I suffer from insomnia, and on some sleepless occasions, disgusted with the "cute news" with the O'Brians on CNN, I'd turn the tv to the Imus show - it aired between 2:30AM and 6AM on the West coast. There were some segments that I thought were terrific and really interesting - primarily when he had political people on. But sometimes it was truly awful. Just terrible. 

I happened to catch Meet the Press this morning, and there was a terrific segment on the Imus issue. It was a round-table discussion that included David Brooks and Gwen Ifil. I think it was probably the best discussion I've heard about the controversy - the text transcript is here, for anyone interested (I linked to page 2 - the first question is at the very bottom of the page and then continues for several additional pages).

Gwen Ifil had this to say in response to the arguments that so many people are making - the "everybody does it" or "there are so many others that are worse" arguments:

[In response to an earlier comment by one of the other participants, "Yeah, it’s hard to know where you draw the line in the entertainment realm."]

MS. IFILL: You know, except that it’s really not hard to know where you draw the line. We know where the offense is. We know what’s acceptable and what’s not, and the best way to dilute the argument in the moment we’re in is to say, “What about this? What about this? What about that?” The fact is, we have a moment where we can talk about the things which have been bugging us. I know a lot of people who aren’t really crazy about something—about, about “Pimpin’ All Over the World” or about what—something that Snoop Dogg would say. And you know what they do, they’ve been doing? They swallow it. They just turn off the TV. “I got—I don’t watch these shows. I don’t listen to these videos. I, I just don’t watch it.” But somewhere deep inside these girls becomes this little—you’ve heard what the Rutgers basketball players said when they were asked about this. They didn’t say, “Oh, well, yeah, I think it’s fine.” They don’t think it’s fine. And after a while it builds in them. And that’s what we saw happen this week. So if we want to—you know, we can, we can say it’s not a big deal because it’s happened all the time or it’s been happening for a long time. It’s precisely because it’s been happening a long time that...

Some people have been talking about how Imus should stay on the air because that would be such a good opportunity to talk about some of this stuff. I do think it's a good opportunity, but I'm not really certain why it should be Imus to lead that discussion. It does appear the discussion is occuring, even without him, as it should.

Strangely, I found myself agreeing with David Brooks as well:

[in response to an earlier question by Russert, "..."Who Can Say What?" Why not have that discussion?"]

MR. DAVID BROOKS: I--while I think there was that racial element, there’s also a cruelty element to it. You know, Imus was a shock jock. He entertained people by shocking, at least in some small part of the show he was on. If he was talking about African-Americans, he used racist language; talking about Jews, he used anti-Semitic lines; with women, misogynistic language; his co-workers, cruelty; his wife when she was on the show, cruelty. So there was that whole culture that has arisen, that has entertained by being shocking and cruel. And I think we have the racial element of this story, but we also have the broader discussion which you’re seeing in statements by Barack Obama, statements by Republicans, by Democrats, by everybody, which is this culture of cruelty, this culture of shock, is something that’s polluting the public culture, and we got to bring it back. And so I think that’s actually where the debate is spinning out to, a broader discussion of Howard Stern, of all these other guys who are doing similar sorts of shtick.

At another point in the discussion, Brooks noted that the problem is how whether or not Imus is a racist, his talk makes it easier for the real racists, because "we all get acclimated." Another excellent point. And although one can say just turn it off, the effect on the overall culture is something we all should be concerned about. How many people watching may have gotten the idea that it's really ok to say the sort of things that were regularly said on the program? When we become innured to hate speech, we lose as a society.

And someone (don't recall who now) even brought up Tipper Gore, whose efforts to protect kids from negative media influence has been soundly denounced in years past, even by people on the left (I'm embarrassed to admit I was one of those, back in the 80s, who felt her concerns posed a threat to the First Amendment). In retrospect, it now appears her concerns about media were just as prescient as those of her husband regarding global warming.

It also occurs to me that perhaps the idea that it's ok for people of a certain race/religion/ethnic group to say things that are not ok for people of other races/religions/groups to say ought to be re-examined. I say this not in the sense of some commentators, who think that the rules should be the same for everyone, but because when language is used freely, and occurs frequently in the culture, even though that language does not have the same demeaning value within the particular group in question that is using it, it still goes on to feed negative stereotypes. And it becomes far too easy for someone else to repeat something mindlessly, without intent of offense (Imus, however, surely did know what he was saying, as he's had these sorts of problems before). I guess what I'm advocating here is self-restraint, as opposed to censorship.

[Note: I had originally posted much of this as a comment on one of MJ's Imus threads, but as it's an older thread, I think it's likely that just about nobody will see my comment. So I'm reposting it in the hope that for anyone who missed MTP this morning, it will be an encouragement to see one of the program repeats that occur throughout the day. The Imus discussion is well worth watching (and the Zinni interview was very good too.]