Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Racial Passing: A Concept Whose Time has Passed?

Senator Obama's meteoric rise from obscurity just 4 years ago to his almost certain clinching of the 2008 Democratic Party nomination (and barring a kamikaze move by the Clintons, the presidency) has raised the specter of race in both public and private conversation to levels not seen since the Civil Rights era. And what has become clear is that there is no longer a consensus on the assumptions that most folks make both privately and publicly about identity and culture, and how they relate to the political sphere. The fact that there are differences in perspective, especially along generational lines as opposed to racial ones, appears to be a strange shock to a lot of folks in the 50+ set. It's as if the Baby Boomers took the Civil Rights Movement as the end in itself, and not the means to the end - which was supposed to be a color-blind, more racially equitable society.

Clinton minions who wish to see her secure the nomination at all costs are consistently the worst perpetrators of this strange myopia, insulting the generations who grew up in an integrated society because they don't (and can't by definition) subscribe to the neurosis of that barrier-busting generation. Senator Obama spoke directly to this generational divide in regard to the African American community when he tried to give some context to the anger expressed by Reverend Wright in the clips aired ad infinitum on Fox News, et al. The Reverend was not to be outdone by the Clinton crew, and his fratricidal impulse in defense of his generational worldview nearly derailed the aspiring candidate. A lot of black folks wondered aloud what the hell Wright was thinking. Did the brother have his eyes on the prize or what?

For me these are the moments when the long view is instructive. A suave, black gentleman friend of mine aged 72 years young regularly puts these issues of race and identity in perspective for me. A life-long New York city native who grew up in Harlem and now lives in Brooklyn, he remembers when sanctimonious Northern cities were (informally) segregated, and shares strategies with me on how he worked his way up the ladder in the architectural world to operate his own design firm. He is not just a student of history, but lived it.

Over brunch on Sunday we talked about an issue that is basically taboo in discussions about 20th century black life – namely the tensions between the light skinned (biracials) and dark skinned (blacks) where issues of leadership are concerned. Yes, there were the Marcus Garveys out there, but on the whole it is biracials who occupied the higher tiers of black society. One need only look as far as Reverend Wright, with his even lighter skin and even more European-looking features contrasted to the biracial Obama, to see an example of this. Could the Reverend’s public unhinging have to do with his deep-seated frustrations at not being allowed to play the leadership role that Senator Obama has been occupying in our brave new “postracial” world – as Obama hinted at in his speech on race? Is the Reverend suffering from a jealously heightened by a form of tragic mulatto-ism?

During our conversation my friend mentioned an interesting factoid of which I was not aware, that if true, adds a further dimension to the discussion. Apparently, the member of President Truman’s inner circle who convinced him to integrate the military was actually a black man “passing” as white. Passing is a phenomenon generally vilified by black folks; a famous fairly recent example is Henry Louis Gate’s posthumous outing of Creole writer Anatole Broyard, resulting in his daughter Bliss’ memoir One Drop. However, since One Drop rule made it traditionally impossible for the biracial leadership to get really close to the annals of power it could only be “passing” blacks or sympathetic whites who could turn the ears of powerful men to do the right thing. I’ve wondered if that ever stuck in the craw of biracials like Gates or Wright who might have had the same vision as an Obama, but the times wouldn’t allow them the space to lead beyond the Jim Crow era race categories.

Obama is messing with black people's minds as much as white's because he is a biracial that is not out there solely representing the black struggle, as was the case for the majority of the Civil Rights leadership of the 20th century. His platform and worldview can be summed up as a rising tide lifts all boats. There is no denying that things are still bad for many black folks and there is a lot of work to be done. However, opportunities for black advancement have improved in the post Civil Rights era -- along with the minds of many white people young and old about the intelligence and leadership capabilities of people of color. If this were not true, Obama would not be winning!

It is precisely because Obama is biracial, not just genetically but also culturally and politically, that many white people feel comfortable in his ability to represent the needs and desires of all Americans not just black ones. His biracial appeal to whites is also the reason why black people eventually came out overwhelmingly in support of him; they recognized that he was being taken as a viable presidential candidate, and not just seen by whites as running for the president of black America.

One drop rule may have once been agreed to by whites and blacks alike – as a necessary mechanism of economic control for the white elite while also a way for blacks to foment solidarity for the freedom struggle. But in President Obama’s America will it still be necessary or even possible? Will newly biologically white folks (read: passing) need to hide African descent in order to advocate for black advancement when there is a bi-racial president advocating for all people's advancement? When there are blacks, biracials and other people of color (not proportionally representative but getting there, albeit slowly) in leadership positions in government, business, academia and media across the board? And just where does that leave the Reverend Wrights of the world?



Technorati Tags: - - - - - - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Friday, July 27, 2007

Prison Thriller

Complete with transvestite love interest, this 1,500 strong production of Thriller by the Cebu Provincial Detention and Rehabilitation Center in Cebu, Philippines proves Jacko is still the king of pop.






Technorati Tags: - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Thursday, July 26, 2007

Montessori's School of Hard Knocks

Hip hop finally joins the fray in attempting to reverse the literacy crisis among young black American boys. Effective or tasteless? You be the judge...





Technorati Tags: - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Monday, July 02, 2007

Latifah is to Diana as Angelina is to Pearl?

Todd Boyd, professor of critical studies at the USC School of Cinematic Arts, makes the ridiculous claim here that Angelina Jolie playing the role of the multi-racial widow of slain journalist Daniel Pearl is akin to Queen Latifah acting the part of Princess Diana.




















Purportedly part Iroquois, actress Angelina Jolie (above left) is pictured next to widow Marianne Pearl (above right), who was nicknamed "my mulatta" by husband Pearl.





Queen Latifah pictured above her doppelganger Lady Di.


Technorati Tags: - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Friday, February 16, 2007

My Day Job

StoryCorps Griot is a national oral history project that is designed to collect the stories of African Americans. An airstream trailer outfitted with a soundproof recording studio will travel around the country for the next year to reach out to nearly 2,000 families. Yesterday, I welcomed the press to its Atlanta launch.







WABE's Senior Vice President John Weatherford introduces me.














Weatherford and I standby as Griot's first interview participant Reverend Chuck Barlow tells the audience about his work in the community.

















Reverend Barlow, Barlow's sister Cheryl, and WABE Board member Kevin Ross listen in.

















Photos courtesy of David Barasoain


Technorati Tags:
- - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Monday, February 05, 2007

Negro Hysteria Month

This Onion satire, which a good friend sent to me, brilliantly encapsulates so much of what is wrong with Black History Month.

Nation To Celebrate First-Ever Black History Month History Week
February 5, 2007 | Issue 43•06

WASHINGTON, DC—Saying the time had come for America to recognize "some of its most unsung heroes," President Bush issued a statement Tuesday announcing the creation of Black History Month History Week, which is to be held in the last seven days of February and will honor the men and women who pioneered the commemoration of Black History Month.

Nation To

Officials unveil a new commemorative Gerald Ford stamp.



Technorati Tags:
-


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Saturday, January 20, 2007

The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend?

In the clip below, Dr. Marc Lamont Hill discusses on Fox News Live Desk why the black leadership hasn't yet come out in full support of Barack Obama's presidential candidacy. Republican strategist Leslie Sanchez nails the fears of the established black leadership on the head when she states that "Barack Obama doesn't need a connection with African American leaders to build a connection with African American voters."

The zinger is Martha MacCallum's follow up comment: "Yeah and I don't know, David, you know, politically whether he wants to be going around the country with Al Sharpton."




Dr. Hill assures the panel that the black leadership is not against Obama per se; they just want to to see him "take a stand." A friend of mine has an interesting take on what steps the black leadership may actually take if Obama refuses to "take a stand" and tow their party line:

"Obama's biggest danger may be if the civil rights establishment tries to deliberately sink him by embracing him, accusing mainstream white institutions of "anti-black racism" for campaign tactics against him. I have a feeling that that's a big part of what sunk Harold Ford, Jr., perhaps deliberately by the NAACP, when they made a lot of noise about how campaign ads against him were anti-black racism."

