What Took So Long?
| 13
|
by J Cunningham
The Associated Press is reporting that Rutgers women's basketball junior Kia Vaughn has filed a defamation lawsuit against radio host Don Imus and CBS Radio over comments Imus made shortly after the team's run to the NCAA championship game against Tennessee. On April 4, Imus referred to the Rutgers players as a bunch of "nappy-headed hos," sparking a national controversy and resulting in Imus' firing.
Imus is reported to have resurfaced, signing a deal with WABC Radio.
Before I launch into my spiel here, let me make one thing abundantly clear: in no way do I condone what Imus said. I supported CBS Radio in firing him and feel sad that someone would see fit to make such a comment about young women and college athletes. In jest or not, those comments were in poor taste and horribly immature. I've been a long-time supporter of women's college basketball, and my work over the years with the Old Dominion team has shown me how good these players are, both on and off the court -- so for Imus to pull a race and sex card for the sake of a cheap laugh was one of the most despicable things a radio host could do.
Aside from eating popcorn on the air while calling a basketball game.
All that said, I can't get behind this lawsuit. Why? Well, for one thing ... what took so long? Why is Vaughn just now filing a defamation suit? Why not file one within a month of Imus' comments? I won't pretend to understand legal procedures, but if I'm going to file a defamation suit against someone and claim their comments had an adverse effect on my reputation, I'd be filing that lawsuit ASAP.
Imus' comments were made in April; Vaughn's suit is just now coming in August. Why the delay?
Granted, from what I know, defamation law suits are tricky; in filing one, you claim that not only have someone's comments impaired your reputation, but that they're also false. And it's on you to prove the defendant's comments were false. That's often easier said than done.
I also don't know what life has been like for these young women since the comments were made. I grant that on the surface, it would appear that Imus' comments had no effect on them; the comments were made, the players reacted in a press conference and met with Imus at the New Jersey governor's mansion ... and that was that.
The players go back to their lives, taking classes and preparing for another NCAA title run in 2007-08 Coach C. Vivien Stringer goes about the business of recruiting, travelling to Virginia for an AAU basketball tournament, miles away from any mention on Imus and his comments. Just life and basketball.
Right? Not necessarily.
But still, I have a hard time believing Imus' comments really tarnished the players' images -- I'd like to think that, if they did, more players would've filed suits. And, near as the AP and the Rutgers womens basketball program can tell, Vaughn's the first player to file such a suit.
Not only that, but I'd like to think most sports fans would be level-headed enough to realize Imus' comments were deplorable and not that bright; I'd like to think they realize he was just a crusty old shock jock looking for some ratings and publicity. Then again, I've often been accused of giving people too much credit, so it's possible there are people out there who heard what Imus said about the Rutgers players and actually thought they were "nappy-headed hos."
But even so, people of that mindset should be the least of the Rutgers players' concern. The best thing they can all do is move on and concentrate on their studies and their games. This is a team returning all five of its starters from last year, a team many feel has a legitimate shot at winning the national title ... why hold onto something like this?
I long ago criticized the likes of Rafael Palmeiro and Barry Bonds for not filing defamation suits -- Palmeiro when Jose Canseco's book Juiced alleged that Palmeiro had used steroids, Bonds when Game of Shadows came out. I felt that if someone made a claim about you and you knew it was false, you sue their butt off before they even know what hit them. You don't sue, that's like an underhanded, implied admission of guilt.
And I realize this case is different. Imus didn't accuse Vaughn or her teammates of steroid use; he simply called them a name. And, though my communication law is a bit off in the years since my education, I'm not sure if name-calling exactly fits under the definitions of slander and libel.
'Cause if it is, I might need to start looking into hiring a lawyer.
