« Me on CNBC Talking iPhone | Main | GoogleClick, Microsoft's Air Supply, & Bid 'Em Up Brin »
Latest Stories
- Excel Wankers and Recession Averages
- Sorry, New York is Closed. Check Back Later.
- Catching Falling 2009 Earnings Estimate Knife
- Survivorship Bias in Global Markets
- Talking Positions on a Lazy-ish Retirement Portfolio
April 13, 2007
Imus, Transparency, and Niceness
I pay near zero attention to the political nattering class, but a lot of people are bringing technology into this Don Imus racism shouting match, so it's worth a comment. While some people seemingly think that the lesson here is that negativity is out and niceness is in, I disagree entirely. Negativity and shock work as well as ever, and they will get work even better in a world preoccupied with niceness.The main lesson, captured in part by David Carr in the NY Times today, is that all media is now visible and permanent, even radio. As a media personality you can never assume anything you say will go sliding by into the ether, and eventually forgotten. Everything is being archived, everything is permanent. Your media life now has URLs -- as Don Imus just discovered when something that would have ordinarily blown over quickly got a second thru twenty-second life online.
Sphere It
| 
Digg it
| 
Bookmark it
| 
Stumble it
| 
Facebook it
>>>whether this is political or not...
It certainly is political in that a similar unpleasantness directed against another minority group would not have resulted in so vigorous response. Sharpton and Jackson et al enforce the notion that African Americans are different--a sword that has two edges.
Actually, I think it's an aging shock-jock being given the boot for business demographic reasons, but claiming it's due to Blog/Internet/New Era/Sensitivity/etc... lets everyone try to get a piece of the pie.
Negativity is the new nice. Seems to work all in the right ways for the right people.
The problem with hastening the exit of those, who engage in racism or any other 'isms' in public, is that it appears to shower us all in a warm after-glow of having done something right by some downtrodden section of society. I would not even begin to comment on how many implicit 'isms' hide in that assumption of downtrodden-ness... Meanwhile the 'isms' are alive and thriving in suburban dinner parties and in day-to-day life. What a silly way to deal with things!
Are our identities so frail that they get hurt so quickly? Imus made his career on racism and other such stuff, but how do Sharpton and Jackson defend themselves, in their focus on one and only one race? Is THAT not racism?
The whole thing is preposterous.
Some people have practiced these "isms" so much in their life that at the end of the day the blur disappears and they become very "unstuck" in their lives.
What comes around goes around!
Reminds me of something I heard a while back spoken by a black person, paraphrased for clarity:
Americans think about race only when they must, which for whites is occasionally and for blacks is constantly.
In terms of this whole Imus ordeal, I'm looking first at the Rutgers team. The coach says they accept his apology and that the team is in the process of forgiving him. If they, being the ones most directly impacted by Imus's infamous remarks, then:
Imus Forgive
Dr BLT (c) 2007
http://www.drblt.net/music/ImusForgive.mp3
If anybody is puzzled over who I am, I was the first white artist to use the term "ho" in a song that climbed at top thirty chart. And I used it in a way that potentially helps troubled teens and their parents:
You're Not the Kind of Ho
(That Santa Had in Mind)
http://www.drblt.net/music/hosong.mp3
I also wrote a song that pays tribute to Don Ho, who just passed away. That song is called "Ho."
For us non-Americans, can anybody explain whether this is political or not, i.e, one side exploiting a weak link? Or is it just social unpleasantness getting rejected?
Or is it just as ambiguous to you domestically?