Imus Fires Back; Cutting a Deal
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: ... look at some of the language in this contract and what makes it so remarkable. "CBS Radio," they say, acknowledges that Imus's services to be rendered are of a unique, extraordinary, irreverent, intellectual, topical, controversial and personal character, and the programs of the same general type and nature containing these components are desired by "CBS Radio" are consistent with company rules and policies. Essentially, they're saying they want him to say outrageous stuff?</s>JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: He was required. They desire -- that remarkable word in the contract. It is desired by CBS that he be controversial, irreverent, personal. So, the question is, is the statement about the Rutgers basketball team simply what he was required to do under his contract or certainly allowed to do under his contract, or as CBS will presumably argue if this comes to a lawsuit, no that was so far outside the pale, that it doesn't count as controversial and irreverent.</s>COOPER: But really, just to prove his case, Imus then just has to go back into his archives, look at some of -- you know, and play some of the other things he has said and say, look this is all of a piece. This is all of a pattern.</s>TOOBIN: And this was a new contract. He was in the first year of a five-year contract, $8 million a year, $40 million contract. So all the years he's been doing his show and all the controversy he's courted, that's folded in here. He can say, as you pointed out, that, I've been saying these inflammatory things in the past. You encouraged me to do it. This was just another thing. You can't fire me.</s>COOPER: Well, obviously we're talking about a lot of money. Is there interest in both camps to settle?</s>TOOBIN: There's always interest in settling. Very few cases...</s>COOPER: Because no one wants litigation, really.</s>TOOBIN: Very few cases go to trial. And especially in a case like this. Both sides have a lot to lose with a trial. First of all, it could just take a long time. Both sides could be open to depositions about ugliness in their past. CBS does not want this story dragged out all through courts. It does not want to go through all the other inflammatory things he has said. Don Imus is 66 years old. He wants to get on with his life. Certainly, there's a lot of room for negotiation here for a settlement. So I think that's much more likely than a lawsuit going to trial.</s>COOPER: I want to read something else that is in the contract, the part of the contract that you got exclusive access to. It says that "CBS Radio" acknowledges its familiar with the program conducted by Imus and its familiarity with the reviews and comments, both favorable and unfavorable, concerning Imus and his material by critics, reviewers and writers of the various media, both in New York and nationally.</s>TOOBIN: You know, that is such a bizarre part of a contract. I mean This whole thing is like no other contract I've ever seen. But that, that is bizarre.</s>COOPER: Why?</s>TOOBIN: Because basically he's inoculating himself for bad press. He's saying, look, I know I'm going to get bad reviews. I know I am going to have people write critical things about me, but you can't use that as a justification to fire me. That's what that provision of that contract says.</s>COOPER: And that certainly seems to apply very well to...</s>TOOBIN: Exactly. I mean, that's exactly why he got fired because there was this firestorm. And you know, he -- I mean, the drafting of this contract was very clever on Imus's lawyer's part because it seems almost to have anticipated this kind of storm over something he was going to say.</s>COOPER: So you're saying you've never seen language like this in a contract?</s>TOOBIN: No, no. Nothing like...</s>COOPER: With the desired...</s>TOOBIN: Well, the idea that someone is supposed to be controversial and that's built into a contract, I've never seen anything like that, but it clearly was insisted on by the Imus people to insulate him against getting fired.</s>COOPER: So the only case CBS really has is saying, well, look, the comments -- those particular comments that he made are so outside, so beyond the pale, that it nullifies this? We never expected he would say something this bad?</s>TOOBIN: Right. What we meant by that provision, CBS will say, is that you'll make fun of George Bush and you'll make fun of John Kerry and people in the news, but this defenseless group of admirable students is totally different and the word ho is not within what we're -- what we expected. But begin other things Imus has said, it just doesn't seem all that different.</s>COOPER: That's a fascinating document, what we saw of it. Jeffrey, thanks very much. Great reporting. We asked Reverend Al Sharpton what he thinks about the contract and what it means for Imus. I spoke to him a short time ago.</s>COOPER: Reverend Sharpton, CBS, we now know, desired Imus to be controversial, irreverent, and personal. What's your reaction to the contract?</s>AL SHARPTON, CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST: Well, the question is whether or not CBS or any other company puts in contracts where people are protected to say things that are sexist and racist. First of all, when the National Association of Black Journalists put the flag up, and we at National Action Network and other civil rights groups came in, it was not to deal with Imus one way or another. Whether he gets money or not is really irrelevant. It was the sexist and racist nature that he was using the airways. So, whatever happens here is of no moment to many of us in civil rights. But, if there is in fact contracts that say that you are permitted, by the company, to be racist and sexist, which some could argue is different than irreverent and personal, that would be of concern. I think that that's the only interest that I would have here, is in fact, is there an institutional agreement to promote racism? And I think that would be argued either way by the lawyers. And we will have to wait and see that.