WASHINGTON — I should have expected it. There is an effort
being made to get talk-show host Don Imus back on the air. Citadel
Broadcasting, owner of 243 radio stations as well as ABC Radio
Networks, is reportedly negotiating to bring him back in December,
presumably for the Christmas season. Possibly Christmas has nothing
to do with it. Possibly it is just that Citadel’s executives
recognize that there is a substantial audience of macho fellows out
there who consider themselves somewhat intellectual, somewhat
athletic, in sum: very au courant with what real men know
— pardon my French. They miss the locker-room fantasy of the Imus
radio show complete with pols dropping by, and journalists, and
even writers — all very clever and a little raunchy just to
manifest their macho SUPERIORITY.
Yes, I never shared these fellows’ admiration for Imus, or for
that matter their admiration for themselves. Imus has been a vulgar
presence for years. He is a poseur of the most repulsive sort. When
he was bounced from the airwaves in April for slurs cast on the
Rutgers women’s basketball team, the only thing that surprised me
was that he had not provoked such a ruckus earlier. Down there in
the Imus locker room, such drolleries had been heard before. But he
camouflaged them all with high mindedness: a charity for children,
earnestness about books, an assumption of moral and intellectual
superiority without being too moral or too intellectual.
Nonetheless, he was bounced. Now Citadel is negotiating to bring
him back. There is a market out there.
Yet, there are also groups intent on thwarting his return. The
National Organization for Women (by now rather old woman I would
think) and the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) are
in full howl. “He used his free speech to broadcast hate speech,”
the president of NABJ has declaimed. “To put him back on the air
now makes light of serious and offensive racial remarks that are
still ringing in the ears of people all over this country.” Both
groups are modern opportunists engendered in an era of identity
politics. To maintain their positions at the head of their various
aggrieved groups, they have to alight on slobs such as Imus to
exploit. For years they have had numerous opportunities to spot
gaucheries in Imus’s dialogues, but they would rather hit him when
he is down.
Obviously I do not mind taking a few swipes at him either when
he is down, but there is something out there that is even more
significant than his vulgarity or apparent racial and gender
insensitivity, namely the First Amendment’s promise of free speech.
It allows Imus to speak coarsely or foolishly. To bar him from
public forums is to deny a freedom that allowed feminists and civil
rights leaders the right to make their case in years past. The
feminists and spokesmen for NABJ now apparently assume the
rightness of feminism and civil rights for blacks was always
apparent. It was not. Someone had to make their case in an era when
it was unpopular. If it were not for the First Amendment, their
case might never have been made.
Thus I draw the conclusion that Citadel should be free to make
its deal with Imus. Let him pull his silly cowboy hat on his head
and amble into an air-conditioned radio studio. There in his hat
and boots and — who knows — maybe he carries a toy gun, he can
live out his fantasies with his macho audience of wisenheimers. If
he attracts enough sound critics, perhaps his audience will shrink
into insignificance out of personal embarrassment.
Black journalists, aging feminists, join with me in laughing
Imus and his audience into oblivion. But let us not weaken the
First Amendment. Free speech his how we all got where we are.