Don Imus and Your First Amendment Rights

[slowtaco]

Originally Posted by MYIX8UR8

Bottom line:

FCC sets rules

Imus had been warned several times

Imus was ultimate fired for violating rules set forth by the FCC

Claim race, gender, anything you want. He was legitimately fired for doing something clearly outside the realm of what is considered acceptable on public airwaves.

This isn't a freedom of speech issue as I already stated. It's not an issue of black or white, man or woman. It's a right or wrong issue. Imus was wrong. He got canned.

Again, if you were at your place of employment and a woman walked in and you called her a "nappy headed hoe" and she complained. I'm sure you wouldn't get a 2 week suspension. You'd be in the unemployment line.

Keep the meat of the matter in mind, not the sizzle.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Calling a fellow co-worker a "nappy haired hoe" is different then what Imus did. People make generalized comments all the time, regardless of race, gender, color etc... Everyone should be fired over it?

[nysulli]

oh, and freedom of speech means i can say whatever you want, however you want, without having to use this soft, pussified language that's considered PC today

and if i can't use it, then guess what, i don't have freedom of speech

[intern8tion9l]

i had thought this country had more to worry about than a stupid comment a radio host said, but i guess i was wrong. its all you hear about now. al sharpten and jessie jackson are definately a waste of human life. and as for those duke guys, when they were found innocent did those dirtbag revs do anything to apologize for ruining them? i don't think so

[Celtic1982citleC]

I don't think you've ever read the Amendment regarding figure or speech, or studied it for that matter. I feel you should research the actual wording as Don Imus' comment would NOT be classified as "common good" under any circumstances. I would also consider that you research Schenck v. United States. This dates way back to when someone yelling "FIRE" in a public place was deemed illegal. But wouldn't that be figure of speech? One in which has the ability to cause a huge frenzy. It's like saying "There's a bomb on the plane!" You have the right to say it, but there are consequences. You can't claim you're protected by the Constitution in that case. Your views are very narrow and I believe you should do more research before making such decisions on your views. This is my opinion and take it for what its worth. But this is one of the major problems with todays politics. Too many people who are uneducated on matters voice opinions with no read idea on the issue at hand. It's like people who vote democrat/republican JUST because they are a democrat/republican. Even if they have no idea what the candidate stands for. Sillyness.

[Celtic1982citleC]

Originally Posted by slowtaco

You're comparing apples to oranges. Calling a fellow co-worker a "nappy haired hoe" is different then what Imus did. People make generalized comments all the time, regardless of race, gender, color etc... Everyone should be fired over it?

You're sadly mistaken. If I called a woman a nappy headed hoe in person it would be much less severe as it is a personal matter between myself and that woman. I said it to her, one person. I didn't announce it to an entire viewing audience. You're basically saying whispering is someones ear is the same as standing on stage and making an announcement in the middle of time square. Would you agree now, with this in mind?

[nysulli]

i'm very well educated on the constitution, and "common good" is a vague term, for that matter telling me what you had for dinner isn't considered "common good" so i guess you have no right to tell someone what you ate for dinner then...

and the case of yelling fire in a building pertains to starting a panic in which people might be trampled in the resulting fear, yep, i see huge potential for fear to cause bodily harm or death to someone as a result of Imus's comment

my views aren't that narrow at all, i'm saying everyone should have the freedom to say whatever they like, if it offends you, then tough shit, you can ask that person to try not to offend you, but you cannot demand it. If that person you ASK not to offend you respects you, then they will probably make an effort not to

the whole problem is that your view is the popular one, we shouldn't say anything or do anything that would offend anyone, well guess what, just about anything you can say, any side you take on an arguement is going to offend somebody, its unavoidable, yet people want to make you bendover backwards not to do it

yes, what imus said was beyond that point, but the point is this, people will say things that offend you, people have to learn to take it in stride. Now if someone looked at say the duke lax team and said "wow, they look like a bunch of child molesters" thats a whole different level, and fits into your yelling fire in a building comment, as your inferring that they have done something both illegal and immoral, not just making a comment about their appearence.

i guess by your standards i should be offended whenever someone comments on my height, because I shouldn't be singled out for being tall enough to have to duck to walk around most peoples basements, and anyone who says anything about my height should be fired...

[Celtic1982citleC]

You can take it to any extreme that you would like, but the fact of the matter is there is a fine line when it comes to what you should/should not say. It's not the fact that Imus can NOT say what he wants. In fact, he did. Point is, that is should NOT have said that. He did, and there were reprecussions for his action. As you know in this crazy world we live in, for every action there is an equal or greater reaction. In his case, the reaction was greater. Notice on TV they don't totally sensor out all the words considered foul. They just avoid the more offensive ones. Years ago TV shows like NYPD Blue would never have been allowed on TV. I think people have become more than understanding as times have changed. Just hte minority (you) seem to think every extreme should be warranted and covered under the Constitution. Again, if that were the case and there were such a broad allowance of everything imagine the whole what is "assault" vs what is "battery" issue. Its different, yes. But can be looked at under the same light because its an interpretation of something that was/is/did happen and each has totally different consequences. Just like with Imus, if he had worded it different the reaction may not have been as severe. He chose his words poorly and the reaction warranted his termination.

[nysulli]

i agree with you on the point of responsibility, to often everyone blames everyone but themselves (another big pet peeve of mine, you did it, own up to it)

but lets keep another simple fact in mind, there is a difference between freedom of speech, and what you can and can't say in the workplace.

what warrents you getting fired its a matter of opinion, and is ultimately up to your employer, unless you take them to court over it and can prove that they have impeded your first amendment rights.

now i'm also not saying i myself would say something like that in public, but i am saying that i support someone who would want to say it themselves, because i believe in a very literal application of the constitution, just my views, you obviously have yours. Its a comment in poor taste, but thats it, and if it offends you that someone said that about you, then more then likely theres some truth behind it, well unless you accuse someone of being a rapist or something totally illegal or morally wrong. and i've seen the rutger's womens team, they do look rather "thugish"

and as said, what amazes me is that amongst all the other problems facing minorities today, from inner city violence, gang wars, poor education in city schools, etc., this is the biggest issue that these so called "black leaders" are willing to talk about, come on, a real leader like MLK would be calling for a stop to all the violence, because from watching some of the crimes that occur involving minorities, some people can actually justify truth to some of those negative stereotypes, chris rock hit the nail on the head a few years back with his bit "black people vs n%$^$S.

then again, i also think career politicians are bad for the system, as did those who wrote the constitution, , but hey, thats just me, and ultimately, i could give a rats ass what anyone else thinks about my views, another great thing about this country

[Plan B]

His job is to be offensive. He wasnt hired to be bland. They have always embraced his ways... eventually it will catch up to everyone.

I hate political correctness, but Im no fan of racism...but I am disgusted by censorship... but what he said was.... but wait... was it... Is it racist just because it's offensive... or does there have to be malice behind it.... Was he accurately describing them...perhaps not...but was he describeing them in a way he thought humerous though the insult? Do hosts insult and berate every day? Would he have a job if he said the Bulls were a buncha nappy head pimps?
Come on people... he should be able to say whatever he wants... and the stations can then appropriately choose if they still want him. They chose no... so what.. He's in a risky business when it comes to speech. I think it was pretty stupid to say what he did, but they had no choice due to public and sponser outcry. Life is a game of darts, especially when your a host of anything..and eventually you will take a dart in the eye.

[Celtic1982citleC]

Though all this I have to say I think this is the first time EVER on rspeed that a top has gone 3+ pages and has NOT gone OT. Props to everyone who has posted here. Lots of good conversation and debate.

[slowtaco]

Again, it's unfortunate. I agree with Plan B... he was the original "shock jock". I'm not saying it's a reason and or excuse to behave the way he did. However, I will agree with Mike that Jackson and Sharpton need to take a proactive approach across the board, and not pick out the specifics just to be in the lime light.

I agree with what both sulli and MY8 have to say.. However, I don't feel that because a person is opinionated in 1 way, means they're not educated. We all have our own specific beliefs, that why USA is the best place to live.. Because it's our right to do so. And yes, while it maybe offensive to some, others it may not. Unfortunatley Imus was a big name... If this was a local hole in the wall radio show airing on AM and the comment was made... do you think Jackson and or Sharpton would have been involved?

[JiM P 2001]

I will laugh my ass off if Howard Stern hooks Imus up with a job at Sirius...

[Khyron]

Originally Posted by JiM P 2001

I will laugh my ass off if Howard Stern hooks Imus up with a job at Sirius...

LOL, I just don't see that happening. Imus would be too proud to be sterns coffee getting bitch

'cause thats all stern would let him do.