</s>COOPER: Do you think he has been racist in the past, though? If you're saying these comments were racist, were they racist in the past when he made comments based on people's ethnicity or their gender or whatever his comments were based on? Because if so, CBS seems to have encouraged that by resigning a contract and saying they desired those comments.</s>SHARPTON: Well, he certainly said things that one could say was biased. I don't know that -- if he said anything as blatant as calling women hos and calling people nappy-headed. He certainly said things that was biased. I think that, what he said, there was no room for wiggle. You must remember, even Imus went and apologized to the young ladies at Rutgers himself. So, one side of the argument could be, what the contract appears to read -- I have not seen the contract, and all of it -- but on the other side of the argument is, he, himself, despite the contract, went and apologized, and said he was wrong. And they claimed at the time they were firing him based on cause. He seemed to have conceded that cause when he went, even after the firing, and apologized to the girls.</s>COOPER: You met and others met with Leslie Moonves, the president and CEO of CBS. Imus was fired. What was your impression of Moonves at the time? I think you said that you felt he really understood the human side of this issue. Do you still that -- believe that to be true?</s>SHARPTON: I think he understood the human side. I think he also understood the gender and race insult. Again, we were not talking about a personal attack. We were talking about a sexist and racist attack that, again, fellow journalists brought up. What this issue that now has come to light brings up is, what kind of contracts are people given? Are people given the right to be provocative and controversial? Well, that's one thing. Are they given the right to then take that to where they can be blatantly against a race and against a gender? I think that that's going to be the thing that we would watch. Whether he gets money or not is really no concern to me.</s>COOPER: As you look back on your actions in the last couple of weeks regarding Don Imus, do you have any regrets? Don Imus' former producer, Bernard McGuirk, said about you recently -- and I quote -- "It seemed like he terrorized some broadcast executives, that they were, you know, sort of in a fetal position, under their desk, sucking their thumbs on their BlackBerries, trying to coordinate their response to him. I mean, they appeased, really, this terrorist here," essentially saying you're a terrorist.</s>SHARPTON: Well, first of all, a man that would call some honor students in a basketball team that had done what they did for that school some nappy-headed hos, how could I think seriously what he thinks of me or anybody else? Look at what he thought of some honor students. So, believe me, I don't spend any time worrying about what he said. Look at who's talking.</s>COOPER: That was Reverend Al Sharpton, of course. For more perspective, I asked Jeffrey Toobin to join me earlier in a discussion with CNN Contributor Roland Martin and "Washington Post" Media Reporter Howard Kurtz.</s>COOPER: Joining us, also, Syndicated Columnist and CNN Contributor Roland Martin, along with "Washington Post" Media Reporter Howard Kurtz, who is also the host of CNN's "RELIABLE SOURCES." Roland, are -- first of all, are you surprised by the excerpts of this contract that you have seen?</s>ROLAND MARTIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I'm surprised in terms of that kind of language -- clearly, very smart attorneys, as Jeffrey said. Look, this is why CBS is settling. They CBS cut Don Imus loose because it was a business decision. They did not want the protests to spill over to their prime-time programming, to have advertisers pulling those dollars away from their shows. Paying him $8 million a year, even if they settle for $20 million, that won't even -- won't even compare to how much money they could have lost by other advertisers pulling out from the network and radio -- television and radio.</s>COOPER: So, you have no doubt they are going to settle?</s>MARTIN: No doubt. No doubt.</s>COOPER: Howie, you say that any lawsuit wouldn't just be about money. How so?</s>HOWARD KURTZ, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, that may sound strange, because nobody walks away from $40 million. But I think what Imus is primarily interested in right now, in hiring a lawyer and considering this lawsuit, is vindication. Look, he said something that was terribly racist and offensive. He understands that. That's why he apologized 47 times. But he wants to make the point that CBS encouraged this, that they made lots and lots of money over the years with a show that was built, in part -- because he also did good interviews with politicians and journalists -- it was built in part on this sort of insult humor. It was often racial and sexist and gender -- excuse me -- and ethnic in nature.</s>COOPER: It's interesting, Roland, though. I remember you saying a lot during the height of this, you know, he's not a shock jock. In this contract, it specifically terms him as a shock jock. And they note, they desire the personal character of the shock jock.</s>MARTIN: This is a "CBS Radio" contract. They saw him as a shock jock. The context that I put it in, by simulcasting his show on MSNBC, he is now being perceived as competing against CNN "AMERICAN MORNING," "Today Show," "Good Morning America," "The Early Show." And, so, that was a whole different context. The issue, also, that jumps out, in terms of Imus suing -- no doubt he's trying to go after money. The guy is 66 years old. Ain't that many $40 million jobs out there that he can actually get. So, it's wise to go after the money.