All Posts Tagged With: "black images"

Last week I saw on iGoogle (probably in the TechDirt feed) that 1938 Media had inked a deal with Verizon Wireless to distribute 1938 Media content on its VCast service.  I didn’t get to read it because it was a busy day.  1938 Media was no stranger to me, however, after all the controversy that his TechNi***: Where are the Black Tech Bloggers? video caused on the Videoblogging Yahoogroup a year ago.  (Google it).  So then Monday I see in my email from the Electronic Urban Report that Najee Ali, Paul Porter and other activists were calling for Verizon Wireless to withdraw the distribution deal.  I thought that interesting that this was in the Electronic Urban Report and also since the infamous video was about a year old.  I wondered if the boycott would work.  Apparently it did because the next day the Electronic Urban Report was reporting that Verizon dropped 1938 Media from the VCast service.

Now folks are crying “outrage” and “conspiracy”.  What you have here is the basic tenet that corporations don’t like controversy.  Corporations care about one color: green.  And if some controversy threatens that green they will drop the source of the controversy.  It’s simple.  Outside of Hollywood and the music industry, controversy doesn’t get you far in real life.

I read a lot of comments on TechCrunch saying the video wasn’t racist and that political correctness is evil.  It’s easy to say when you’re not a member of the group being ridiculed.  A minstrel show is a minstrel show.

I also saw many say that if a Black person had made the same video then everyone would think it’s okay.  There were even comments about the “activists”.  I took a little time to Google Najee Ali to find out what else he’s been into.  Just last month Najee Ali and Paul Porter were apparently protesting the depiction of violence in an Ashanti video.  He consistently protested R. Kelly, even outside the courthouse at his trial two months ago.  Ali led a protest threatening an NBC boycott over the inclusion of Snoop Dogg in It’s a Very Merry Muppet Christmas Movie.   As long ago as 1999, Ali protested 1999 NAACP Image Awards given to Jay-Z and Big Pun for recognizing “gangster rappers that call each other [n-words] and denigrate black women.”  There is a lot more about Najee Ali and his various protests all over Google but I will stop there; I think it’s shown that Ali protests anyone who portrays Black people with this gangster/pimp image whether or not they are Black.

I would also like to point out this post that I also saw: BET, probably the single largest purveyor of negative Black images, has apparently lost some sponsors due to viewers petitioning those sponsors directly.  For Black people and others negatively portrayed in the media it’s about having more realistic images.   For the corporations it’s about business.  Controversy is not good for business.

Back to 1938 Media, this quote from Bill Cammack says it all:

The resurgence is due to Loren stepping outside of the Echo Chamber with his Verizon deal and exposing himself to people who don’t give a damn about Social Media AT ALL, but DO CARE who companies that they patronize associate with… as well as what those people appear to stand for.

I had the opportunity to attend a screening of The Souls of Black Girls as a part of the Urban Film Series last night. The film produced by Daphne Valerius questions whether women of color suffer from a self image disorder as a result of media images. It features discussions with teenage girls as well as the familiar faces of actresses Juanita Jennings, Regina King, Amelia Marshall and Jada Pinkett Smith; PBS’s Washington Week moderator, Gwen Ifill; and rapper/activist Chuck D.

The film’s premise is that Black girls and girls of color in general are given two images to aspire to by the media: 1) the European standard of beauty and 2) the video vixen which essentially equates to a Black prostitute. The girls see that they don’t fit the standard of European beauty so they manipulate themselves in an effort to fit that image or gravitate to what looks most like them – the video vixen. In heartfelt interviews, the teenage girls intimate that because what is considered beautiful on TV, in movies, in magazines and the like, looks nothing like them, they feel that they must be ugly. The famous guests give a Hollywood perspective as to which images of Black women are shown. Images that challenge the status quo which are often more realistic are not chosen because executives making the decisions believe they don’t sell.

Valerius’ piece leaves us with the message that in order to counter these images we must hold ourselves accountable for being complicit in promoting them and also for putting positive and realistic images out there. The documentary is a must see not only for girls and women but also for boys and men.

Valerius started this film as a research project at St. Johns University as a Ronald McNair Scholar . Her motivation for studying this subject was that she too as a girl felt that she wasn’t pretty because the images of women in the media looked nothing like her. At that time she had no idea that she would eventually make a documentary based on that research. She went on to make the film as her final project in the broadcast journalism masters program at Emerson College.

Visit the site for listings of screenings in your area. Screenings can also be requested through the site.

I read this interesting article of how African immigrants in the United States are losing their ethnic identities. In African countries where everyone has the same skin color, ethnicity is not defined by race. I can certainly see the author’s point on this because ethnicity is not equivalent to “race” although we tend to think so. In Nigeria, for instance, there are three major ethnic groups: Hausa-Fulani, Ibo and Yoruba. These are all Nigerians and, for all intents and purposes, black. It might be difficult for a Black person in America to understand since this country tends to define ethnicity by race.

