Exactly Where Is The Outrageous Insult Line In The Sand?

Of all those weighing in on the Imus debate, Gwen Ifill was among the most impressive. She's intelligent and insightful. And yesterday she revealed her courage. She didn't give the multiple-time-Imus-guests an inch on Sunday's Meet The Press. She reminded us, too, that those who sit tight while the sludge builds around them are accomplices to the suffocation and stench. Clearly Ifill believes Imus crossed over the line - which she does not consider invisible.

Frank Rich took a different tack. He likened Imus' typical style to a kind of burlesque banter. To him, it seems, Imus' sincere apology should have had more impact, despite what Rich described as an "ugly" attack on the Rutgers Women's basketball team. He credited Imus with not blaming anyone else and seemed to feel disappointed that some middle ground hadn't been found.

Rarely has there been a Rich column with so much swinging to and fro on an issue, but that's where many people are right now. We don't know what attacks - humorous or otherwise -- are out of bounds. And so there are victims all around.

I find it useful to draw a distinction between offense and insult. While the words are often used interchangeably, offense is more accidental - a slip of the tongue, a moment of poor judgment, a blind spot, or poor phrasing. It's, more often than not, an out-of-character moment - human error. I think of Jon Stewart as an example. Surely he doesn't mean to offend by having so few women as guests when the issues are political or in some other way substantive. But something very weird -- kind of offensive to women -- is going on there.

Insult, by contrast, is intentional. The purpose is to patronize, put down, humiliate, or in some way harm the target. Insulters and violators of trust often hide behind claims of accidental offense - blurring the distinction. As when Paul Wolfowitz appealed for some understanding of his nepotism because he was new to his job and "navigating uncharted waters." Or when Alberto Gonzales claimed to have made some "missteps" that he'd avoid if he were able to fire uncooperative U.S. Attorneys again.

Insult occurs when the comment or action in question is directed at innocent or less powerful people, has happened before despite protest, occurs between two people who haven't developed a kind of unstated master contract of verbal sparring, becomes too personal, or brings benefit to the source but substantial harm to the target. This isn't an exhaustive list, but it's a good start.

Context is important too. Cancer patients, for example, may laugh together about the effects of treatment - like those in other highly stressful situations. It's a release of sorts. But people outside those circles shouldn't interpret the fun as invitations to join in and one-up.

When in doubt, self-deprecating humor can be a safe way to go. But it's not a sufficient balance for making the mistakes above.

The truth is we've become more tolerant of crudity, incivility and stupidity. Is that the kind of world we want for our kids and theirs? How much longer do people like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, for example, get to spew vile invectives with their careers unscathed? When do we stop listening to them? When are their turns for a long vacation?