Imus is just a symptom of a bigger problem

| | Comments (2)

"You have made of radio a laughing stock to intelligence....you have cut time into tiny segments called spots (more rightly stains) where with the occasional fine program is periodically smeared with impudent insistence to buy and try."

Lee de Forest - inventor of the vacuum tube for radio - addressing the National Association of Broadcasters in 1946

By the time you read this article the Don Imus story will no doubt be long gone. Why not, CBS did can his butt, so end of story, right? Well, it seems to me that the "national discussion" that took place during the whole shock jock scandal was quite limited, so lets recap a bit and see where else we can go with this issue.

Don Imus called the Rutgers Women's basketball team "nappy headed hos." Some people said he simply made a mistake. According to Black Scholar Ishmael Reed, writing on Imus and racism over a year ago, the Imus show used racism as its bread and butter. Even 60 Minutes (airs on CBS) did a show on this "shock jock" where they were told that "Bernard McGirk, the man, who, according to 60 Minutes, Imus hired to do "nigger jokes," doing a lame imitation of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, using a plantation type dialect." The national media watchdog group FAIR has also documented racist diatribes on the Imus show over the years. "Imus called Washington Post reporter Howard Kurtz a "boner-nosed... beanie-wearing Jewboy," referred to a disabled colleague as "the cripple," and to an Indian men's tennis duo as "Gunga Din and Sambo." In Imus' words, the New York Knicks are "chest-thumping pimps."

Some of the "national debate" quickly turned to criticism of rap lyrics that also demean women and minorities, so why not censor that from the airwaves? Why stop there? Imus is not the only radio talk show host who uses racist or sexist language. The list of radio personalities that do this on a daily basis is quite long. But lets just look at some of the syndicated talk radio people one might hear in West Michigan. Tune into WOOD radio on any weekday and you will likely hear some offensive language from people like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Laura Ingraham. Remember what Rush said about Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donavan McNabb? Another example was when Rush made fun of the NAACP by saying "The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies." On the other hand, Michael Savage makes Rush look like an altar boy. Savage has built his fame off of racist and homophobic diatribes. In 2000 he said:

"With the [Latino] population that has emerged, since they breed like rabbits, in many cases the whites will become a minority in their own nation... The white people don't breed as often for whatever reason. I guess many homosexuals are involved. That is also part of the grand plan, to push homosexuality to cut down on the white race."

I don't hear anyone locally calling for a boycott of WOOD radio...although it's not a bad idea.

The problem however, isn't just limited to the comments of Imus, Savage and company. There are deeper problems with media that "allows" this type of speech to be broadcast. One major problem that has not really been addressed in the "national debate" has to do with whom we don't hear on radio or TV. There is a clear absence of minority and female voices in radio. If you want to hear women or minorities on radio you are limited to some NPR programs or local stations that focus on audiences that major media has ignored. There are Spanish language radio stations locally and you can listen to African American radio talk show personalities like Tyronne Bynum and Robert S., but these shows are specifically targeted to Urban Black and Latino listeners. WOOD radio would claim they broadcast to a broader audience, when in fact they are primarily interested in a White audience, particularly White people with money. This is the case with most radio stations even though they like to promote themselves as lite rock, Christian, classic rock, eclectic, pop, or country, but in the end we should just call them what they are...White radio stations.

Television, particularly TV news is much worse. Minority and female voices have been limited in news stories. For women, being a news source is quite often gender specific, meaning that women's voices are sought out when it is a "women's issue" like shopping or domestic violence. When it comes to stories on the economy, politics, the environment, education, and foreign policy then women's voices are less frequent. The same is the case for minority voices on TV news. If the story is about racism or culture then you'll hear a minority voice. In other words, minority voices are typecast, limited to race-specific stories and not broader issues. But the biggest aspect of the Don Imus "scandal" that has not been addressed has to do more with media ownership and media policy.

Why was a show like Imus in the Morning or shows with Sean Hannity and Michael Savage so well known? With the increasing consolidation of radio ownership it was much cheaper for radio companies to air syndicated shows instead of locally produced programs. If the same show airs in dozens of media markets radio companies can offer better advertising packages to fill in those radio spots, as Lee de Forest called them in 1946. Radio companies can also downsize their workforce. If you are doing little or no local programming you don't need the same amount of staff. Syndicated programs also work because they don't allow for as much interaction as a local radio show, thus limiting the involvement of local communities. Big media companies are primarily interested in ratings, not serving the public interest, so of course syndicated talk show idiots like Don Imus are welcomed programming that will capture a primarily White audience with money. This is what is called institutional racism and is much more devastating than racial slurs. Don't get me wrong, I am quite repulsed by most radio and TV commentators, but pulling the plug on shows like Imus will not solve the problem alone.

