quote: Former radio talk show host Don Imus has hired one of the country's top trial lawyers to sue CBS Radio following his dismissal last month for making racial and sexual on-air comments about members of the Rutgers University women's basketball team.
Attorney Martin Garbus told CNN Wednesday that he has agreed to represent Imus in a wrongful breach of contract suit against his former employer.
quote: Imus had $40 million remaining on a multiyear contact that began in 2006 and included a clause that CBS wanted him to be "irreverent" and "controversial," according to CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, who was shown part of the contract.
So the situation stands thus, in my reasoning.
Imus makes gaffe
Imus attacked (not physically attacked, you know what I mean) by civil rights/anti-discriminatory groups.
Imus apologizes publicly Imus apologizes publicly
Imus is publicly sacked
Imus claims that he had a riht to be "contraversial", and sues CBS for breach of contract.
Your thoughts, Hatrack?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I'm still thinking about it, but Ill write a more extensive opinion when I am off work.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
Well, if they really did contract him to be "irreverent" and "controversial," he certainly fulfilled his end of the deal.
Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
He has a point. If that is in his contract then they don't have much to say. That being said, CBS can still get him for conduct detrimental to the company. Much like military courts almost always getting someone on "Conduct Unbecoming".
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
If they fired him for simply causing a public outcry, that's one thing; but I think they were within their rights in firing him if he had become a liability. I didn't follow the story closely enough to know if advertisers had begun pulling out, but if they were then Imus was no longer an asset to the broadcasters.
--j_k
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Apparently he was too irreverent and controversial.
I think they wanted him to be controversial enough to get free publicity for the show...but not so much as to damage CBS itself. It's a fine line, and Imus crossed it.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
That's a stupid line to ask people to dance near.
Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
From what little I have heard from Imus, those comments were not the worst he has ever said. I wonder what made this comment explode as big as it did?
Either way, good riddance. I don't mind hard core, adult themed shows, I just don't like them over the public airwaves.
Posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick (Member # 9302) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: That's a stupid line to ask people to dance near.
Hear Hear!
Posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick (Member # 9302) on :
I'm of the opinion that racist statements definitely cross the line of "contraversial and irreverent".
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
And he...what...doesn't know that there is a difference between being irreverent and controversial and being a racist, sexist jerk?
Please. I don't know which is more stupid...this lawsuit or the judge that is suing his dry cleaners for something like $64 million for losing a pair of his pants.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:And he...what...doesn't know that there is a difference between being irreverent and controversial and being a racist, sexist jerk?
Can you explain the difference?
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:That's a stupid line to ask people to dance near.
I agree.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:And he...what...doesn't know that there is a difference between being irreverent and controversial and being a racist, sexist jerk?
Can you explain the difference?
Well, yeah...Just discuss controversial subjects or topics that some people hold sacred without using racist epithets or insulting people based on their gender or sexual orientation.
Watch Keith Olbermann sometime. He is often controversial and irreverent (and very funny)...heck, he's sometimes (often) witheringly insulting to people he thinks are less than the sharpest crayons in the box...but I've never heard him using racist or sexist language. I suspect the same is true about Jon Stewart, but I haven't seen his show enough to know that for a fact.
I don't know, maybe our culture has devolved to the point where it is impossible to get a laugh from some audiences (which, I assume, is what Imus was trying to do) without insulting someone based on their ethnicity or gender. I hope not, and I hope that most people can discuss (for laughs or seriously) controversial topics or things like religion, where irreverence is most likely to occur, without having to call names, be they racist or sexist.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Well, yeah...Just discuss controversial subjects or topics that some people hold sacred without using racist epithets or insulting people based on their gender or sexual orientation.
So, he's supposed to be irreverent while holding race, gender, and sexual orientation sacred.
What makes those three particular things so special that they are off limits, whereas everything else is fair game?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
LMA, I agree with Porter. I'm afraid that 'controversial and irreverant' are such subjective terms that to define them as precisely as you are doing is an exercise in futility.
At what point does a racist remark go from irreverant to intolerable? Is Mel Brooks crossing the line when he played Rabbi Tuckman?
Edit:
quote:...sometimes (often) witheringly insulting to people he thinks are less than the sharpest crayons in the box...
I'm curious: why is it acceptable to be rude and insulting on the basis of their perceived stupidity, and not on their race, gender, or nationality?
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"...race, gender, and sexual orientation...What makes those three particular things so special that they are off limits, whereas everything else is fair game?"
[ May 04, 2007, 05:17 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
CBS should pay Imus because of the contract they signed with him. CBS can put him on the 'bench' but they should be forced to honor the contract that they signed with him. Imus was doing what CBS paid him to do, so if they want to break his contract they should have to pay him.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I can't believe we're going to now require that a judge determine what constitutes an "appropriate" level of controversial irreverence.