Blogger Spurs US Radio Host's Firing 505
jas_public writes "The Wall Street Journal reports on the controversial events which ultimately led to the firing of radio shock jock Don Imus. 'At 6:14 a.m. on Wednesday, April 4, relatively few people were tuned into the "Imus in the Morning Show" ... Ryan Chiachiere was. A 26-year-old researcher in Washington, D.C., for liberal watchdog organization Media Matters for America, he was assigned to monitor Mr. Imus's program. Mr. Chiachiere clipped the video, alerted his bosses and started working on a blog post for the organization's Web site.' The article breaks down how that viral video clip and word of mouth outrage reached the ears of the presidents of CBS and MSNBC, ultimately leading to Imus' dismissal."
Re:Al Sharpton (Score:2, Informative)
There's a little more to it than that... (Score:1, Informative)
The word of mouth outrage reached the ears of mainstream media, which in turn spread to the ears of the average American, which in turn made MSNBC and CBS's advertisers, which lead to them pulling their ad dollars from both networks, which in turn lead to a loss of revenue, which at this point the problem finally reached the ears of the presidents of CBS and MSNBC.
See? Simple.
Re:Al Sharpton (Score:2, Informative)
P.S. Nice touch firing him on the day of his annual fund raiser for sick children. If you want to donate despite the cancellation of the radiothon, you can call 877-877-6464, or donate online here [blackbaud.com]. This information was provided by the Opie and Anthony radio show, which I happened to catch that morning.
This article is baloney (Score:5, Informative)
For starters, there is nothing approaching blogging involved. Media Matters has hired a number of prominent bloggers to work with them, but an organization with offices on K Street [wikipedia.org] in Washington DC, with a staff of about 50, is a far stretch from what folks think of when they think of a blogger. The researchers write their articles to a very precise formula, and then the editorial staff "correct" them and the process goes back and forth quite a number of times before anything is published. Not exactly what the image of the term blogger conjures up, but Media Matters sure likes when people make that mistake.
What's happening here is not Media Matters discovering this horrible outrage and then alerting the rest of the world to it - what's happening is Media Matters trying to take credit for Imus's firing because they monitored his show. They monitor dozens of shows per day, and pick up every off color comment like this and document it over and over again [mediamatters.org].
Now, if you buy the stereotyped liberal "whiner" point of view, this is indicative of the whole media being a bunch of foul-mouthed bigots [mediamatters.org]. And said bigots having a whole lot of staying power for not getting shit-canned more often. But if you think about it for a second, it's really just Media Matters shooting a spray of bullets, pointing out every time anyone says anything off color, and then taking credit when people get outraged about it because they documented it "first".
The unfortunate thing is that lots of well meaning and powerful leftist funders give Media Matters money because they fail to see this subterfuge, or maybe because they are "whining liberals" themselves.
It's really more indicative of a more general problem in Washington DC - folks there think that everything that happens in our democracy can be traced back to some pressure group inside the beltway. They don't believe in this thing called "grassroots". I wish I could say they are fools, but reluctantly I must admit that they are frighteningly close to correct in many cases - but not this one.
WRONG (Score:1, Informative)
Imus listener since 1995 (Score:2, Informative)
I have listened to Imus on a semi-regular basis since 1995 when I found his show on the now defunct KPIX 95.7 in the SF Bay Area. I was initially drawn by his parodies of Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and Richard Nixon. The sports break segments with Mike Breen were utterly hilarious. Often the humor was Breen singing songs wishing the death of Imus in various forms.
The more I listened I found Imus' real skill was as an interviewer. His style subtly brings out personality in people whose public face is very buttoned up. He brings out edginess and humor in public political and entertainment figures. The show could get a little harsh and maybe insensitive, but that was not the theme.
Another thing is Imus really thinks for himself. It is impossible to pin him to a left/right ideology. He jokes that he's the only registered Republican in Westport, Connecticut. Some of his favorite people are James Carville, Harold Ford, and Frank Rich.
Other Regular guests included: - John McCain - Tom Aspell (hard ass reporter who hangs out in the middle of wars) - a bunch of Newsweek writers - Mike Lupica (sports writer and novelist) - Doris Kearns Goodwin (presidential historian) - Boomer Esiason (sports) - Mary Matalin - Pat Buchanan - Phil Sims (sports) - Christopher Dodd - Jim Cramer (interesting guy when interviewed by Imus) - David Gregory (NBC Washington correspondent - hilarious rapport with Imus) - Tom Brokaw - Michael Beschloss (presidential historian) - Kinky Friedman - and dozens more. This is off the top of my head.
He also has authors and musicians on the show. That's when I usually tune out as it's typically country music, and I find book talk boring unless it's newsworthy.
Over the years the show had lost much of its edginess, especially as the MSNBC simulcast became more well-known. For that reason, I became a less loyal listener, but I still listened occasionally for the nuggets of humor and good interviews. I hate the term "shock jock" (almost as much as I hate "mashup"). He is not shocking. He gets a little off color and insulting. Often, it's self effacing; sometimes it's directed at others. Hillary Clinton and Dick Cheney are big targets for insults. It's not shocking though.
Based on my 12 years of listening but not knowing much about him outside the radio show, I understand Imus as the following: reclusive, funny, grumpy, smart, harsh, philanthropic, liberal, conservative.
His comment wasn't nice. He apologized (a little too much) and made a point to meet the Rutgers team in person. My takeaway from this whole episode is summed up in four words - blown out of proportion - with the operative word being "proportion." It was a good radio show, and I'm sorry to see it go.
Re:So, how does your own medicine taste? (Score:1, Informative)
He's had Harold Ford, John Kerry, Bill Bradley, Joe Biden, and Chris Dodd on his show. This is a man who called Rush Limbaugh a "fat, pill-popping loser" and Tucker Carlson a "bowtie-wearing pussy". That sound like a tool of the right wing to you?
Imus isn't a conservative. He's just a fool.
Re:"Attacked" them? You sure? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Radio vs TV (Score:4, Informative)
It is not racist, for example, to say "that hassidic jew is wealthy", "that black man robbed me", or "that white guy ignored me." Racism is "he's jewish, he's got money", "he's black, he'll rob me", or "he's white, he can't understand da hood."
Re:Free speech or hate speech? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Free speech or hate speech? (Score:2, Informative)
Right, and the fact that I think Paris Hilton is a stupid bitch means I have tacitly condoned the idea of raping and murdering her then throwing her body in a river.