</s>COOPER: Any time anybody says, it's not about the money, I'm always saying, it's about the money.</s>MARTIN: Right. Right.</s>TOOBIN: I was shocked to here Howie say that.</s>TOOBIN: I mean, I think Howie is right that Imus wants the vindication of CBS saying -- of a court acknowledging, or CBS acknowledging, hey, we hired you to do this stuff. This isn't some astonishing thing you just did. But I think he would like a very big check, as well.</s>COOPER: Howie, is what he said any different -- I mean, I don't listen to the show, but is it much different than what he had said for years and years that, clearly, CBS desired?</s>KURTZ: Well, certainly, you know, that term, nappy-headed hos, was way over the line, and it was different. But he used to toss around words like hos all the time in little skits that he did. And let's remember for just a moment -- because CBS obviously is going to get on its high horse here and say, this was such a terrible breach, that we had to cut him loose. When this controversy first erupted, "CBS Radio" and MSNBC said, Imus said something wrong. We are going to give him a two-week suspension. It was only after the media and the pressure from employees at those two companies and outside pressure from people like Reverend Sharpton turned Imus into kind of a symbol of everything that was wrong in our toxic popular culture, that both companies decided to cut him loose. So Imus, obviously, feels like he wants to get a piece of his reputation back.</s>MARTIN: And, Anderson, that was the problem that I had during this whole deal. CBS is trying to take a very high-profile position. And I raised the point. We talked about it. Had they suspended him before? Had that reprimanded him before? And, so therefore, they sanctioned that kind of conduct. He made them lots of money. The bottom line is, these companies, they want the irreverent personalities. But, when they cross the line, and then public pressure rises to a certain level, then they take action.</s>TOOBIN: They not only didn't suspend him before. They put in the contract...</s>MARTIN: They gave him a raise.</s>TOOBIN: They put in the contract, we want you to be like that.</s>COOPER: A new contract.</s>MARTIN: Right.</s>TOOBIN: A new contract. This is -- so, I mean, that's why CBS' position is really awkward.</s>MARTIN: Right.</s>COOPER: I want to read this other graph from the contract. It says, "CBS Radio" acknowledges its familiarity with the program conducted by Imus and its familiarity with the reviews and comments, both favorable and unfavorable, concerning Imus and his material by critics, reviewers and writers of the various media, both in New York and nationally.</s>MARTIN: Look, it's simple. A good comedian will tell you, how far can I push the envelope before I get in trouble? And that's -- CBS knew what they were getting. And so, to say that, well, this violated any of our standards, we know what the real deal is. And so, they got rid of him because they knew he was going to cost them with advertisers.</s>COOPER: Jeffrey, how -- legally, can CBS -- if the FCC weighed in on this, and said that it violated FCC rules, which is one of the things Reverend Sharpton was early on was talking about, could they then say, OK, well, that's cause for termination?</s>TOOBIN: They might. That might -- that would certainly be helpful to CBS' provision. I -- and I haven't seen the whole contract. There may be some provision regarding the government. But the FCC hasn't said anything like that. I don't think they will. I don't think the FCC has gotten involved with this whole -- with this whole matter.</s>MARTIN: They have actually been saying, we're not going to get involved.</s>TOOBIN: Well, that's right. As far as I'm aware, they don't even have an open investigation.</s>MARTIN: Yes.</s>TOOBIN: No, it's all about what he said. And the interesting thing about that passage you just read, there, they're basically acknowledging, Imus is going to get some bad press sometimes. There is going to be criticism. And that's not grounds for firing.</s>KURTZ: And, Anderson, I think Imus wants to get back on the air. And one of the ways he can help himself to do that is by getting some kind of settlement with CBS, which kind of gives him a piece of his respectability back. Look, this guy said he was sorry. He said he was sorry many times. But, in the firestorm that surrounded him, that proved not to be enough.</s>MARTIN: I just have one issue, Anderson. Who was his lawyer, so we all can try to hire him to negotiate our deals?</s>MARTIN: I have got a radio show. I will call him in a minute.</s>COOPER: Roland, Jeff, appreciate it. And Jeff -- Jeff actually got the contract, some great reporting there. And, Howard Kurtz, thanks very much.</s>COOPER: Here's the raw data on how Imus's $40 million salary at "CBS Radio" stacked up against other radio hosts. Rush Limbaugh, the number one talk radio host in America, signed $250 million contract in 2001 that runs through 2009. In 2005, Shock Jock Howard Stern signed $500 million, 5-year deal that pays his salary and production costs. But to put this in context, the typical radio anchor makes just about $30,000 a year or about $14 an hour. Ahead tonight on 360, redefining the mission in Iraq. The president's new definition of success. Not hearing the word "victory" much these days. That's coming up. We'll also have this.</s>COOPER (voice-over): Condoleezza Rice, from her relationship with the president to talk of a possible White House run. We'll talk to the author of the explosive new book on the secretary of state. Single and singing. Sort of. Britney Spears returns to the stage. Can the pop diva turned drama queen save her career with acts like this? That and more, ahead when 360 continues.