Cultural theorists have written about two economies, one financial and one cultural. But I wonder as with the current controversy surrounding shlock jock Don Imus whether or not we can really separate the two. Within the financial economy at least three advertisers have announced intentions to withdraw their advertising support from the Imus program: Procter & Gamble, Bigelow Tea, and Staples office supply chain. As MSNBC decided to suspend airing of the program we could also say that General Electric owner of MSNBC also has for the time being withdrawn its economic support. The economics of syndicated radio are more complicated than this simple scenario for advertiser withdrawal suggests; there are plenty of advertisers, for example, including General Motors that have not as yet withdrawn their advertising from the program. Sometimes pop culture transcends the financial economy as controversies like the one Imus finds himself involved in enter the cultural economy. Think Calvin Klein Kiddie Porn, Heroin Chic. Think Benneton. One could suggest, perhaps, that within a capitalist economy there is a self-correcting mechanism: if demand for Don Imus remains strong then he will probably survive either over the airwaves or on satellite radio. However, if his listenership wanes or if the intensity of his current fan base lessens continuing interest on the part of advertisers may also become depleted. When it comes to culture we can see the cultural economy play out like a marketplace, although instead of trading shares on the New York Stock Exchange, trading in the “cultural shares” of Don Imus take place in the Blogosphere, talk television like The Today Show, among others as well as traditional media like magazines and newspapers. Day after day we can see in these various venues trial by pop culture. However, I do not think the financial economy operates separately from the cultural economy. Rather, I think they work together, not necessarily in tandem, but they reflect the complex nature of the players in this game of culture both corporate and political.Thursday, April 12, 2007
Don Imus: Trial by Pop Culture
Cultural theorists have written about two economies, one financial and one cultural. But I wonder as with the current controversy surrounding shlock jock Don Imus whether or not we can really separate the two. Within the financial economy at least three advertisers have announced intentions to withdraw their advertising support from the Imus program: Procter & Gamble, Bigelow Tea, and Staples office supply chain. As MSNBC decided to suspend airing of the program we could also say that General Electric owner of MSNBC also has for the time being withdrawn its economic support. The economics of syndicated radio are more complicated than this simple scenario for advertiser withdrawal suggests; there are plenty of advertisers, for example, including General Motors that have not as yet withdrawn their advertising from the program. Sometimes pop culture transcends the financial economy as controversies like the one Imus finds himself involved in enter the cultural economy. Think Calvin Klein Kiddie Porn, Heroin Chic. Think Benneton. One could suggest, perhaps, that within a capitalist economy there is a self-correcting mechanism: if demand for Don Imus remains strong then he will probably survive either over the airwaves or on satellite radio. However, if his listenership wanes or if the intensity of his current fan base lessens continuing interest on the part of advertisers may also become depleted. When it comes to culture we can see the cultural economy play out like a marketplace, although instead of trading shares on the New York Stock Exchange, trading in the “cultural shares” of Don Imus take place in the Blogosphere, talk television like The Today Show, among others as well as traditional media like magazines and newspapers. Day after day we can see in these various venues trial by pop culture. However, I do not think the financial economy operates separately from the cultural economy. Rather, I think they work together, not necessarily in tandem, but they reflect the complex nature of the players in this game of culture both corporate and political.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I don't think Don Imus should be fired. Sure, what he said was completely out of line, and demands some form of apology which as of yet he hasn't done, in my opinion.
But I don't see why everyone demands the firing of Imus for an irresponsible comment he probably didn't even think about before making, while Rush Limbaugh can get away with intentionally mocking Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's Disease last election season without any punishment whatsoever.
I can understand advertisers dropping Imus because of all the negative press surrounding him. I think the best thing would be to just allow Imus to quietly stop doing shows on AM radio and make the move to Sirius. He made a mistake, but don't destroy his career over it; it isn't as if he made a racist tirade on the level that Michael Richards did. What he said was horrible and deserves some repercussions, but he should be allowed to move in and everyone should stop acting like what he said is the first sign of the apocalypse.
I agree that the financial economy and cultural economy work together in a lot of ways. It seems obvious that companies would not want to be associated with a radio personality that has offended a racial group in a very demeaning way, and it will be interesting to see if Imus loses a lot of his fan base because of his comments as well as his lack of support from companies that sponsor the show. I think that Imus did deserve to be suspended from his radio show for a period of time (a few months seems fair to me), but now that he has been fired by MSNBC and will not have his show broadcast on television, I think he may end up switching to satellite radio and hoping that those fans that are still behind him will help him resurrect his career. I guess only time will tell what will happen to Imus in the next few weeks...
In looking at all of the possibilities, you can see why these companies have decided to do this: to save themsevles. Because this has been such a hot button issue, it is no wonder that companies are taking themselves out because they do not want to be associated with such a negative light. Again, if Imus is so popular that his fans will stay loyal and find a way to listen to him. Because he has caused such a spectacle it seems relevant that no TV and or radio stations are dying to have him or even have an interest. To go along with the issues of Howard Stern I would not be surprised if he did move to satellite or even take a break for a while and try to clear his name.
I think that whether MSNBC wanted to fire Dom Imus or not, in a sense they had no choice. Similar to advertisers cutting advertising for Imus, MSNBC had to cut him from the entire association. No company wants to be linked to a controversial character, one in which some people may enjoy and find funny but others find inappropriate and out of line. By advertising or producing a person of this nature, the company is ultimately decreasing potential viewers and consumers and reducing overall profits.
As I am sure if I agree with the firing of Don Imus, in a way I think it was the only thing that could be done at this time in order to keep the integrity of MSNBC in tact.
One thing that people have not been mentioning throughout the Don Imus situation is that free speech does not apply to the radio. Journalists can write and print things in newspapers and magazines that broadcasters cannot say on radio and network television. This is why we have the FFC-to moderate speech.
I agree with the people who say thaht our right to free speech is becoming more limited with each passing day, but in some ways, I see the reason for different speech laws in print and broadcast mediums: In print mediums, a person is reading each specific article or column because of a desire to do so. With the radio or TV, people are often watching because they are waiting for something. You watch the news to see the weather, listen to the radio for a traffic report or music. You do not always the same control over what you consume in broadcast as in print media.Because of this, it is not as acceptable to offend people over broadcast waves as it is to in words.
The more I learn about business after having not been a business major, the more I realize just how insanely tricky it is. Whether or not things may be right or wrong, in the business world I feel like people are always just trying to figure out how to make money. Don Imus looses advertisers, the network has to drop him because of the money they are going to be losing. The connection with a controversial figure would have also continued to harm their image.
As for whether or not Imus should have been fired, I have a hard time admitting that he should have been. You can get into the whole free speech debate, but I feel like it all comes down to choice. If you don't like what Don Imus says, don't listen to him. Just like rap music, which repeatedly comes out with phrases just as inappropriate Imus, you can choose not to listen if it offends you.
Post a Comment