...LABC63.

I want to add that I understand the arguments of people who feel that society is "too sensitive."

I also respect those who liked Imus and think it just plain sucks that he was suddenly sanctioned for something he's spent his whole career doing.

I don't necessarily agree with them, but I think those are reasonable positions.

I can't even argue that he's actually more racist, sexist, homophobic & anti-Semitic than the next guy - I haven't listened to him since I was a kid, and I know that shock jocks are assholes for a living.

Their job is to be avatars for the socially repressed assholery of the masses, and when they throw people to the lions they provide catharsis for their crowd.

Personally & subjectively? I think Imus is profoundly bombastic & annoying, and I'd personally, subjectively, love to see him MC'ing Love Boat reunions in Vegas someday.

But if masses of Imus listeners sanctioned MSNBC and chastened them into re-instating him, I'd groan, but I'd cheer them. I relate to the people who see groupthink as potentially threatening on an ideological level, and I think that the government has to be extra-careful about insuring individual freedom.

But we all know that our society is founded in democracy AND free-market capitalism. It may seem oxymoronic at times, but corporations can do things with impunity to their employees that the government can't & shouldn't do to its citizens.

Corporate America is NOT a democracy.

Furthermore, Imus is in show business.

He serves at the pleasure of the whim-driven market, just like Dick Clark or Angelina Jolie or Siegfried & Roy.

If the market wants him but the money people no longer want to deliver him to his audience, the market simply has to exert pressure on others to do so. No one truly popular ever "loses" his/her voice in America.

There is NOTHING unfair about Imus' employment situation IF you accept the fundamental nature of capitalism, so the idea that this is a "free speech issue" really, really bugs me.

Joan- as a longtime Salon subscriber and someone who admires your work in particular, I must disagree.

Was Imus really fired for the whole shebang or is it really just some kind of pandering?

Frankly he says a lot of awful and stupid things that offend everyone. I can't even stomach a few moments of it. However I also feel that way about Howard Stern, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter. Generally I choose not to listen.

You don't have to dig too deeply into any of the aforementioned names' work to find truly awful, offensive remarks.

I really think Imus got caught in some 24-hour-media/YouTube/Al Sharpton(there I've said it) crosshairs and is taking a big fall. We may not have to live with what he says that was so bigoted but we also loose something else with his voice gone. Sorry, even if it is a voice I disdain, something goes with it.

While I appreciate your thought that for years Imus has been an equal opportunity offender, I don't think that had one thing to do with his firing. I worry now about silencing... everyone.

FranR

I never said that what's happening to Imus has anything to do with free speech; I sincerely believe that anyone who thinks it does is sadly mistaken.

My point is simply that the rush to silence any discourse we find offensive, whether it's a free speech issue or not (and, as I said, in this case it clearly is not) contributes to a blanding of the public square that I find very dispiriting.

Anyone who thinks that the silencing of Imus will do anything to improve race relations in this country is living in fantasy land. All it will do is contribute to a brief period of corporate media being more careful about policing the language of their employees. I haven't heard anything in the media coverage of this controversy that deals with the real issues of race relations and racism; that would be far too volatile a subject for our pablum media to air.

the harder it is to fire someone, the harder it is to get the job in the first place. the better the job, the more you are *owned* (in really crappy jobs you can say whatever you want - no one cares). america was founded by and for independent farmers - and their slaves. now it's independent corporations - and their (wage) slaves. no wonder people would rather be owners than workers - and it's not just the money.

I agree on the unlikeliness of a real discourse. I have read a ton of posts on this matter on different posts and am amazed by the lack of understanding of history and constitutional law. Plus, the ugliness of some self identified white posters who seem to want a green light to use derogatory words because "a rapper used them". There is this victimization vibe about being able to say anything without consequence. I just do not understand where the responsibility and respect for other people's dignity has gone. It seems that we are more concerned about the bomb thrower's feelings than we are about the damage done.

David,

Surely you are not lacking in wisdom? Respect that is earned.... has no requirement for acknowledgment.... by those earning it. These respected people are not desiring to attack and whine about the lack of respect they recieve from those around them......because respect is given to these people freely.

Sticks and stones may break my bones...but names will never harm me! Clearly it is not my comment that states the facts...it's clearly the "actions" of the great Black Leaders representing a race of people who have not earned enough respect yet...... that tells the true story.

Will you attack me now.......?

Obewan

is in a meeting with jackson and sharpton. is this fine with the black posters out there? after all they represent no *elected* position (like the head of the congressional black caucus) or any large advocacy organization (like the NAACP). just free lancers with a remarkably small constituency considering their influence.