Ok, Now the Argument is that people are violating Imus' right to free speech

[ellacott]

Unbelievable, this was posted on another board by 2 conservatives.

[Orrex]

1. I agree

If Imus wants to make himself look like a worthless racist, sexist, and flatly unfunny dinosaur, that's his inalienable right.

[yellowcanine]

5. but not to get paid to do it on the public airways.

[Squatch]

7. Whether or not he gets paid is between him and the company

that employs him.

[Richard Steele]

13. And whether he can use PUBLIC airwaves is between him and the public which owns them.

[Squatch]

21. Well, let's just refer to our handy dandy copy of the 1A, shall we?

"Congress shall make no law respecting ... or abridging the freedom of speech."

Well, that sorta answers that, doesn't it?

Look, Imus is a monumental ass. MONUMENTAL ass, to be sure. But I would rather let him run his mouth and stick his foot in it than risk proceeding down that slippery slope of abriding speech that some may or may not find offensive.

[Richard Steele]

35. No, it doesn't answer that. If you are on my property, and I tell you to leave.......

....nothing in the First gives you the right to remain.

Imus can say whatever dumfuck nonsesense he wants; using
other people's property to spread that nonsense is a very
different issue.

[yellowcanine]

37. Well if the FCC can fine the network that showed Janet Jackson's boob

they ought to be able to fine the network that broadcasted the Imus bigotry.

If one passes constitutional muster the other ought to also.

[NormanYorkstein]

16. and we can pressure his advertisers to drop him

which will pressure his network to fire him. That's OUR free speech.

[Squatch]

24. Absolutely.

[Orrex]

12. A good point!

Let him take his lame schtick into the public square and make a public ass of himself. Maybe somewhere in New Jersey.


Hell, since Imus is a representative of the company that has been licensed to use the public airwaves, is his right to free speech even relevant? Seems to me that the company's access to those airwaves should be reviewed, depending on how they handle their representative's representation of them...

[Benhurst]

17. Yes, but such remarks by broadcasters should fall under

Oliver Wendell Holmes' opinion that "the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic."

He has the right as a citizen to indulge in any racist remarks he wants, but not on the public airways, especially now that there is no longer the fairness doctrine, a mechanism which guaranteed time for a response from targets of such abuse.

[Orrex]

20. Yeah, yellowcanine already did a good job of calling me on my snark

I was just aiming for an anti-imus zinger, but my aim was a little imprecise.

Oh, well. He's still a bigoted, sexist, and flatly unfunny dinosaur, no matter where he speaks.

[earthlover]

19. I agree

Nothing in the Bill of Rights guarantees free speech only for those of us who are not racists or sexists.

However, nothing in the Bill of Rights prohibits a media organization to fire/suspend/punish an employee for racist/sexist speech.

It is a free country. Imus can make racist or sexist speech and will not be hauled off to jail. For that matter, many Americans can and do regularly refer to women as "hos" and they are not hauled off to jail for it, nor are they on the Imus show.

We are, however, also free to object to stupid speech, and also to advocate the media to punish Imus in a fitting way: fire his ass.

[yellowcanine]

2. Hmm. Last I looked, free speech doesn't include the right to be PAID to speak, and

particularly not to make bigoted statements on the public airways.

[SoFlaJet]

3. yea big surprise

that side always claims the right to free speech when it comes to intolerance or money for republican candidates...remember Imus' guy is McCain in '08.You know Bernie.Imus' producer was even more offensive in my eyes by saying "it was a game between The Jigaboos and The Wannabees" HE should get fired

[youngdem]

4. Shows the typical wingnut's depth of understanding of constitutional issues

No one is trying to say he can't be an ignorant, racist asshole....People are just saying that they will oppose and boycott any business seeking to profit from that.

People who are given a public megaphone and corporate backing are lent a credibility that supports and validates their actions and/or views. Members of the public are right to make such a stink, and are not violating his right to be a bigoted idiot - just in the privacy of his own home, not as part of a corporate media.

MSRNC is free to continue to employ him out of greed, which is what they will do. They are just gonna pay the price in reputation and market share.


(comments directed at the wingnuts, not the poster)

[NightWatcher]

6. He can say whatever he wants, we can boycott anyone we want (MSNBC)

MSNBC is free to fire anyone that they want. Imus is free to shovel shit on the Imus ranch.

I hope that Keith says something about it tonight.- prob not. Has anyone noticed that he has not had any "Special Comments" since he got his contract extention?

[LynneSin]

8. Hell we have people here supporting Imus

claiming he does more 'good than bad'.

This is not the first time he's made sexist, racist comments so I'd like to know how a man who has a history of making these kinds of slurs is actually a friend to the progressive folks out here.