So, while the "national debate" about Imus and rap lyrics continue big media is trying to push through new regulations on media ownership. Major media corporations, in conjunction with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are hoping to further de-regulated media ownership rules that would allow big companies to own even more of the radio, TV, cable and phone companies in our community. You say that you haven't heard about this? Exactly, it is not in the best interest of media companies to run news stories on this issue even though right now the FCC is allowing public comment on media ownership. You can participate in this important debate by going to the website Stop Big Media. There you will find resources and action steps to stop big media from owning more of the public airwaves. If we don't act on this issue we will be inundated with more and more of the same kind of programming, the kind that brought us programming like Imus. If we want a diversity of voices and local voices, then we need to change the media system not just censor programs that are a creation of this media system.

2 Comments

The free market has enabled the radio talk shows you criticise. Many folks like to listen to coservative talk radio because they believe that the mainstream (CBS,ABC,NBC,PBS,NY Times,etc) lean left and filter the news. Because many people listen to conservative talk radio, advertising revenue generated by this programing supports the local stations enabling these various points of view to continue.

Sounds like you want to shut down speach that you do not agree with. You may get your wish if the Dems carry the White House and Congress in the next election.

The "fairness" rules may then be rewritten to limit free speech and free markets. Then you can be happy for you and all others to hear only what the Left wants you to hear.

Don, I appreciate you taking the time to read my most recent commentary on Media Mouse and that you decided to respond. I am going to return the favor.

First, the free market did not "enable the talk radio shows" as you suggest. Talk radio and the consolidation of media ownership has meant less competition, which is a fundamental tenet of the free market system. How can we be better off with fewer voices and fewer choices, which has been the result of more syndicated programming instead of locally produced programming.

Secondly, you claim that media outlets like CBS,ABC,NBC,PBS,NY Times "lean left" but provide no evidence to support that. My assertion is that media is not a right/left issue, but a profit motive vs community service issue. If the media outlets you mention are left leaning, why did they all during the build up to the US invasion of Iraq not question the claims made by the Bush administration? Even with the war beginning's it's 5th year the major media still tends to rely on offical government and military sources. The major media also has framed the battle over legislation between the Bush administration and the Democratic Party, when in fact, the Democratic Party has not advocated for defunding the war and only half-heartedly has pushed a timetable for US troops withdraw that essentially has no teeth to it. The voices that are ignored in this media debate are primarily the Iraqis and the more than 60% of the American population which is opposed to the war and wants an immediate troop withdraw.

This gets to your third point, which is that I will get my wish to censor speech and that I will get my wish if them Dems "carry the White House and Congress in the next election." I never advocated for censorship in the article. I was merely pointing out that media ownership policy and consolidation of media ownership has led to the current crisis in radio, a crisis which the Democratic Party has been equally guilty of, since the major shift in media ownship policy for radio was initiated with the passing of the 1996 Tele-com Act that the Clinton administration pushed through.

I suspect that I loathe the Dems as much as you do and do not long for the days of having Air America in Grand Rapids. Air America symply duplicates the style that Rush and company employ and the only difference is that they promote Democratic Party positions. What I would advocate for is more local control of the airwaves, more programming that served the needs of this community. The radio airwaves could be used in this community to promote debate around issues like public education, local elections, race relations, public safety and provide an outlet for sectors of the population that are mostly ignored - youth, working people, women, and ethnic minorities.

Email Updates

Subscribe

Receive our articles automatically:

Donate

Media Mouse is reader funded and relies on contributions to provide unique reporting and research.

donate

Bloom Collective

bloom collective logo

Media Mouse is part of the Bloom Collective, an infoshop and lending library located at 1134 Wealthy St SE. The Bloom Collective offers a wide variety of resources to promote social change.

Promote Mediamouse.org

You can help promote Mediamouse.org by printing and distributing flyers or by adding us as a friend on the following social networks:

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by published on May 2, 2007 9:10 AM.

Your Health Is for Sale was the previous entry in this blog.

Up South, All White, Confused and Scared is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

About Mediamouse.org

Mediamouse.org is a left and progressive website providing independent news, media, analysis, and commentary covering Grand Rapids, Michigan and beyond. We aim to inspire grassroots activism to transform our community, our lives, and our world.

Get Active

We hope that this site will function as a catalyst for action. We urge you to get involved either with the groups listed in the Progressive Directory or by attending local events.