Thursday, April 12, 2007
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Bad Year for Dons
I sorta love this Imus thing because it touches so many subjects, especially for a guy like me who works in the radio business. Btw, I want to mention that I supported Opie and Anthony being fired when they had listeners fornicate in St. Patrick's Cathedral. That to me was crossing the line by going into someone else's house, and doing what they did. There was no turning back from that, and they took a place which is sacred to so many, and on some levels tarnished it in a big way. Plus, O & A had a 1 minute delay in which many people could have bounced it from the air. This is different.
Now, back to Don.
Jim Rome was comparing what Don Imus did on his show to what so many hip hop artists and others do in the entertainment world with the words niggah, ho, etc. Rome posed the question to the world, asking what is the difference. There is definitely a major difference, and for more than one reason.
First off, when someone uses words like "nigger" or is just sexist and racially insensitive like Don Imus, it's up to society to decide whether or not the use was insensitive. Now there are probably many people who are offended by the words regardless, and others who are not at all, but it's up to the people. Imus has a history of being insensitive towards groups of people, and apparently, there are people who think what he's saying is racist by the way he's saying. It also has to do with the target. If Don Imus had called a bunch of hookers in New York City, "nappy headed hos" he would have no problems. But the fact is, he called very accomplished, nice, and successful young women that, when there was no basis for it. To many people it sounded both sexist and racist. Therefore, it is!
Contrast this with what Ghostface or Nas says on one of their albums. Or contrast it with what Howard Stern might say. It's not the words, it's the context of the words, and it's who is saying them. If society believes Don Imus is a racist, and then he says something racist, then it's racist! People are smart enough to form a general opinion, and that opinion has been formed because of the way Don Imus has carried himself throughout his life.
Second, when rappers, or other artists use the words I mentioned earlier it's within the context of what they're speaking about. Plus, certain people are allowed to use these words. Find me a hip hop artist who is calling random, successful, innocent women these words. You won't! At the worst someone may call Condi Rice a "nappy headed ho..." but it probably won't be a white guy. But if someone did that person MIGHT get away with it. If Howard Stern did, he MIGHT get away with it. Why? Because Condi Rice has helped conduct a governmental policy that has led to the death of many innocent people. She herself is not an innocent, like the RU Women's Basketball team, and this is an extreme example.
But back to the rappers, they use these words in an artistic manner, and most of their words are for purchase. You know exactly what you're getting when you buy a hip hop artist's music, or go see a film. Yes, it's art. And yes, that music is on the radio. But that artist isn't singing the music on the radio, and in order to see it on TV you most likely have to buy it. Or, those words are used in context within a movie. A DJ most likely played the music of an artist. That falls to the DJ, legally at the very least. In order to hear these things you must make a choice, and that choice is to purchase the artist's release and by that you're accepting what this artist has done. Plus, it usually is art, and story telling.
Okay, so you don't buy that, so lets focus on these words, especially the word "nigger." The word "nigger" or should i say "niggah" has always been viewed by me as a challenge, one used by inner city youths, and sometimes some adults who came from those places. By a challenge I mean that it's used amongst certain groups of blacks as a sign of affection. Why is it used? Because blacks, the way I see it, have taken the word back. What used to be a derogatory word used against them, is now a word they use amongst themselves. If a white person even dares to use it you are challenging someone who is black. Back in the day you could use it indiscriminately by whites. But now, to use it, even when it's being thrown around in front of you, is a dangerous thing, and I get that. Would I prefer it not be used? Certainly. I think it's a terrible word (even when it is funny), but I do understand how and why it is used by many people now. And I equally understand why it is most white people cannot use it, or words connoting the same thing.
In the end, when Don Imus says the things he says and is raked over the coals for it, well, that's how it should be because that's what society is saying should happen to him. The people are pointing at him as a racist, and usually the people are correct. When they let others use it without any comment, that's also their choice. Society is usually a pretty good gauge of what's going on. It's called the "common sense" approach to life.
(not editing)
Now, back to Don.
Jim Rome was comparing what Don Imus did on his show to what so many hip hop artists and others do in the entertainment world with the words niggah, ho, etc. Rome posed the question to the world, asking what is the difference. There is definitely a major difference, and for more than one reason.
First off, when someone uses words like "nigger" or is just sexist and racially insensitive like Don Imus, it's up to society to decide whether or not the use was insensitive. Now there are probably many people who are offended by the words regardless, and others who are not at all, but it's up to the people. Imus has a history of being insensitive towards groups of people, and apparently, there are people who think what he's saying is racist by the way he's saying. It also has to do with the target. If Don Imus had called a bunch of hookers in New York City, "nappy headed hos" he would have no problems. But the fact is, he called very accomplished, nice, and successful young women that, when there was no basis for it. To many people it sounded both sexist and racist. Therefore, it is!
Contrast this with what Ghostface or Nas says on one of their albums. Or contrast it with what Howard Stern might say. It's not the words, it's the context of the words, and it's who is saying them. If society believes Don Imus is a racist, and then he says something racist, then it's racist! People are smart enough to form a general opinion, and that opinion has been formed because of the way Don Imus has carried himself throughout his life.
Second, when rappers, or other artists use the words I mentioned earlier it's within the context of what they're speaking about. Plus, certain people are allowed to use these words. Find me a hip hop artist who is calling random, successful, innocent women these words. You won't! At the worst someone may call Condi Rice a "nappy headed ho..." but it probably won't be a white guy. But if someone did that person MIGHT get away with it. If Howard Stern did, he MIGHT get away with it. Why? Because Condi Rice has helped conduct a governmental policy that has led to the death of many innocent people. She herself is not an innocent, like the RU Women's Basketball team, and this is an extreme example.
But back to the rappers, they use these words in an artistic manner, and most of their words are for purchase. You know exactly what you're getting when you buy a hip hop artist's music, or go see a film. Yes, it's art. And yes, that music is on the radio. But that artist isn't singing the music on the radio, and in order to see it on TV you most likely have to buy it. Or, those words are used in context within a movie. A DJ most likely played the music of an artist. That falls to the DJ, legally at the very least. In order to hear these things you must make a choice, and that choice is to purchase the artist's release and by that you're accepting what this artist has done. Plus, it usually is art, and story telling.
Okay, so you don't buy that, so lets focus on these words, especially the word "nigger." The word "nigger" or should i say "niggah" has always been viewed by me as a challenge, one used by inner city youths, and sometimes some adults who came from those places. By a challenge I mean that it's used amongst certain groups of blacks as a sign of affection. Why is it used? Because blacks, the way I see it, have taken the word back. What used to be a derogatory word used against them, is now a word they use amongst themselves. If a white person even dares to use it you are challenging someone who is black. Back in the day you could use it indiscriminately by whites. But now, to use it, even when it's being thrown around in front of you, is a dangerous thing, and I get that. Would I prefer it not be used? Certainly. I think it's a terrible word (even when it is funny), but I do understand how and why it is used by many people now. And I equally understand why it is most white people cannot use it, or words connoting the same thing.
In the end, when Don Imus says the things he says and is raked over the coals for it, well, that's how it should be because that's what society is saying should happen to him. The people are pointing at him as a racist, and usually the people are correct. When they let others use it without any comment, that's also their choice. Society is usually a pretty good gauge of what's going on. It's called the "common sense" approach to life.
(not editing)
Awesome
More time for our soldiers to be killed.
Be proud, supporters, be proud.
Gates when on to say:
All active-duty Army troops now in Iraq or Afghanistan or headed to either country will serve 15-month tours of duty, up from the usual 12-month tours, effective immediately, the Pentagon announced today.Yes, it is now easier to predict if they are going to be killed. The likelihood has increased.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates called the change “a difficult and necessary interim step” and said it would at least give soldiers and their families more predictability than they have now.
Be proud, supporters, be proud.
Gates when on to say:
The new policy will ensure a year at home and that “all share the burden equally,” Mr. Gates said.And of course, he means a shared burden by anyone fighting, and no one who chose this war.
John McCainiac
Again, sorry I didn't post this earlier, but I was just reminded of it when I saw John McCain on the tube just now. If you saw him on 60 Minutes this past Sunday you could see a man that would say, or do anything in order to be elected President, and because of it, he can't be trusted.
This is a guy who let the Bush campaign smear him by saying he fathered a black child. Of course, he did nothing. Now he even goes further by saying that he knows the group supported the Bush campaign, but doesn't necessarily know they were with the campaign. Ok, pal. Maybe you forget about Karl Rove in college, and his youthful transgressions?
ANYWAY...
Scott Pelley of 60M asked McCain about some comments he made regarding the Union Jack, aka, the Confederate Flag, on the last campaign. Here's what was said:
What brings me to talk about this is how McCain was being labelled in 2000. Do you remember? He was the Train Conductor of the "Straight Talk Express!" That's right, it was John McCain. So apparently, Mr. Straight Talk Express wasn't so fucking straight. And I'll say he's certainly no more straight today, in his older age, when Viagra is probably the only think that keeps him close to straight.
