immediately cease. Instead, programming for people of Mexican ancestry must be in the native languages spoken before the Conquistadores forced the Mexican people to stop speaking Aztec, Toltec, or whatever other native languages they spoke.

And since we don't want to perpetuate stereotypes about any ethnic group involved in crimes, news reporters should be forbidden to reveal the name or gender of any criminal or criminal's victim in a news report.

Personally, the letter Q offends me. So it must also be forbidden, along with any words that contain it.

 

[nhradiochild]

Hey realist! (He says, keeping the sarcastic wit fresh...)

So if Spanish speaking folk need to adopt Aztec and various other native languages, that would mean we would need to do the same, abandoning the English language entirely, right?

Ich weiß nicht wirklich, wie Deutsch zu sprechen, aber ich habe diesen hier Übersetzer benutzt, MEINE Muttersprache zu sprechen, weil Englisch einfach eine angenommene Sprache zu meiner Erbschaft ist.

Stick it in www.freetranslation.com.

 

[Radio_Realist]

the English language entirely, right?

No. You didn't read what I said. I'll refresh your memory:

And since the Normans conquered the peace-loving people of England by force, all words in the English language of Norman origin must also be purged, as that simply perpetuates the principle of right of conquest. All programming on the radio in English must only use English words with Anglo-Saxon roots.

Didn't you read that? We can keep Anglo-Saxon words in English, but mustn't use words that came from Norman French.

Vous devez tout lire avant de répondre à une petite portion.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

So radio realist, you're saying that we should allow all offensive words to be aired. It's either all of none as it's wrong to only say that the "N" word, the three letter "F" word are forbidden, but all other groups can be insulted. Again, I refer back to the 1950's where you'd never hear any of those racially sensitive words for any group spoken on radio/TV. That's all I'm saying, is to go back to THAT standard.

 

[Radio_Realist]

So radio realist, you're saying that we should allow all offensive words to be aired.

You need to define who is included in "we". Do you mean just you and me? Do you mean all people in America? Or do you mean that some sort of government authority should be empowered as the "good taste police" with the power to decide which words are offensive and which ones are permitted?

That's all I'm saying, is to go back to THAT standard.

The issue isn't what standard to use, it's who should define and enforce the standard.

And speaking of the standards of the 50's, are you saying that it's not OK to use the "N" word, but that it's OK to have white guys talk like Amos 'n' Andy?

 

[MikefromDelaware]

Sure, after all many white guys today talk like black rappers. Seriously, as I recall Amos and Andy on radio did use white actors to play the parts and talk like blacks, of course Al Jolson did black face and sang mammy. Today neither would be accepted by most people of any color. Of course there was a movie a few years ago where two black guys dressed up as white blonds (I don't know the name of the movie) so that works both ways.

Well prior to the 1960's, I believe in the 1940's-50's there was the Hayes Commission that did censor movies, radio, and possibly TV. So that isn't new and apparently did work ok. Probably the only people who didn't like it were the Hollywood people who like to push the envelope. There are probably others here who know far more about the Hayes Commission that I and they could elaborate on that group.

However, maybe the FCC should set up the standard as they are the keepers of the airwaves. Most of it is common sense. Vulgar words that you'd not say in front of your mother, Racial or Ethnic Slurs against any group, taking God's name in vain as in God Da*n, etc. These are the words that most would agree could and probably should be left off the air.

 

[nhradiochild]

Of course there was a movie a few years ago where two black guys dressed up as white blonds (I don't know the name of the movie) so that works both ways.

That movie would be "White Chicks" written by Keenan Ivory Wayans and Shawn Wayans, and starring Shawn and Marlon

 

[Radio_Realist]

Probably the only people who didn't like it were the Hollywood people who like to push the envelope.

Actually, there werre other groups of people who didn't like it -- movie theatre owners and movie ticket buyers.

Vulgar words that you'd not say in front of your mother, Racial or Ethnic Slurs against any group, taking God's name in vain as in God Da*n, etc. These are the words that most would agree could and probably should be left off the air.

Define "most". Do you have any sort of research that shows that a majority of radio listeners would agree that radio would be better off with all content bowlerized? Or by most do you mean the owners of satellite radio operations who would love to have radio so sanitized and returned to the standards of yesteryear that even more people would pick satellite over terrestrial radio.

BTW, you might want to look at broadcast television ratings, and the impact that cable TV, especially premium channels like HBO and Showtime, have had on them.

 

[Holland Cooke]

"Hey kids, wanna have some FUN???"

We're haggling this to death.
LET'S HAVE SOME FUN!

Your PREDICTION?
Where-and-when will Imus re-surface?

 

[Radio_Realist]

Imus-will-take-the-whopping-big-pile-of-money-he-wins-from-CBS-and-will-buy-himself-several-radio-stations. And-he-won't-hire-any-consultants-to-tell-him-how-to-run-them.

 

[Holland Cooke]

Alrighty then...we're off-to-the-races!

Even the predictable, angry bile-and-phlegm that drips from every Radio_Realist post retorting-ANYTHING-I've-written can't obscure an otherwise-tasty prediction.

And with Clear Channel still dickering its value in the marketplace...and more-than-likely needing to sell-off more markets if present efforts to take-the-company-private bomb...there'll be stations for sale!

WHO ELSE?

WHERE-AND-WHEN do YOU think I-man will surface???

 

[nhradiochild]

Let's have a little more fun...

I really don't know where Imus will spring up, but if the prophecy were to end up true about him buying radio stations, personally I find him "Stephen King"ing it and only buying one, probably around where Fred and the ranch is at and calling it a career.

Then, he'd hire Radio_Realist as PD!!! (OK, only if Radio_Realist applied!)

 

[Radio_Realist]

Even the predictable, angry bile-and-phlegm that drips from every Radio_Realist post

Those are hyphens. Angry bile-and-phlegm looks different.

An alternate prediction: he could become a talk radio consultant himself.