4 comments April 11th, 2007at 07:17pm Posted by Eli

Good news from Tucker(!), via Jane:

Tucker Carlson just announced that MSNBC will no longer simulcast the Imus show. The FCC will be opening up an investigation into the incident.

Awesome. Still not quite as good as firing, but it sends the message that MSNBC has standards that must be met, and they do not want their brand associated with anyone who calls women “nappy-headed hos” or “jigaboos.” It’s a start.

Entry Filed under: Media,Racism,Wankers


  • 1. bdr  |  April 11th, 2007 at 8:50 pm

    I’m curious: has anyone asked Joe Lieberman whether he’ll go back on Imus? Imus is another of Lieberman’s BFFs.

    I haven’t seen anything. Just wondering if America’s Moral Pygmy has been challenged on this.

  • 2. Eli  |  April 11th, 2007 at 9:57 pm

    He’ll be back. He may not admit it, but he’ll be back.

  • 3. Beel  |  April 12th, 2007 at 7:19 am

    For what it’s worth, Imus’s big mistake was in using this language on actual people. He isn’t Limbaugh or Malkin and he uses a lot of edgy language with some irony. Even this comment could be understood that way. There’s a general view among male sports talking heads (see Jim Rome for example) that women’s sports are a joke, and there are literally endless comments about the looks of women basketball players by endless sports talking heads. This is perhaps a societal problem–but a society wide problem is not a particularly Imus problem. You youself, in the thread below, use the following: “The “hos” strike back”. I totally understand what you mean, but those scare quotes were in some sense around Imus’ remarks too. It’s a bigger problem than you think, and therefore Imus is being scapegoated. Scapegoating does not work, it just makes victims.

  • 4. Eli  |  April 12th, 2007 at 7:39 am

    It sure didn’t look “ironic” in the full transcript, and he sure didn’t seem to have any problem with McGuirk or Sidiot’s comments. So I just don’t buy the “just kidding” excuse, which is a little too reminiscent of Time’s Ann Coulter profile about how it’s all just a provocative act. (The long list of prior offensive comments supplied by Americablog and Slate, even after he pledged to clean up his act, do not help his case either)

    If you’re right about Imus being a good guy who was misinterpreted (which I doubt), then it’s a shame that he’s the one who went down first for racist/sexist language, but SOMEONE HAD TO. The message that such language is unacceptable is very very important; the identity and even the intentions of the person who triggers that message are of secondary importance.

Contact Eli



Most Recent Posts




April 2007
« Mar   May »

Thinking Blogger

Pittsburgh Webloggers

Site Meter

View My Stats *