Don 'Nappy Headed Ho's' Imus Is Ba-a-ack -- and So Are His Enablers

By Rory O'Connor, AlterNet. Posted November 19, 2007.

It didn't take long for the Don Imus enablers to re-emerge. Just months after the racist, sexist and homophobic shock jock was fired for his on-air characterization of the Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy-headed ho's" -- and less than two weeks after Citadel Broadcasting announced his impending return to radio -- the Big Media and Big Politics elite are crawling out of the woodwork to embrace Imus all over again.

It's no surprise that executives of major media corporations rushed to defend Imus by claiming, as did Citadel Broadcasting CEO Farid Suleman, "He's more than paid the price for what he did." After all, as recently noted in the New York Observer, "redemption and rehabilitation are secondary concerns" for Citadel. Phil Boyce, operations manager at the company's flagship station WABC, spelled it out in stark terms, explaining, "Obviously, there are a couple of reasons to look at him, but the biggest reason is the revenue opportunity. There's a lot of money to be made there. And we're in the business of making money."

But what excuses and explanations are being offered by the many leading journalists and politicians -- some of whom distanced themselves from the self-styled "I-Man" in the wake of the Rutgers controversy -- who now say they will once again appear on his program? No amount of high-toned talk about "guilt and redemption" and "second chances" can obscure the serial offenses of a man who made a career -- and tens of millions of dollars -- from repeatedly using hate speech against women, gays, minorities and foreigners in exchange for cheap laughs, hot controversy and higher ratings.

Consider, for example, the curious case of CNN political commentator James Carville, who had the temerity to compare the travails of Imus to those of his former boss Bill Clinton. "I think I've had some history of defending friends of mine that have been in uncomfortable circumstances," Carville told the Observer. "I defend the speaker, not the speech. If there's no redemption, what are we here for?" Dare I suggest that Carville -- set to appear as a guest on Imus' first day back, Dec. 3 -- is there for publicity, self-aggrandizement, access to the I-Man's audience and the benefit of the shock jock's well-known ability to help sell books?

Sadly, Carville is not alone in his purportedly principled stance. In fact, many of Imus' previous enablers from the corrupt nexus of politics and media are welcoming him back. Former senator and presidential candidate Bob Kerrey, for example, recently gave Imus his own "seal of approval" in an article in the New York Daily News.

Kerrey began by comparing Imus not to President Clinton but to "Freddie Krueger, the terrifying lead character in Nightmare on Elm Street." To Kerrey, "as with Freddie, there is something about the I-Man that is scary but irresistible." After urging fellow Democrats, particularly those running for president, to "sit down, chit chat and legitimize a man they once reviled as something close to a racist," Kerrey went on to note, "I myself have appeared on Imus before and would welcome the chance to go on the show again."

At least Kerrey was honest about his motivation for doing so: "As offensive as his remarks were about the Rutgers women's basketball team ... he will have a big and influential audience," Kerrey said.

Moreover, to Kerrey's mind, "Imus adds a lot to the American political debate." Apparently, epithets like "brillohead, dark meat, Mandingos, Uncle Ben, gooks, chinks, slanty-eyed bastards, queers, homos, ho's, lesbos, gorillas, pimps, and knuckle-dragging" African-Americans are among these worthy contributions to our political discourse.

But Kerrey offered "another reason" he believes politicians shouldn't boycott Imus. "If they keep away from the show all the way through next year, it could do real political damage, if not in votes lost, at least in courage points," he says. "We can't afford to start putting our interviewers through purity tests." Instead, Democratic politicians should simply look the other way when confronted with the "impurity" of the I-Man's transparent racism and trade their silent complicity for access to his audience of millions and their votes.

See more stories tagged with: imus, enablers, radio, shock jock

Filmmaker and journalist Rory O'Connor is now completing AlterNet’s first-ever book, which is on the subject of radio talkers like Imus, and will be available early in 2008. O'Connor also writes the Media Is A Plural blog.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »