News Media Agenda and a Radio Host’s Racial/Sexist Slur

By Brigitte L. Nacos
Calling the members of the women’s basketball team of Rutgers University “nappy-headed hos,” the host of the “Imus in the Morning” radio show (simulcast on the MSNBC cable network) resorted to an ugly racial and sexist slur that was rightly and immediately followed by massive criticism from many corners and rightly and heavily covered by the prestige and tabloid media. I must admit that I had no idea about the meaning of those words until I asked around for explanations.  I have followed Rutgers women’s basketball and rooted for the team this season again as it moved from a disappointing start to a dream come true, when it reached the championship final last week. The loss against Tennessee did not diminish the marvelous accomplishment of the team. It took Don Imus’s stupid insult to draw massive media attention on these accomplished young ladies and their successful coach—media attention that the dream team should have received as a championship finalist right after its defeat. But shocking, sensational, conflict-oriented news is the stuff that today’s news media crave and over-cover. Thus, one week after the racial and sexist insult, the Imus/Rutgers story remains on top of the media agenda. Today, the New York Times published a front page story and photograph of the Rutgers team, 2 stories in the Sports section, one story in the Arts section, an editorial, and several letters-to-the-editor. The Washington Post, too, has at least five stories about the controversy—among them quite different takes by media columnist Howard Kurtz who has been a guest on the Imus Show and sports columnist Michael Wilbon. Yes, Wilbon is right, when he suggests that “what Imus has prompted is a necessary national conversation” and that the arranged “meeting with the Rutgers women is necessary...” But such a conversation should not just be triggered by a shocking slur and be forgotten when the media hype runs its course eventually—it should be part of the regular mass-mediated public debate.

Effective activists like the Reverend Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson should not carry on with their calls for and protests in support of Don Imus’s firing. They themselves have made mistakes in the past—from Jesse Jackson calling Jews “Hymies” and New York “Hymietown” to the Reverend Sharpton accusing a man to be the rapist in a case that turned out to be a fabrication by the “victim.” Far more than  Jackson and Sharpton in those incidents, Imus is now severely punished. Of course, he is not the only offender in the media. How about the insults coming from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter? How about gangster rap and hip hop lyrics? Unless we learn from this incident, the firing of Imus will not change the underlying societal problems.

As I mentioned above, I am a fan of the Rutgers women’s basketball team. I am not a fan of the Imus show because of its often foul language and the chauvinist attitudes expressed by the regular cast--especially by the show's producer. I haven't watched the show frequently to know whether its cast has displayed racial and/or ethnic prejudices. But I have come to appreciate the fact that the entertainer Imus asks public officials oftentimes far tougher questions than the reporters, correspondents, and anchors of the news media.

If he gets back on the air, he needs to clean up his act—but he should retain his critical stance towards the forces of power—in Washington and elsewhere.

Comments

[Brigitte]

Patrick: I agree with your thoughtful comment but wanted to highlight in my post the need for the mass media to be a guardian of fundamental values and a forum for mass-mediated discourse apart from episodic events like the Imus episode and the reactions to it. All the sudden attention to racism and sexism must not overshadow the fact that this is not a problem of but a few but one that is alive and well among many. We can only hope that this unfortunate episode will serve as the beginning of a meaningful discussion of deeply seated societal prejudices and stereotypes--but this will only happen if the mass media fulfill their roles.

[Patrick]

Greetings Brigitte, I read your blog on occasions and thought I would add a few words:
As a hoops fan I watched Rutgers in their tourney. They were tough, clutch, electrifying, disciplined and well coached and beat a 30-1 Duke team. As soon as I heard the quote, I was angry as a ditto head. Imus didn't jingle off some nappy whoe lyrics in a MTV video or a private night club. He made a specific malicious personal attack on a group of college kids over airwaves owned by the public. The symbiotic Sharpton-Imus embrace was an obvious self serving media slow dance (Imus's calculated self-flagellation at the hands of the villain Sharpton must have had the 20-35 yr old attack dogs howling). I am continuously amused at the deceptive logic conservatives spin, 'Well, Clinton did this' and 'the city of Durham did that'. Have fun with that logic in court. The charge here is a personal mean-spirited attack on a team of college kids. Listen to the statements from the team and the impressive oration by Coach Stringer and judge for yourself.
Minutes ago Imus was fired. I thought CBS Les Moonves got it exactly right in his summation. I also think another stream that feeds into this is that people are getting fed up with the course incivility profited on by generally conservative populist talk radio hosts and supported by business interests large and small. I also agree with others who have stated that the severity in the firing reflects, probably to a minor degree, the emerging media and consumer strength of women and minorities. I think the sociological dynamics and timing of this clash point run deep into a wriggling can of worms.

[Brigitte]

Mia, to be sure he has his favorites--but he has been relentless in attacking members of the administration--particularly the vice president but the president as well--for their incompetence and failures and lies--not only with respect to Iraq.
I am not watching this show ever from beginning to end or for a longer stretch of time--when I get a chance very early in the morning for a short time when he has a politician as guest. More likely--I read afterwards excerpts from the transcript or look at a video clip.

[mia]

I've been searching around about the imus story, I found your post interesting, but do you think he is really critical of washington. with so many showing up on his show how critical can he really be?

I found another great column you might be interested in

http://joeleonardi.wordpress.com/2007/04/11/don-imus-is-a-jerk-whats-new/