An example of this, not related to Africa, is Iraq. In Iraq, as we have learned in recent years, is made up of three main ethnic groups: the Shi’a Muslims, the Sunni Muslims, and the Kurds. Here in America we would probably define them all as Iraqi or Middle Eastern. In addition, people of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese or Taiwanese heritage would all be called Asian here in America although their cultures are very different. I do see the harm in defining yourself the way that others define you.

However, I was somewhat offended by where the article went from there. I think the author is assuming that there is a defined Black American culture. I do not accept the N-word, speak a parody of Ebonics, don the thuggish uniform of hip-hop culture or walk around in sagging baggy pants. And I resent any the assumption that all Black Americans do. If you look closely, beyond the images displayed so prominently in the media, you will find that this is not the case. I personally think that immigrants should keep their traditions and try to integrate them into their new surroundings, if possible. America is more of an ethnic stew than a melting pot anyway and I think that immigrants who seek to completely assimilate, losing all ties to their culture, do themselves a great disservice. Black Americans, as the author calls us, are already devoid of a history and that was not by choice.

The argument in defense of Imus’ comments is that rappers say the same things and no one complains. This argument is full of fallacy. Try telling the police officer that pulls you over for speeding that everyone else was speeding too. While it might be true that doesn’t change the fact that you were speeding and that speeding is wrong. It’s just that you were caught. And no one accepts “Everyone else is doing it” a justification from their teenage children, so why should we accept it in this case? If you are doing something wrong, you are doing something wrong no matter who else is doing it. At any rate, Imus intended to be malicious as evidenced by his previous remarks and there is no excuse for that.

It is sad that you can accomplish much in life and still be a target of such derision by Imus (or whoever else) as evidenced by Imus calling the phenomenal Gwen Ifill a “cleaning lady” and William Rhoden of The New York Times “a quota hire.” America has a short memory. It wasn’t too long ago when a radio host in Wisconsin called Condoleezza Rice an “Aunt Jemina” and Colin Powell an “Uncle Tom.” Whether you agree with their politics or not, these are great people who have accomplished more than most of us could dream of. Yet they resort to racial slurs to disparage them. Still, Rush Limbaugh called Barack Obama and Halle Berry “Halfrican Americans.” These aren’t the kinds of comments that the “rappers” would use in referring to these people. So they can’t use that as an excuse.

The other problem with “everyone is doing it” argument is that it is assumed that everyone is fine with what the rappers are putting out there. This is simply not true. People need to realize that the media does not cover everything that happens; or rather they don’t provide the same level of coverage for all stories. No one has mentioned that C. Deloris Tucker spent significant time and energy on her grassroots campaign against the explicit lyrics in rap music. Many rappers responded by directing some of that vulgarity toward her. Last year I read an article that 50-Cent complained that Oprah wouldn’t book him or other rappers on her show. Ludacris did go on (as an actor) promoting “Crash” and was upset that Oprah “gave [him] a hard time as a rapper, when [he] came on there as an actor.” Now people are criticizing Rev. Al Sharpton as an opportunist jumping on this issue for personal gain. While I admit that his rise to the public spotlight was dubious, he has done a lot in recent years to build his credibility (i.e. going to jail in Puerto Rico protesting the bombing there). One week before the Imus fiasco, Sharpton was slated to participate in the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network’s protest against rapper Tony Yayo for his alleged assault of the 14-year old son of a hip hop rival. While this is not specifically related to the lyrics themselves, the actions correlate to the lyrics which are indicative of the lifestyle.

I do believe that Don Imus was made into an example as there are many others who have said much worse with no repercussions. We can not change other people but I do believe that we should change the way we refer to ourselves. We need to own our own images and take responsibility for them. That includes taking anyone to task that represents us (collectively) negatively. The Imus incident has opened up an important dialog that we can hopefully keep going and use to effect change.

P.S. Can someone tell me why the Rutgers women’s basketball team received death threats when they have done absolutely nothing wrong? That is what real hate looks like.

Yesterday Don Imus’ TV simulcast was terminated on MSNBC and today his CBS radio show was canceled. The uproar caused this to happen. Congratulations I guess.

The same uproar occurred as a result of the Michael Richards episode a few months ago. And everyone was upset about what Joe Biden said about Barack Obama. We continue to be offended and then there is some feeble apology and we forget about it until the next non-black person says something racist. What I would like to know is what is next. In listening to Imus’ comments about “nappy-headed hoes”, my first thought was about where he might have heard such a phrase. Many people are arguing that rappers can get away with saying the same thing and try to use that as a justification as to why no one should have been upset about Imus’ comments. I submit that we should be offended when anyone including these rappers use derogatory terms to refer to black women or black people in general.

I believe in free speech but as with anything in life, there are consequences. And there should be consequences for spewing hate.

Everyone who rose up against Imus should rise up against these so-called artists who serve up remixed misogyny and racism. They have more influence – especially with young people – than Imus does. It is imperative that if we want to banish racism from our language that we start at home.