BLOG

After Imus

Infamy is a great way to become part of mass media and a deadly way to stay there.

Paris Hilton romped nude on the Internet and became a TV star. Hugh Grant got a blowjob on Hollywood boulevard and leveraged it into record high ratings for Jay Leno. Anna Nicole was a stripper and a prescription drug addict whose medicine cabinet-assisted life was exactly what made her E! TV show so insatiably watchable.

ImusBut even if these folks achieved fame in part thanks to their vices, those vices weren’t committed in front of a free TV or radio audience. Vice can make you a star and broadcasting can milk that stardom for everything it’s worth.

But never sin on the air.

What Don Imus said was stupid and racist and sexist and insensitive and certainly not funny. There’s no doubt about that. But if he had done it in the pages of the Washington Post instead of on his radio show, he’d still have his radio show. And that’s the difference. When you stack three stupid words up against thirty years of broadcasting, should the words outweigh the years?

The answer doesn’t matter. Because they always will.

As Americans we hold our publicly owned airwaves to a higher standard. The fact that Imus has been doing what he’s doing on and off for years without notice (until now) is not a statement on a newly politically correct society. It’s a statement on a newly wired, ever-vigilant society that can police its airwaves more effectively than ever before – even if the folks doing the policing don’t necessarily represent the tastes of the folks doing the listening to shows like Imus’s.

Howard Stern said it best the other day: “Did I leave terrestrial radio at the right time, or what?”

You sure did, Howard.

Allow me to speak the unspoken: The public airwaves are designed as and destined to be a safe harbor for all where “all” is code for “children.” Whether most listeners want that or not – and I strongly suspect they do.

There’s no theater with an R rating on the radio. There’s no pay-per-view tier in the terrestrial radio world. Radio is one big Disneyland, and your morning show is Mickey and Minnie. Not the lowest common denominator, necessarily, but definitely the safest.

That’s what happens when the public owns the air.

Ironically, when SNL ran a particularly provocative music video featuring Justin Timberlake offering his “D**k in a Box” the censored version ran late at night on NBC where children are least likely to be watching and the uncensored version ran on YouTube where children are most likely to be watching. But YouTube is not the “public airwaves” and so follows the beat of a different drum, all other logic aside.

Without doubt, the chilling consequences of Imus’ firing will affect the decisions of everyone on the air for years to come. In the long run, the audience will get the kind of radio its watchdogs demand: Patently inoffensive, free of risk, vanilla to its core.

And when radio’s critics complain that there’s nothing very interesting or entertaining happening on the radio, that all the stuff that cuts the edge is on satellite radio or on HBO or in the Wild West of the Internet, we in broadcasting can always say “you’re welcome.”

7 Comments;
  • http://www.maximumfun.org Jesse Thorn

    You and I both know that there’s a big difference between being racist or vulgar and being innovative. This American Life was full of risks, free of offensive content, and was revolutionary. Two million people listen to their show every week.
    To the extent that radio is vanilla or riskless, it is the fault of programmers without imagination. In fact, I’d say that Howard Stern’s success has generated more vanilla, non-risky offensive shock jocks than it has provocative, exciting anything.
    To equate offensiveness with innovation is in itself offensive. To set up a binary between being offensive and being “vanilla” is baloney, too. And you know it, Mark.
    The lesson radio programmers should take from this is that if they want people to get excited about their shows, they should take enough risks to be exceptionally good (like Stern), not exceptionally boorish and offensive (like Imus).

  • Old Grouch

    Favorite Dorothy Sayers quote (and yes, I’ve used it before, in response to Howard’s move to satellite): “Some people can be funny without being vulgar; and some people can be both funny and vulgar. I suggest that you be one or the other.”
    Entirely too much of what is supposed to be “funny” is just “vulgar.” That’s not “cutting-edge,” it’s just offputting.

  • greg gillispie

    ABSOLUTELY GREAT point at the very end!
    Now, I and certainly a number of other readers will be patently offended by what you have written…regardless of on the ‘net or in print – you said “blowjob!”
    Apologize…or you’re fired and lose all your clients… he said in jest, but not really?

  • http://www.mercradio.com Mark Ramsey

    Jesse, you are completely misrepresenting my opinions.
    I am not equating offensiveness with innovation. I am equating risk-taking with innovation. And even more with entertainment – comedy.
    Now if you think you can take risks in a world where the next three words can get you fired, then you have never done a radio entertainment show and you know little of the history of comedy.
    Further, if you don’t think this action – irrespective of its correctness – will have consequences for entertainment on the radio far beyond the “offensive,” then you also know little about radio.

  • http://myspace.com/apolloxviii Chance McClain

    Actually, as stupid as what Imus said was…the reason it became the story that it did was because nothing else was going on. If Brittney had shaved her head six weeks later, if Zsa Zsa’s husband has actually been the father, if Katie had left Tom because of that weird cult he promotes, if ANYTHING of shallow perceived importance had happened his idiotic comments would’v been a blip on the radar…not the unnecessary nuclear bomb that it turned into. It is a crazy world we live in.

  • http://www.bobgreenproductions.com Bob Green

    Regardless of one’s take on the MSNBC and CBS firing of Imus (fueled by the bottom line more than righteous indignation) we may be entering the end of the mean spirited highway on radio. Or, not.
    The argument that the Sterns, Opie & Anthony’s, Imuses and hip hop & rap lyrics and images are merely a reflection of the paradigm shift lacks credibility. So too is the idea that media provides the fuel to send cultural norms into the bonfire. Likely, it’s somewhere in between. Back in the days when “water closet” was banned from the public airwaves(silly as that was RIP Jack Parr) broadcasters instinctively knew what taboos to avoid rergardless of their personal persuasions. Sure, taboos come and go, but flying in the face of decency and humanity is a cheap cop out. Pushing the envelope wasn’t the tool by which air personalities could be creative and funny… even controversial. The dumbing down of America has an ally, in radio in particular. ONE thing we do thank Don Imus for…a whole week withoiut having to endure more “news” items about Anna Nicole!

  • http://www.mercradio.com Mark Ramsey

    Bob, I know you’re making a different point that really isn’t in the original post, but it should be clear that that original post wasn’t about Imus’s sin at all, but about the aftermath.
    If I ever write a post on taboos, you’ll read it here first, but that post wasn’t it.
    One note though: It is radio’s responsibility not to elevate the public but to give it what it wants.

Sign Up For Blog Email Updates

About

MRM President Mark Ramsey has worked with innumerable television and radio broadcasters over his career, including all the biggest names, from Clear Channel, CBS, Bonneville, Sirius XM...

Mark Ramsey