I hope you guys can keep the thought provoking material coming. I read this blog, and it constantly forces me to rethink my views and opinions on sports and society. I would love to use this in a classroom, but of course some of the language will probably prevent me from doing so, but it has given me ideas for classroom discussions (Social Studies teacher).

Again, thank you and keep up the good work.

Ben, I would never tell anyone to stand down when offended.

Where’s your conviction?

Isn’t this a non sequitur? Standing down in face of offense (call it turning the other cheek), while not your recommendation, has quite a long (and arguably successful) history of practice.

In fact, I’d argue that it takes more conviction to ignore a slight than to respond to it.

Imus apologized on-air pretty quickly and, after that, the situation should have been between him and the Rutgers team – something along the lines of the sitdown that just occurred. Someone at CBS Radio should have held him accountable for that much. The appropriate media coverage would have been to find out the reaction of the Rutgers team, and then go back to Imus to see how he planned to respond. Barring Imus offering inflammatory or uncaring response showing a lack of remorse THEN, there should have been no pomp and circumstance and no extra attention given to a guy that an overwhelming number of people in this country don’t seem to have a taste for anyway. All this hoopla is going to do is serve to earn Imus a fat contract on satellite radio, where his ratings will be huge for the first airing.

“I find assuming people to be unable to process on their own to be much more offensive.”

What the hell does this mean? I’ll let you explain this one.

Yes, Imus is an idiot for making that crack, especially because he’s an idiot with an audience. But it’s because, to me, he failed three times – once, by taking the easy out with a cheap joke about the attractiveness of the two teams, twice because said joke was not funny and thirdly because he never acknowledged Rutgers’ success, the latter of which was the focus of the team’s own statement. And when people like Jesse Jackson – captain of Team Let’s-railroad-the-Duke-lacrosse-players – are up there all over this on every media outlet, a double standard becomes evident. Maybe that’s a media problem, because with a large majority of white journalists, issues like blacks using said language is internalized to their own communities. There’s a lot going on here.

No, I haven’t listened to Imus regularly ever. No, I don’t think racism is cool. I think it sucks. But sometimes I think people forget we’re only 50 years past the Civil Rights Acts being passed. This generation is the first one to grow up thinking black culture is “cool” on the mass market level. Hip hop permeates every ’80s baby’s life. People like Imus – and his audience are being phased out.

Maybe I’m an idealist, but I think any non-ignorant person who heard Imus first-hand dismissed the comments. You shake your head and think, “Ah boy, what an asshat.” And you move on. The ignorant racists who agree with him, they agreed. Anyone who’s got any kind of “conviction” isn’t going to be swayed by one random comment. Imus calling the Rutgers basketball team by the terms he did demeans their accomplishments and proves he’s got no filter between brain and mouth. I find assuming people to be unable to process on their own to be much more offensive.

Glad to hear your thoughts, and I read your piece on the ‘new-old’ Georgetown (and everything else you’ve written that doesn’t involve tennis). Good read.

Panger

Thank you and that’s a fascinating article.

Mizzo,

TSF has a noble goal, and I’m sure you’ll ignore the occasional irritable idiot (like me). Ever since I started reading Dwil I don’t think the same way. I’m glad he’s turned me on to the whole crew here.

JFunk wrote:

MGD asks: “why is it okay for him [Chapelle] to make racial jokes but not Imus?”

I have yet to see anyone even tangentially address this.

I’ll directly address it. More to the point, let’s have Dave Chapelle address it.

He was on Oprah Winfrey a year or so ago, discussing why he quit his show and walked away from a $50M payday. (By the way, this is why you want chicks here. Who else is gonna watch Oprah for you?)

Here’s the summary of what he said which I am pasting in here verbatim from her website:

During his third season, Dave began questioning his work on the show. From the very first episode, Dave’s sketches sparked controversy. But, over time, he says some of his sketches started to make him feel “socially irresponsible.”

“That concerned me,” he says. “I don’t want black people to be disappointed in me for putting that [message] out there. … It’s a complete moral dilemma.”

