Wednesday, June 25, 2008

What Did You Expect?

I feel bad for Don Imus. The poor guy isn't doing anything new, really. Given the shifting standards in our global community, what's the difference between 1972's "1200 Hamburgers to Go" and 2007's "Nappy-Headed Hos"?

It's noteworthy that the former routine is on the same-titled album reissued in 1997 with an EXPLICIT LYRICS sticker. Early-Seventies radio bits get a sticker? (I haven't listened to my copy in a while, but now I'm curious.)

Our paths have crossed a few times over the years, Don's and mine, and I really don't think he's a racist. But he's of a generation that has struggled with cascading seismic shifts in political correctness: what was okay when he was a kid ... what was okay in earlier adulthood ... and what's okay today. (Hint: as a kid, he probably heard adults tell - and himself told - racist jokes openly; as an adult, he probably told racist jokes to well-vetted white friends; today, he might tell a racist joke to a select few - if at all - and they would all have two first names and bad teeth.)

Ah, but there is that whole radio thing. Listening to the 2008 version of Imus in the Morning, you hear a guy who is struggling to remain relevant ... to see, with 68-year-old eyes, the boundaries of political correctness ... and to know just how far outside those boundaries he can safely stray to keep both his shock-jock cred and his job.

Overall, I think he does pretty well. He sure sounds more relevant than his contemporaries up the dial on the Oldies stations - legendary jocks we all revere but wish somebody would tell them to hang up their headsets already.

Yes, the "nappy-headed hos" incident (hereinafter known as Incident One) was regrettable, to say the least - as Imus himself acknowledged. But this "Pacman" thing? Puh-leeeeese. Even if you're totally not a fan (are you listening, Rev. Al?), you have to acknowledge that the remark was ambiguous. Given the eggshells he must tread since Incident One, and what I truly believe is Mr. I.'s outlook these days, his explanation is eminently plausible.

Which brings us to Rev. Al and his kind.

"Aha!" would say Rev. Al. "We know what you mean by 'our kind,' and that makes you, Mr. Radio Ranter, a racist."

But the good rev. would wrong. Again. By "his kind" I mean those who leverage societal sensitivities for their own political agendas, to the potential detriment of society itself.

I mean, who is this guy? Okay, I know who this guy is ... check out Wikipedia for a sense of how, just maybe, it's a case of the pot calling the kettle - oh, never mind.

No comments: