Yale Daily News

Updated: Monday, November 23, 2009 1:03 a.m.

A A A

Given Yale’s race issues, return of Imus is relevant

Staff Columnist
Published Wednesday, December 5, 2007

A slur, an apology, a termination, a hiatus and a return.

Don Imus’ fall eight months ago was as fast as he was popular. And on Monday, he quietly returned.

It’s not all the same now. Far fewer radio stations broadcast his program, “Imus in the Morning,” than did a year ago. And Imus himself insists he has changed. He referred to the controversy that ended his show as a “life-changing experience.”

It must have been. Newly aware of his potential to offend, he will not be able to recreate his past irreverence.

The rest of us have to hope that the effects of...

#1 By (Anonymous) 5:40a.m. on December 5, 2007

FYI, Sid Rosenberg was not even on the Imus episode in question. How interesting to once again read of an Imus critic who has little actual knowledge of the program. Until you can become informed, how about just kindly giving the rest of us some shut up? Thank you.

#2 By (Anonymous) 7:18a.m. on December 5, 2007

Anonymous,

Actually Sid was in the station day. He was filling in for carton. You can see him on the tape and in the transcripts.

Just so you don't think I'm "an Imus Basher"

you can read my opinion at...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/246866/The_Birth_of_the_I_Nation

#3 By (Anonymous) 7:19a.m. on December 5, 2007

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704040011

Listen for Sid Rosenberg (or read the text on the page). He's there.

#4 By (Anonymous) 7:21a.m. on December 5, 2007

For the clarification, Rosenberg was a call-in guest at the time. A one-time co-host, he had taken to calling in to the show after he left. On April 4, the day of Imus' infamous quote, Rosenberg was on the air with Imus and Bernard McGuirk, just not as a paid employee of CBS or MSNBC. In fact, as the video shows, it is Rosenberg who first draws the parallel to the Raptors.

#5 By (Anonymous) 8:51a.m. on December 5, 2007

Get over it (and yourself). While I am no Imus fan (really), that a couple of old white guys (one wearing a cowboy hat) can SPEAK IRONICALLY to highlight the linguistic absurdity of certain cultural segments (in this case, the tamest, most innocuous of hip-hop/rap comments)--and the get VILLIFIED (and fire-ified, a.k.a., fried) shows that RACISM is alive and well.

Not racism by "the usual suspects" as fingered by the media, but a racism that reserves "some" language for "some" groups, but not "all" groups (some animals are more equal than others, right Orwell?).

Rap & hip-hop can--ON THE AIRWAVES--air absolutely (i.e., not just relatively) disgusting stereotypes of women and minorities (and cops and whitey and what have you) WITHOUT REPERCUSSION, but when an old white guy in a 10-gallon hat makes fun of that language: WATCH OUT AMERICA.

So, Pete, I say again, get over yourself. An attack on Imus (as annoying and grating as he is) is an attack on free speech (and NOT, mind you, the most egregious of speech).

#6 By (Anonymous) 10:10a.m. on December 5, 2007

re: 5:40am - wow, is that all that you got out of this article?

#7 By (Anonymous) 11:36a.m. on December 5, 2007

As the comment alludes to above, the die hard Imus fans are always on the attack. They never take responsibility for what he did, it is always how you are wrong and need to shut up. Never Imus needs to shut up.

#8 By (Anonymous) 4:34p.m. on December 5, 2007

It's amazing to me that the liberals, like yourself, young man, will hyperventilate over a stupid remark by an old shock-jock but will remain silent when racist remarks like "honky", "hymie", etc. are uttered by a Jackson. "Free speech" for the liberals is "it's okay to burn the flag, it's okay to mock religion, etc." but everyone else must remain politically correct. It's the McCarthyism of today (and I can remember the horror that was caused by it many years ago).

#9 By (Anonymous) 10:12p.m. on December 5, 2007

Are you outraged by rappers and rap moguls such as Russell Simmons, Snoop Dog, etal., BET and music execs who have accumulated billions of dollars by denigrating the women of their own community? Did they apologize to the women of their community, or did I miss something? I’m still waiting for Sharpton to organize a boycott of the advertisers who sponsor misogynistic videos on BET and rap lyrics on the radio’s public airwaves. “Protests” and “marches” now and again will not suffice, nor will “recommendations” by Russell Simmons to refrain from such language. Why don’t you demand the immediate firing of these rappers and executives? Why don’t you shut down Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock and other comedians? Why don’t you demand the firing of Isiah Thomas? Your self-righteous holier than thou hypocrisy is staggering!

I don’t want to live in a sanitized society in which every utterance is scrutinized and is “approved” or “disapproved”. I would rather be offended than have a self-appointed thought police determine what I can and cannot listen to or what should or should not offend me. Who appointed you as the thought police and arbiter of virtuous radio behavior? This is straight out of the former Soviet Union’s propaganda machine. Or, perhaps you are ignorant of the history of totalitarian governments – so-called “offensive” remarks, and off to the re-education camp you go!

From my perspective and as a feminist and female listener, the feminists of yesteryear propelled us to positions of unimagined strength and power. But, thanks to the new generation of NOW and its PC cohorts, today’s generation has transformed us into whining victims in need of protection, lacking the spine to laugh at ourselves and laugh off tasteless and poorly conceived humor, or at least, to dish it right back.

#10 By (Anonymous) 3:14p.m. on December 6, 2007

To the above: brava!

Sorry, but comments are disabled for this article.