It seems to me that Dr. Cuddy has not really gotten much respect on House. Last episode, she had a stress related illness, a result of thinking there might be a risk to fellow passengers onboard a flight home. More than once she was portrayed as letting her emotions get to her, though last week they helped to save a pregnant woman and her fetus. Dr. Cuddy did have her moments that underline she is a good administrator (her key role), and Dr. House made sure to say he respected her skills as a doctor as well. But, I do think it might be useful to have an episode that focuses on just that.
Now, some might say that overall she comes off as competent, her emotional side just part of the wider package. Still ... Dr. Cameron has that too, but her skills as a doctor also come out. OTOH, now she is going to the other extreme, with apologizes, the "pretty white girl ho" route. Note how this isn't quite the same thing as calling real life black college girls "nappy haired hos" (one caller to a local sports show even brought out a children's book with "nappy" in the title -- ignoring the 'ho' part, the book was meant as a response to badmouthing that hairstyle ... I'm sick of such cluelessness*). Ironically, she decided to have a causal affair (more power to her, seriously) with her fellow intern, who is real life she is planning to marry.
"We still find his statements to be unacceptable, and this is an experience that we will never forget," said Vivian Stringer, coach of the university's Scarlet Knights women's basketball team.
Stringer said she hopes the furor Imus sparked with his racist remark will be a "catalyst for change" and convince other raunchy radio jocks - and rappers as well - to clean up their acts.
The coach said they took no pleasure in Imus getting fired from his nationally syndicated WFAN show and said he deserves "credit" for personally apologizing to the team. She also told Imus' critics to stop checking to "make sure he is dead and following up with how well he was dressed in his coffin."
-- NY Daily News
As to the Don Imus matter ... Richard Neer, a calm voice on WFAN radio station (Imus' NYC affiliate, where he served the "Howard Stern" role of giving weight to an otherwise all sports station) who I respect, noted this morning that his opinion was that the best path would have been to give him the two weeks, and then see if he shaped up his act. There is some merit to this path though I wonder if Imus really cared to be under the microscope (sort of a worse punishment than being fired?) in this fashion. I'm not sure if someone so far into his career really was ready to change his ways ... self-censorship, and some even fairly innocent comments might get him in trouble now, does not seem to be his way.
And, this might be seen as a "straw that broke the camel's back" penalty. [As to the breadth of the problem overall, see here.] Some think this is unfair -- but putting aside that yes blacks do have a special history of victimhood in this country (if in Europe, Jews might fit the bill), is it not true that sometimes things work that way? Some things fall by the wayside, but then something happens, and the stars are in alignment for your downfall. The reason why that specific incident is the damning one changes over time, but generally speaking you lose your benefit of the doubt.
And, your past starts to haunt you, including things that probably deserved a bit more attention at the time. A tasteless comment about young black women athletes (not just black ... btw this underlines the stupidity of using Sharpton as the spokesperson ... a much more apt person was their coach) seems like a good enough as any choice. BTW, I think Joe Conanson is a tad over the top in his latest column. Who knows it his charity work was not truly felt? And, not only he gets tax breaks for such things. Still, those who think Imus cannot be replaced are a bit much too -- there are others who are willing to work hard for charity, including using their own funds and time -- and others who can provide an independent perspective of the news with some verve ... without the distasteful aspects that got him fired.
This underlines the point -- if this was one incident, Imus might have got away with it. But, like Trent Lott (and, his apology tour of sorts -- including going to Sharpton's show, which was a bit disgusting, honestly ... it actually helped Imus as shown in the footnote below, and not only in a good way --- reminds one of that), it was not only one incident. [Thus, Harvey Fierstein sort of misses the point by wondering why a comment by one star on Grey's Anatomy, whose comments were criticized even by those on the show, was not treated the same. He is right to note that we are selective in our outrage ... so it goes in life.] As a black caller to Richard Neer's show said, I deep down do not really care if he was fired or not. I do hope it suggests, as was mentioned on Air America, a certain disapproval of crude talk that will carry over into other areas as well.
Neer and others also noted that the fact Don Imus did some good off air etc. was not quite the point ... it was the on air personality that we focus upon. Now, in fact, RN noted he is not a big fan of the guy, and I doubt off air Neer is not the evenkeeled sort he is on air. But, others do alternate -- some note hosts like Tucker Carlson can turn their shtick on and off as need be. To toss in a perhaps not totally related point, some historians note the importance many Founding Fathers gave to public appearance -- "character" was in effect their public face, even if privately they were somewhat different. The fact is still important in respect to public figures in the current day, one reason I'm so upset when some act in certain divisive/destructive ways that promote bad things.
Finally, Neer also noted that it underlines the power of media watchdog groups -- he didn't mention Media Matters and the like specifically, but did note the presence of blogs. He said a rule in media, especially radio sorts, is not to emphasize one's mistakes. If you do, even if it is fairly trivial, it will be focused upon, probably more than it deserves. Or, more than you want it to be. Now, you cannot get away with that as much, can you John McCain? [safety in Iraq] I'm not sure if this necessarily is a great example of the practice -- he is a national radio/tv personality, and such people have got in trouble in the past for making stupid comments. [Think Howard Cosell]
But, it is one of those moments that linger, that help us understand wider problems and concerns that hit upon society overall. I guess as a final comment, one wishes some good came of it all. Things are not "meant" to be, but this does not mean we cannot do the best we have with what is out there. Such is our responsibility, to end on a philosophical note, I guess.
---
* This includes, one by someone claiming to never have called a talk show ... now required to do so to voice an opinion voiced by many others ... every continual references to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson or rap stars. I commented on this already, but again, this is b.s.
Are we saying that the only people upset are these two or like people? Are we saying that many blacks actually share Stanley Crouch's distaste of such language, including many black women akin to those upset when one black activist in the 1960s said something like the best place for them to be is prone? It is the mentality of a five year old, and damn I'm sick of it. This includes this sense of victimhood behind the comments, victimhood much broader than of the "let's not be too holier than thou now" sentiment sometimes deserved.
A liberal sometimes is said to be someone not totally sure that they are right ... though some do think that ... and that more than ever seems like a good path to take. Surely when one is wrong! Lol.