[http://www.oprah.com/tows/slide/200602/20060203/slide_20060203_284_105.jhtml]

I recall Chapelle went on to say that he walked away because he didn’t want to be a person who, however inadvertantly, perpetuated racial stereotypes. Further, it bothered him that racists might use his sketches as an excuse for their biases, that it was “okay” to feel that way.

Thought that might be of some interest.

Get real.

Where’s your conviction?

As far as Bonds, deal with the facts that his father was torn a new one by the media and obviously had an affect on not only his life, but his career. Also, are you speaking of the Hawaii trip Arizona State was on when there was a team vote? Get back to me and then we can talk.

I’ll stand by my words concerning Sharpton. Is the action at fault here or the reaction?

1) Anyone thinking that the media is responsible for Bonds’ douche-ness needs to read Jeff Pearlman’s book, Love Me, Hate Me: Barry Bonds and the Makings of an Anti-hero. This is a guy who was VOTED OFF his college team by his TEAMMATES even though he was by far their best player and represented their best hopes to win the NCAA title.

2) The reason the attention is being “deflected” from Imus is because people like Sharpton are HEAVILY involving themselves in this debate. Once Sharpton goes on every media outlet available, stumping for Imus to be fired, he’s inviting attention. Since he’s up in arms now, why didn’t he do this any other time a Hot 97 or Power 105 DJ dropped an n-bomb while describing someone in negative fashion.

Gwen Ifill, a former NY Times reporter Imus once derisively called a “cleaning lady” points out in an op-ed piece that Imus’ joke “failed one big test: it was not funny.” Her ultimate response is this: ignore him. Taking away an audience is the worst thing one can do to a shock jock. So she does, while personally striving to have the strongest, most beneficial voice she can.

Unfortunately, McCann is a bit too effusive and pie-in-the-sky in his “people like Georgetown, now” feelings. It was interesting that, in Georgetown hoops’ first “glory moment” since AI’s days, that the NYT published an article questioning one of the JTIII’s ex-players’ enrollment into the school. Ironically, this was two weeks after I posted a column about the Hoyas and racism: John Thompson III: “The Deal” at Georgetown which spells out the past and present attitudes toward the Hoyas and how they remain the same.

Pete Rose? The 1919 Black Sox? Bill Romanowski?

I’m not here to defend Imus or his statements. Far from it, in fact. The guy’s an unparalleled asshat, as are those that allow him to spew his vindictive crap on the airwaves. But there is a double-standard and it resides on both sides of the color spectrum. African-Americans can call each other “N”-bombs all day long with no repercussion. But if a white guy does it, he’s splashed across every major news outlet and defaced to the point of being fired, as well he should be.

But why is this case not the same when Chappelle/Chris Rock/50 Cent/et.al do it?

And I agree with Mcbias. Jemele Hill infuriates me because I really like a lot of her stuff over at Page 2. But then there’s the occasional column that drives me bananas. Either way, great interview.

I’ve been in public places, gyms, bars, hell, in lobbies of emergency departments when EVERYTHING stopped when Barry came up. Talk about Mighty Casey at the plate! Yeah, he might limp along to Aarons record, and maybe one day A-Rod will pass him. But as far as I’m concerned, there has NEVER, excepting possibly Sandy Koufax pitching the rock, been a more spectacular or compelling sight than Bonds at the plate in those years.

Jordi-Awesome point.

I think the focus is skewered. Instead of focusing on the “nappyheaded” part of his comment, few people are actually talking about the fact that he defamed the character of those women by calling them a slang word for prostitutes. Beside the employment ramifications, if I was one of those women, or all of them, I would file a civil suit on grounds of libel. A court of the people could debate all day on the cultural definition of “nappyheaded”, but the cultural definition of “hos” is unmistakable. If he had called Anna Nicole Smith a “peroxide blond, fake titted, airheaded ho” would he ground to stand on? Perhaps. Because of her sexual history. But I think he libeled the Rutgers basketball team.

Just my three cents. You heard it here, and here is the only place you’ll hear it.

Gimme Ryan Howard. Gimme Pujols, or Johan Santana, or David Ortiz. Those guys make the sport a pleasure to watch. But let’s leave Barry and his sorry, compromised, half-crippled self alone, can we?