Don Imus
and the State of Public
Discourse
By Butch Ward and
Bob Steel, Pointer.org Online, April 11, 2007
The controversy sparked
by Don Imus' comments about a Rutgers
basketball team prompted an e-mail exchange between Bob Steele and Butch Ward. What follows is an edited version of their conversation. The exchange took
place before CBS Radio and MSNBC announced Monday evening that they were suspending Imus for
two weeks, but the issues remain relevant.
Butch Ward:
Yo, Bob, I've got a question for you:
Do journalists have any responsibility for the level of
discourse in this country?
I've been thinking about
this question for a while now, ever since we gathered some of the best minds in
the online world at Poynter to discuss whether we could agree on some guidelines
and standards for the Web. I think it's safe to say we agreed on very few.
In the months since, I've watched the evolution of web
civilization continue, along with a continuing decline in the quality -- and
civility -- of conversations. Throw in the quality of discourse on our
traditional platforms -- think Imus and most talk radio hosts -- and I'd argue
we're in free-fall.
Here's where we are: If I can call you an idiot without
using one of George Carlin's favorite words, I can get published or aired.
Indeed, if I can avoid using obscenity, I can tell you that you're so wrong you
should be dead.
And I can do it without telling you my name.
Is that the level of discourse this country wants? And
needs?
Bob Steele:
As media professionals and journalists we certainly have a responsibility for
the quality of the content we produce. It is about civics and it's about the
civility of the discourse. I believe respect is a linchpin value in a healthy
society. When respect diminishes or disappears, the society corrodes from
within.
This is also about ethics, of course. We have a
responsibility to use wisely the tools we have at our disposal. Don Imus happens
to have a really big platform and a very large megaphone. His voice carries loud
and far.
Imus was wrong to say what he said about the
Rutgers women's basketball team. It was hateful and harmful. And
he's been spouting similar smears on his shows for years.
There's nothing funny about racism and homophobia.
There's nothing humorous about denigrating people based on their gender,
religion, race, sexual orientation, disability, accent or ethnicity. It's
disrespectful and damaging.
It's inane to argue that Imus is an "equal-opportunity
offender," as some suggest. There is no positive value in bashing everyone
equally.
And journalists who condone Imus' behavior by going on
his program and not challenging and condemning his verbal beatings are culpable.
Sadly, the latest incident involving Imus is reflective
of much of what is happening on our media landscape.
Butch Ward: Back
in March,
the Orange County Register
invited comments on its website to a story about April Branum, a 420-pound woman
who learned she was pregnant two days before giving birth to a son. According to
the paper's March 10 follow-up story, nearly 200 comments had been posted
anonymously, and Branum's fiance, Walter Edwards II, complained to the
Register about the nature of many
of the comments.
"If I could reach through my computer and strangle them,
I would," the paper quoted Edwards as saying. "It just isn't working right. The
Register is a news company. That is not news."
The story said one subscriber, who canceled her
subscription, called the comments "a breeding ground for hatred, racism and
bigotry."
Do we have any responsibility for the quality of those
comments? I'm not talking about legal responsibilities. I'm talking civics here.
It seems to me we have to come at this question from two
directions: first, how do our own journalists affect the community's
conversations through our blogs, columns and on-air commentary?
And second, now that we're providing the community with
greater access to public discourse than ever before, what responsibility do we
have for the quality of their conversation?
Bob Steele:
The digital arena does give us many possibilities for new conversations. The
journalists can explore and examine the issues much more quickly and in
different forms. And it’s great to bring the public into the discussions in more
ways.
But, there are many ethical mine fields on this digital
landscape, and the example you site is a perfect example of explosions waiting
to happen. What were the folks at the Register thinking when they asked for
comments on that story? What did they expect to happen? The Register drew a big
target and urged folks to fire away. Why would they allow respondents to attack
this woman? There is no value in creating a forum for abuse. And giving the
attackers the protection of anonymity only heightens the potential for serious
problems.
This case is a perfect example of a lack of foresight by
the media professionals and a failure to hold anyone accountable.
Butch Ward:
A
story in Monday's New York Times reports that some high-profile bloggers are
so concerned with this question that they're proposing voluntary standards aimed
at achieving some level of civility in public conversations.
Where are media companies in this effort? Shouldn't we
care?
Bob Steele:
Definitely we should care. Media companies are still powerful even as the
dynamics of the marketplace shift. Many citizens still get much of their news
from the mainstream media. Journalists and other media professionals should be
an integral part of the discussion about how to honor important values and
practice high-quality work no matter what the platform.
That’s why we held that conference last Fall to reiterate
important principles and develop guidelines for the practice of ethical
journalism in the online era.
Butch Ward:
Bob, it seems to me that we've got a big reason to address this issue right now. The 2008 presidential election might be as important as any this country has
ever faced. And unless we do something to lift the quality of our public
discourse, we will not only miss another opportunity to have an informed,
productive discussion of issues, we will spend the entire campaign creating ways
to call each other stupid, unpatriotic morons without using four-letter words.
Isn't that a cause that journalists should embrace?
|
