Right to Free Speech

Let me start this by saying that I think Don Imus is a bigoted jerk and the air waves are better off without him.

That said, I am finding the entire outcry against his speech to be disturbing. No, that's not quite right. I find the way certain people are responding to what he said to be disturbing. That people like Al Sharpton believe they have the right to dictate what people can and can't say -- but that the same does not apply to them. If the United States of America has a constitutionally-granted right to free speech, then it applies to EVERYONE, not just those who say what you like to hear (otherwise, Mr. Limbaugh would have been off the airwaves years ago).

Do CBS and MSNBC have the right to fire or suspend him? That's part of what I am wrestling with. Do they have the right to censure him because he is presenting an image contrary to the image that those two networks want to present? Yes, but. The but is that they hired him knowing he held and expressed those types of views. So they had already condoned his behavior. Do the advertisers have the right to pull out? Again, when they signed up for those time slots, they knew who and what he was. So I don't have any sympathy with them. But they caved to a vocal group who objected to what he said.

I am seriously wrestling with the First Amendment implications of this incident. Who gets to decide what is okay to say and what is not? Is this only limited to the airwaves or can it be applied anywhere -- like Live Journal? Can the Moral Minority rise up and decry my journal when I talk about what life as a gay woman is like -- because THEY feel it is immoral and offensive? Can conservative Christian churches come together to force ISPs to remove web sites from GLBTQ groups or web sites of amateur porn? Why is it okay for black rappers to spread anti-white (or anti-Hispanic) lyrics but not for people to decry the offensiveness of said lyrics?

Let's start from the beginning: Do I think Imus crossed a line? Yes. What would be an appropriate way for CBS and MSNBC to censure him? I think that the 2-week suspension is appropriate. I also think requiring a public, on-air, in-person apology is appropriate. I think requiring that he attend sensitivity training (and keeping him off the air until he has completed it) is appropriate. And I think that sponsoring an event (with Imus as host) that promotes interracial and intergender harmony would be appropriate. I don't know that the response we have gotten is appropriate.

I guess most of my problem with this response is that Imus has engaged in this type of speech before with no consequences -- so we've gone from zero to sixty in one incident. There's been no previous censure (that I know of): no warnings, no reprimands, no suspensions. In fact, as I said above, CBS and MSNBC signed him on because he was provocative, in-your-face, and often offensive.

In addition, another part of my problem with the response to Imus' comments is that his detractors aren't helping anyone heal. They aren't making the targets of the comments -- the Rutgers women's basketball team -- feel better. In fact, I think the extremity of response has made it harder for them to express their anger and hurt. Imus' detractors are being nothing more than inflammatory -- using this incident to push their agendas (getting rid of a radio personality they disagree with) rather than support those who were truly hurt by the comments. Or trying to bring together people of different races to overcome such small-mindedness.

Sorry this has been so rambling, but I'm still trying to wrap my mind around it.

S