Douche bag.
This is a guy who let the Bush campaign smear him by saying he fathered a black child. Of course, he did nothing. Now he even goes further by saying that he knows the group supported the Bush campaign, but doesn't necessarily know they were with the campaign. Ok, pal. Maybe you forget about Karl Rove in college, and his youthful transgressions?
ANYWAY...
Scott Pelley of 60M asked McCain about some comments he made regarding the Union Jack, aka, the Confederate Flag, on the last campaign. Here's what was said:
"Let me bring up another issue that surrounded South Carolina in the year 2000. There was a political issue, a local issue about whether the Confederate flag should fly over the Capitol. You waffled on that," Pelley says.Thank goodness he cleared that up.
"Yes. Worse than waffled," McCain acknowledges.
Asked what he means, McCain says, "Well, I said that it was strictly a state issue and clearly knowing that it wasn't."
"That's not what you believed in your heart?" Pelley asks.
"No," the senator says.
"What did you believe in your heart?" Pelley asks.
"That it was a symbol to many of, a very offensive symbol to many, many Americans," McCain says.
What brings me to talk about this is how McCain was being labelled in 2000. Do you remember? He was the Train Conductor of the "Straight Talk Express!" That's right, it was John McCain. So apparently, Mr. Straight Talk Express wasn't so fucking straight. And I'll say he's certainly no more straight today, in his older age, when Viagra is probably the only think that keeps him close to straight.
Douche bag.
Voter Fraud
Small government Republicans authorize large and costly voter fraud report, but make sure information is kept from taxpayers who funded report.
So you can imagine what could have gone on here, or why it's kept from the public. Bottom line: If results are good for them, report is splashed all over FOX News and CNN. If results don't support what they want it to support, then it's as if taxpayer-paid report never happened.
Digressing, you could read into Karl Rove's comments:
So you can imagine what could have gone on here, or why it's kept from the public. Bottom line: If results are good for them, report is splashed all over FOX News and CNN. If results don't support what they want it to support, then it's as if taxpayer-paid report never happened.
Digressing, you could read into Karl Rove's comments:
“We’re, in some parts of the country, I’m afraid to say, beginning to look like we have elections like those run in countries where the guys in charge are colonels in mirrored sunglasses,” Mr. Rove said. “I mean, it’s a real problem.”Hmmm...
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Cheers to Al Sharpton
David Gregory is hosting Hard Ball and he is attempting to grill Reverend Sharpton over his support of Tawana Brawley, attempting to equate that with Don Imus said. Sharpton fired back saying, "I believed in woman's statement and defended her...How can you compare that to a man slandering a whole race and group of people?!?!"
Gregory, "We'll be back after these messages..."
Meanwhile, Gregory is one of the Don Imus' regulars. I think he should be asking himself questions, since it has always been apparent that Don Imus is a piece of shit.
Yes, yes, I know, he gives to children, but he only gives to children because a) his wife makes him have a heart and because b) he gets a lot of credit for it. Yes, I'm sure it makes him feel good as well...to get a tax break...
No no, the Imus Giving Foundation provides him cover. I've always believed it. I trust his wife, but I don't really trust him...
Whoa, here comes David Gregory's final question..."If there is a national question...what should it be?"
Ummm, let me answer that, "Why do so many businesses support racist, sexist, and chauvinistic radio and tv talk personalities?"
Gregory, "We'll be back after these messages..."
Meanwhile, Gregory is one of the Don Imus' regulars. I think he should be asking himself questions, since it has always been apparent that Don Imus is a piece of shit.
Yes, yes, I know, he gives to children, but he only gives to children because a) his wife makes him have a heart and because b) he gets a lot of credit for it. Yes, I'm sure it makes him feel good as well...to get a tax break...
No no, the Imus Giving Foundation provides him cover. I've always believed it. I trust his wife, but I don't really trust him...
Whoa, here comes David Gregory's final question..."If there is a national question...what should it be?"
Ummm, let me answer that, "Why do so many businesses support racist, sexist, and chauvinistic radio and tv talk personalities?"
The "I" Man and the "N-H-H" Word
So basically, this is what the whole thing is about. Don Imus calling the Rutgers women niggers. Not with the word "nigger" but the jist of the word "nigger" via the term "nappy-headed-hoes." The only difference is he was smart enough to not call them niggers. Had he done that he'd be fired. Because he didn't say the "N" word he didn't violate any FCC code, which enables him to take the high ground there, and get support from radio talk show hosts who want to be able to say whatever it is they want to say. These people aren't concerned with women, or minorities, or any other group, but rather, just themselves.
