I SPENT THE day at the convention for the National Association of Broadcasters. And I heard a lot of perspectives about Imus and NBC.

An old friend who has dealt with the media and the major networks offered another perspective about the Imus firing I hadn't heard or thought about.

This friend said that NBC was the culprit for not acting quickly. "Why didn't they suspend him immediately?" Instead, NBC let it fester. If NBC had acted quickly and dealt with Imus, then Imus would possibly still have his job, the black community would have felt that NBC was responsive to them, and sponsors would have been protected from facing the wrath of an angry segment of the audience.

(I should note: this friend believes Imus should have been fired, but not just for that one incident, but for the years of insults.)

It's a great point. Think about it. By not responding immediately, NBC appears to either have paid little attention to the content on its air or they weren't really offended by the remark.

In fact, NBC paid little attention to Imus' content since the I-man continued to do three things. First, Imus produced revenues. Secondly, Imus' show had decent margins since the show was low-cost; it was merely a re-broadcast of a radio show. Third, it became a promotional tool for their news programs on NBC and MSNBC when you consider all the NBC news personalities that appeared on Imus' show.

We need to stop looking at news organizations—especially broadcast outlets—like they're public service organizations. They're not. They make want us to think that. But in reality, they're for-profit companies. They make money for their owners or shareholders. Yes, they offer news and information. Clearly, though, that news and information is geared toward the viewer the advertiser wants.