"Imus-ized"

I have been a listener of Don Imus off and on now for several years. He’s entertaining but I’ve never felt he was a political commentator like Rush or Hannity. I started listening to “Imus in the Morning" in Tucson because the station I listened to had Rush on in the afternoons; I guess I became a listener due to my own laziness (those radio buttons are so hard to push). Several times while listening to his show I was surprised by the comments he would make about a person or people. Some comments where in poor taste, some where degrading, and some where just plain ole mean; but all in all you had to take what he was saying with a grain of salt. I mean after all Imus was a hit because of his grittiness and provoking nature so this was expected. Many times he’d say something that was shocked to hear over the radio and I thought he’d be in some kind of trouble but nope, the 1st amendment protected him, after all he was nothing like Howard Stern. Well today things changed a bit for Mr. Imus. No he didn’t get in trouble with the FCC, no it wasn’t anything he said about some political figure; Mr. Imus got in trouble for saying something about a group of women. Granted what he said was crass and degrading; it had a racial undertone, and yes he should be in a little trouble over it; but the FCC didn’t do anything. You see the FCC is a bureaucracy whose wheels are slow to turn. They would hear a complaint, do an investigation, and issue fines if they saw a reason too. Nope Mr. Imus was fired today not two days after the incident; the FCC didn’t have to do a thing. It makes you wonder a bit who’s right here. Was Sumner Redstone right in directing the termination? Was MSNBC correct in canceling his show? Or should this all have been chocked up to entertainment, and let it be handled between the two parties involved. The “offended” women received and accepted an apology from Mr. Imus today. They accepted it but never demanded his firing. Why, did these women who had been so maligned by his comment not want to have his head on a platter? Could it be that they weren’t necessarily offended by the comment? Maybe they had been desensitized to this type of characterization because they had heard this many many times from other sources of entertainment? In today’s entertainment rich environment there are many artists out there that use this type of language in songs and they’re own image. I don’t know if these women listen to this type of music but being that they are young and in college it would be surprising to me if they didn’t. I would even venture a guess that many of them are frequent listeners to this type of music. Why is this comment from an aging over the hill “shock jock” so much more offending the lyrics of “Ludicris” or “P-Diddy” (if that’s what he calls himself today). It’s called hypocrisy. During one of the “acts of contrition” appearances Mr. Imus did to try to defuse the situation was on Rev Al Sharpton’s radio show. During the interview Mr. Imus was going on and on about how people should just let it go but one thing he said was that he was just an “Old Cracker”. To which Rev Sharpton quickly rebuked him say that “while he was on his show he was to show respect for all races even his own”. Does Rev. Sharpton say this to the rap stars that say these types of things in they’re songs? Nope! He feels that the 1st Amendment protects those artists. Why doesn’t the 1st Amendment protect Mr. Imus? Actually it does, remember the FCC? They can’t touch him; but the private citizen and sponsors of his show are a different matter. Mr. Imus has been demonized by his own speech. I really think he deserves what he’s getting just as Howard Stern did. But what I would like to see is for this to come around full circle and for those that are getting away with this type of behavior to get what they deserve too. Hate speech is hate speech; punish them all, or punish none! But stop making this a race issue!