Imus went on Al Sharpton's radio program and used the term "you people," and I believe that was intentional as well. He's a lot smarter than he lets on. He's so angry this has spun out of control, and so high on himself, that he wanted to send another message across the bow of this ship. He knew exactly what he was doing when he said that, and knew full well he could get away with it because no one would call him out for being that dumb by intentionally making another gaffe in such a situation. But Imus is an animal in a corner, he lashed out because he is not someone who is ever told what to do. That was intentional.
With regards to the comments themselves, others could have gotten away with it, and it would have been fine. Howard Stern, or Artie Lang of Stern's show could have gotten away with it. Is it because people believe they're not racists, or because Robin Quivers sits in the room providing them cover? Whatever it is, Stern is not deemed to be a racist, and I do not think he is. Imus on the other hand, I do believe he is disdainful of minorities and women just based on the way he carries himself in general. In other words, people know when a joke is just a surface joke, and they know when a joke comes from deep down, which is the case with Imus, and the people he surrounds himself with. Speaking for Sid Rosenberg, who I know, he's not a racist. He's just a loudmouth jackass (who I happen to like) who wants to get ahead on the radio. But Imus, he's a racist, chauvinist, and a bigot...and you can tell.
With all of this said, do I think he should be fired? No. Firing Imus will do nothing in the way of stopping others from saying such things, and thinking such things. The point of this exercise is to make people aware, not just to hurt Don Imus. It's to make people reflect on what racism and sexism is, and how it is wrong and hurtful. Firing him does not aid this cause. Letting the advertisers, politcians, and the listeners abandon him on their own, that sends a message. That tells people that you're in the wrong, that this won't be supported, and you will not benefit from your race and sex-based commentary. It's a marketplace that makes this decision, and here in the northeast, it won't be tolerated. Maybe in the south, or some places in the midwest, but not here. The market should decide, and consumers should boycott products who support Imus' show. This will send a message to anyone and everyone that thinks this behavior is okay, now, and in the future.
Imus went on Al Sharpton's radio program and used the term "you people," and I believe that was intentional as well. He's a lot smarter than he lets on. He's so angry this has spun out of control, and so high on himself, that he wanted to send another message across the bow of this ship. He knew exactly what he was doing when he said that, and knew full well he could get away with it because no one would call him out for being that dumb by intentionally making another gaffe in such a situation. But Imus is an animal in a corner, he lashed out because he is not someone who is ever told what to do. That was intentional.
With regards to the comments themselves, others could have gotten away with it, and it would have been fine. Howard Stern, or Artie Lang of Stern's show could have gotten away with it. Is it because people believe they're not racists, or because Robin Quivers sits in the room providing them cover? Whatever it is, Stern is not deemed to be a racist, and I do not think he is. Imus on the other hand, I do believe he is disdainful of minorities and women just based on the way he carries himself in general. In other words, people know when a joke is just a surface joke, and they know when a joke comes from deep down, which is the case with Imus, and the people he surrounds himself with. Speaking for Sid Rosenberg, who I know, he's not a racist. He's just a loudmouth jackass (who I happen to like) who wants to get ahead on the radio. But Imus, he's a racist, chauvinist, and a bigot...and you can tell.
With all of this said, do I think he should be fired? No. Firing Imus will do nothing in the way of stopping others from saying such things, and thinking such things. The point of this exercise is to make people aware, not just to hurt Don Imus. It's to make people reflect on what racism and sexism is, and how it is wrong and hurtful. Firing him does not aid this cause. Letting the advertisers, politcians, and the listeners abandon him on their own, that sends a message. That tells people that you're in the wrong, that this won't be supported, and you will not benefit from your race and sex-based commentary. It's a marketplace that makes this decision, and here in the northeast, it won't be tolerated. Maybe in the south, or some places in the midwest, but not here. The market should decide, and consumers should boycott products who support Imus' show. This will send a message to anyone and everyone that thinks this behavior is okay, now, and in the future.
Obama
So I made a comment that Obama would be the next President to be shot at, and of course, the host I work with threw me right under the bus without letting me defend myself. My days are numbered...I can feel it.
But that's a story for another day. Meanwhile, this is the new name for the Barack gage:
The OBAMETER!
But that's a story for another day. Meanwhile, this is the new name for the Barack gage:
The OBAMETER!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