[johnaries]

9. Hate speech is not protected. nt

[Lex]

10. Imus can say whatever he wants, and we have a right to respond accordingly.

Maybe Imus, because of what he chooses to say, will just be muttering it to himself at some point, but still he can say it ALL HE WANTS.

[no_hypocrisy]

11. Being critical and holding someone accountable for his/her words

is not a violation of the First Amendment. Plus a government cannot punish an individual because of speech, but private citizens (and last time I looked, the Supreme Court equates corporations with "persons") can.

[monmouth]

14. I believe Ann Coulter and the rest of that cabal get paid for outrageous comments..

She happens to go after the gay community...

[Emit]

15. Was posted here, too

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=604966

[nosillies]

18. Why doesn't he have a right to free speech?

I get paid to say stuff. If my bosses don't like what I say, they can stop paying me. If my readers don't like what I say, they can stop reading, leading to decreased ad revenue, which would likely get me fired.

That's fair for all. No one infringes on my free speech rights, but I have to pay the consequences if I say something stupid or offensive or piss people off too often. (see my avatar)

What's so good about censorship? Would censorship still be OK if it were a progressive voice being censored?

edit: spelling

[ellacott]

23. I guess Howard Stern would like an answer to that also.

He's been fined many times for his speech.

As you said:
<No one infringes on my free speech rights, but I have to pay the consequences if I say something stupid or offensive or piss people off too often.>

As someone else posted, his hate speech excluded from free speech.

I mentioned to the poster to go to his job and call his supervisor a nappy headed ho and see what happens to him.

[nosillies]

32. I'm quite familiar with Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1464

as I'm sure Howard Stern is, also! :D

However, as I'm no lawyer/judge/FCC employee, I hesitate to make a call as to whether Imus' comment was a "fine-able" offense under this section. (That's where the whole "public airwaves" bit comes into play, if I'm not mistaken.) That's not the call of me or other angry posters. Thank God for that, or I'd never be able to watch anything good thanks to all the frothing conservative groups who bombard the FCC with daily complaints.

I am also familiar with the First Amendment and Section 326 of the Communications Act, which protect free speech. I'll quote the ACLU here:

How much we value the right of free speech is put to its severest test when the speaker is someone we disagree with most. Speech that deeply offends our morality or is hostile to our way of life warrants the same constitutional protection as other speech because the right of free speech is indivisible: When one of us is denied this right, all of us are denied.

I'd rather see Janet's tit any day that listen to more of Imus' inanities, but censorship is a slippery slope. Shoe, meet other foot.

The V-chip and the channel up or down button: your best friends.

EDIT TO ADD:

I think many people are getting "hate crimes" and "hate speech" mixed up. Big difference in our legal system. There are many laws against hate crimes. Hate crimes aren't protected. Not so for hate speech (at least in the U.S.). When hate speech treads the fine line into incitement or "fighting words" (yes, this term has actually been used in case law), then it can be considered a different story. However, as heinous as his comments might have been, I don't know that Imus could be successfully accused of incitement in this situation.

Again, thanks ot that good ol' First Amendment, speech is protected -- actions are not.

[TayTay]

26. Where is the censorship in this?

There is no prior restraint of free speech in this case. Free speech actually worked. It allowed a person to say what they thought without government interference.

Other people listened to that free speech and are now taking actions based on their reactions to these expressed thoughts. That is also their right.

Isn't that how it's supposed to work? Not that people take no responsibility for free speech and what they said because, after all free speech is worthless, but that free speech has merit precisely because it might be listened to and cause other actions and words to be spoken.

Imus freely exercised his right to free speech. What he wants to do now is pretend that it had no affect on others and that no one else has a right to express themselves in reaction to what he did. That is wrong.

[Madspirit]

29. Hate Speech isn't a Right

The broadcasting companies have all sorts of limits on what can be said on air. Free speech is something between the government and the people. A company can still have it's own rules about what is allowed on THEIR dime. There are all sorts of things that are not allowed to be said on the air.

...and we have a right to complain and boycott, etc. ...and yes, if a progressive was saying things like "nappy-headed hos" or "faggot" or...I would definitely complain but they wouldn't be progressive then would they?
Lee

[Laura PourMeADrink]

22. Call me the biggest hypocrite in the world, but

I just can't imagine not having Imus on my tv. I absolutely hate what he said. It was horrific. It was mean. I am very sorry he thought it and sorry he said it. Imus is not a perfect person. He does very bad things but he does very good things too. I watch him every morning and I really don't think he is a racist - even though what he said was racist - which, I know, sounds insane. Now there's no way I would say that about Bernie.

But, there's nowhere where you get the kind of political dialogue that you get on this show. The good, the bad, the ugly.

[skooooo]

25. my feelings too....

:-/

[Laura PourMeADrink]

30. thanks. I was thinking I was the only one out there.

[hiaasenrocks]

31. Like most other issues, this one will blow over.

I personally don't care for Imus, mainly because I find him kind of boring, and I don't think their "comedy" sketches are all that funny.

That said, I think you'll still have him in the morning. While some are certainly trying to silence him for good, I don't think they'll have the power to do so.

Notice that the main arguments in favor of silencing him for good rely on charges such as "hate speech," but no one will give definitive clarifications as to what qualifies as that type of speech.

The people who believe in having such restrictions also fail to recognize that it's fine to have speech codes as long as your side is doing the regulating. They don't understand that having government decide what can and can't be said is a dangerous path to start down. Do we really want people like * or his appointees being able to decide that speaking against Iraq is "offensive" to families of those serving, or the dead? And if they decide that since it's offensive, it must be "hate speech".... Well, you can see where that's going. I don't want this country to be that way.

And, yes, some are indeed calling for gov't interference here, via the FCC.

These people do not believe in free speech. They are not progressive.

[theboss]

27. What I find interesting is that conservatives don't like Imus either

Nobody likes Imus. He has no listeners.

If I was head of CBS, I would not fire him for racist comments. I would fire him because no one listens to him.

[sandnsea]

28. That's absolutely true

As I've said for a long time. They have the right to say any idiotic thing they want. We have the right, the obligation, to shut them down. We've failed to use community pressure for way too long. I'm equally offended that the Vice President is speaking on Rush Limbaugh's show.

We should be refusing to go on Fox because they're hateful bigoted pricks as much as being right wing propagandists.

[Johonny]

33. Who listens to Imus?

Frankly I didn't even remember the untalented hack still had a show until 90 % of the posts became about him.

[Catherine Vincent]

40. Who listens to Imus?

Apparently a couple of DUers up top.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

42. Well, he has a politician or two almost every day. And it is the

only place I know of where you get to hear them/see them in a relaxed atmosphere. They make missteps. Have you never heard anyone say, "so and so said, on Imus in the Morning" ?

That is why this whole episode is so unfortunate.

[Johonny]

44. I can't understand his hwole show...

He doesn't know sports (clearly) and he doesn't know politics. He's not funny (clearly). So why tune in. Sure he has top political guests on but his conversation with them never even reaches the Larry King level. Imus has Tucker Carlson talent. I just don't get why he has the fan base he does.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

46. I agree on the sports deal. Very surface. But I do think he

is ten million times better than Larry King. Larry throws softballs. Imus tells people (i.e. Santorum, McCain) that their Iraq policy is idiotic. A couple of weeks ago, he said that {for Iraq} Cheney and Bush should be put before a firing squad. Granted, he misses on some issues - but he single-handedly raised the awareness on a Santorum bill about autism - Repukes were trying to hold harmless drug companies for children's vaccinations. (thought to include thymerasol (sp) linked to autism.) He also single-handedly raised the issue of meager death benefits for returning vets - and because of this, they raised it. He bombasted the congress for not catching the Walter Reed scandals.

[walldude]

34. Nobody wants to stop Imus from speaking freely

He can say whatever he wants while he stands in the unemployment line, where I'm sure his racist comments will go over quite well..

[hiaasenrocks]

39. Why are you suggesting that the unemployment line would be

a particularly bad place for racist comments?

Are you suggesting that those lines are populated more by minorities?

I can see no other explanation for why you're making this distinction.

[walldude]

41. Yes I am, I'm saying that racism is so prevalent in this

country that a disproportionate number of people who are unemployed are minorities. Do you disagree?

edit for speeling

[nosillies]

43. I'll back you up on this, with facts from the BLS

http://www.bls.gov/lau/table14full04.pdf

The facts may suck, but they're still the facts.

We can't speak out against the obvious inequities that led to these sad facts if our heads are buried in the sand.

[walldude]

45. Thanks.. I knew there would be someone who would take my

comment the wrong way. Gets like that on the topic of race sometimes.

[ljm2002]

36. Ludicrous!

He can say whatever he likes. But the same thing applies to the rest of us too, and if we find his speech offensive then we get to say so. To him, to his employers, to his advertisers. That's what free speech is all about!

If his racist drivel gets him thrown off the airwaves, that will be a decision that his employer makes. Unfortunately the FCC is unlikely to deal with it (although arguably they could impose a fine) because they're too busy protecting us from 2-second flashes of titty -- clearly a bigger risk to the public discourse than a little old-fashioned racism.

[Ganja Ninja]

38. Imus has the right to say whatever he wants.

He's also liable for what he says. No one is stopping him from saying what he wants. Because of the content of his speech they just don't think he should be given a national radio and TV show to say it on. Let him can go back to ranch and spout his pearls of wisdom to the lizards.