« Fire Imus | Main | Imus Is Fired »
April 09, 2007
Why Imus Should Be Fired
Talk show host Don Imus has been apologizing profusely for his insensitive remarks about the Rutgers’ women’s basketball team, as well he should. But these apologies are not cutting it with an ever-growing mob of critics who recognize the groveling meaninglessness of his apologies.
Aging entertainment attention addicts who have lost their edge, such as Imus and Larry King, will go to any length to stay in front of their fans and get the attention they crave—they’ll genuflect to authority or inform on their lovers. The magnificent, complex film “The Lives of Others” examines this phenomenon brilliantly when the actress and lover of the film’s playwright hero squeals on him to the East German secret police. She’s a nice, caring person who loves the playwright, but she is so addicted to applause and her career that to her horror she becomes a Quisling, which results in self-loathing.
As I wrote in my previous post about Imus, I’m quite sure he’s not a bad person. When I fired him in 1977, he was docile and gentlemanly, completely the opposite of his on-air persona. When he apologized today on his nationally syndicated radio, he said he was a “good person who said a bad thing,” which might be the case. And I believe he’s sorry for what he said, but this does not mean that he will change his behavior or stop making off-color, insensitive, stupid remarks. He can’t control his addiction and should be fired.
In the 40 years that I was associated with the radio and television business, I got to observe many attention-addicted personalities who crave love so desperately that they will do anything to get and keep it. Often they have a terrible self-image and the attention and love they get on air is like a drug. And like addictive drugs, they require ever stronger doses. And not only do these personalities need love, it must be unconditional. They want to know they are loved no matter what they do. Therefore, they continually test love givers (parents and parent substitutes such as bosses) by doing bad or inappropriate things. They’ll insult authority figures and then say, “Do you still love me?” Then, they’ll escalate the bad behavior and plea, “Do you still love me?” I think that’s what Imus is doing.
If MSNBC (owned by NBC, which is owned by General Electric) and CBS forgive Imus and don’t fire him for the current incident, he’ll be back with more outrageous behavior and ask, “Do you still love me?” By not firing Imus, MSNBC and CBS are enabling his bad behavior, just as parents do when they enable anti-social behavior in their soon-to-be-delinquent children. At 66, Imus is still an emotional attention-addicted child who can’t help himself.
If MSNBC and CBS don’t fire Imus, it will say more about them and their values than it will about Imus. We know who he is. Who are they?
Posted by Charles Warner at April 9, 2007 03:06 PM
Comments
Media Curmudgeon ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.mediacurmudgeon.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 15, 2007 01:32 PM writes:
The newly proposed ethical guidelines for bloggers suggests that bloggers should not allow anonymous comments like the one below from "a friend."
Obviously I disagree with these guidelines. Many of the comments I get via emails from friends, and I post the comments myself after I get their permission to post them. Some, like my friend, don't want to be identified for a variety of reasons, mostly, I think, for fear of spam.
Also, some don't want to take the time or trouble to register with TypeKey to make a comment, which I completely understand. The reason I don't allow comments on this blog without registration is because I got so much spam and pitches for viagra (as many as 50 a day) that I had to make people register.
If you'd like to comment on a blog post, send me an email and I'll post it with your permission.
Media Curmudgeon at April 15, 2007 01:23 PM writes:
A friend writes:
"My husband passed on your columns about Imus the last few days. Interesting stuff. We have watched Imus on MSNBC (we don't get him on the radio around here) fairly often. We watched solely to see what interesting guests he had on and turned him off whenever no one of interest was to appear. The rest of his show was unwatchable. It was either about self-promotion, self-congratulation, his hypochondria or silly, sophomoric banter. His crude, mean-spirited, name-calling episodes made us race each other to the remote to change the channel.
We really won't miss him very much. But where will we get the cadre of important, interesting journalists, politicians, authors, musicians, historians, etc., all in one place discussing the stories and issues of the day? I like the idea of more of Keith Olberman (he's great!), but with his fairly liberal bent and his straight tell-it-like-it-is talk, could he pull that off?
Keep up the good work!"
Media Curmudgeon at April 12, 2007 09:00 PM writes:
Terrific comment, JoeDPont. Of course, you're right. Stern did say worse, more vile things than Imus did--both on radio and television--but probably not more racist things. The difference is that no one called Stern out. Now, Howard is on satellite radio and can say what he wants.
Media Matters in America, a liberal-oriented blog that is widely read, first called attention to Imus's racist remarks and the main-stream-media picked up on them because they were both sexist and racist and over-the-top offensive to the heroic young women on the Rutgers basketball team.
I recommend that you make your points about Stern to Media Matters for American at www.mediamatters.org and ask them to keep a watch on Howard Stern.
And thanks again for the comment.
joedpont at April 12, 2007 08:30 PM writes:
you touched on howard stern..
but you really missed the point.
stern has said much more that Imus ever did.
don imus is an old man who sufferes from abuse of alcohol and drugs from years ago.
So who monitors hate radio against white people??
Media Curmudgeon at April 11, 2007 01:52 PM writes:
Mr. Sticky posted a comment about the Imus brouhaha on the blog post "Half In and Half Out of the Kitchen" about the NY Times. I'm sure he meant to post it on one of the Imus posts. Mr. Sticky makes an excellent point, which I agree with:
"MrSticky [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 11, 2007 07:31 AM writes:
Everyone is an expert. People call for the removal of Imus, why? He’s not an influential “civil rights” figure like Jesse Jackson who rode to fame on the backs of a gang in Chicago? Jackson also called New York “himeytown”. He’s a good one to demand a resignation/firing. Sharpton gets sued for the Tawanna Brawley debacle and loses to the tune of 300K. He’s another squeaky clean candidate for righteousness. Imus was clearly wrong, that’s not the problem. His removal would mean a hundred steps backward in the quest for true equality of all peoples. The spotlight on his comment is not where true discrimination and racism lie. It’s embedded much deeper in society than his lame show. By all means, continue to lobby for his ouster. It makes no difference because as wrong as his remark was, it’s not getting to the root of the problem.
Media Curmudgeon at April 10, 2007 03:52 PM writes:
Right on, Paddy! Thanks for the comment.
PaddyC at April 9, 2007 09:28 PM writes:
I agree that Imus needs to be fired. An apology is not enough. MSNBC apparently has no sense of their own complicity in all of this if they think the public will settle for a suspension. Free speech can still be hate speech and when it is there need to be consequences. The next step is to boycott MSNBC and its advertisers.
Paddy C.
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)Printer-Friendly