This recent statement may be an indication that those tactics are not so off.


Technorati Tags:
- - - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Tuesday, January 02, 2007

The Year in Review

Two different takes on the highlights of 2006...

from Miguel Cuevas:




from The Electronic Intifada
:



Technorati Tags: - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Wednesday, December 27, 2006

On the Internets...A More Democratic Future?

Lately I've felt the doom and gloom overcome me when reading about the Spanish bears that have stopped hibernating, or the right-wing pile on of Jimmy Carter for stating the obvious, or our pResident's new brilliant strategy for dealing with Iraq. And don''t EVEN get me started on the sorry state of affairs in our own backyard. De Nile is not just a river in Eqypt, know what I'm sayin'? It appears to be flowing straight through the American heartland with no end in sight.

However, this Guardian/UK article posted by Will Hutton on Christmas Eve caught my eye. Hutton argues that 2006 was a vintage year for world-changing ideas - and get this, he means positive ones! His first, and I believe his most interesting point, is the importance of the growth of the web. Perhaps as someone who has been bitten by the blogger bug, I have a bias. But I couldn't agree more that the development of this interconnected web community is a world changing, paradigm shifting event.

Yet, I think he only scratches the surface in his analysis. The West has become a completely mediated environment, and much of the rest of the world is fighting to catch up and follow suit. The impact of media on our daily lives cannot be easily disregarded. Given that reality, the media we consume, how it is produced and by whom, makes a difference.

In film school, we were taught that form = content. This means that the way characters stood next to each other on the screen, or the way the lighting cast a shadow on an object, provided certain visual cues that the audience took meaning from. For instance, this image from The Lady from Shanghai gives the viewer a sense of danger and intrigue about Rita Hayworth's character Elsa Bannister because
the low key lighting shadows so much of her face.

Of course, Hayworth does indeed turn out to be quite the femme fatale, embroiling Orson Welles' character Michal O'Hara in a complex murder plot. Damn, don't these gullible film noir leads see the shadows like we do?!!!!

In any case, the 20th century world of mass media is giving way to the 21st century internet world, and given that form equals content the difference is significant. Sure it's all "mass" media - TV, radio, newspaper, internet - but there are qualitative differences between last century's media and today's. TV, radio and newspapers are all produced by "experts" and "tastemakers" who know what's best for us - what we should know, what we should like and what we should want. These forms of media have become all the more toxic as monied, bottom-line interests have taken further root in the production and distribution processes. All one has to do is take a look at NBC's primetime line-up today and compare it to one from just 5 years ago, and the difference is obvious. And how about CNN's all junk news all the time?

No doubt there are pitfalls to online news (and entertainment) segments produced and posted by Joe Blow from the block. But the fact that Joe Blow can see an event with his own eyes, write about or record it, and then share that information far and (world)wide is revolutionary for its democratic possibilities. It no longer requires enormous sums of cash or access to contribute to the community dialogue. Conceivably all voices can be heard in the internet media production model. Not so much in the corporate controlled mass media world of General Electric's NBC or Clear Channel's Z-100 100.3 FM. Can it be a coincidence that the 20th century, with all its flirtations with fascism and its many forms (Nazis, Stalinists, McCarthy-ites, etc.), was also the century that gave rise to one-way mass communication controlled in the hands of the wealthy and powerful few?

Technorati Tags: - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Two for Tuesday

FAMILY SURVIVAL KIT


A DRAWN TOGETHER CLASSIC



Technorati Tags: -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Two For Tuesday





Technorati Tags: -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Sunday, December 10, 2006

Why Halle Berry and Vanessa Williams are Bad for Black Women

Just about all Americans agree that our society suffers from color prejudice. Many would refuse to openly acknowledge it in such blatant terms, but if pressed would admit that European skin and features are depicted as the most desirable while African skin and features are rated at the bottom of the totem pole. Moreover, they may unconsciously (or even consciously) hold these views themselves.

Celebrities of all stripes understand this reality quite well, an
d act upon it accordingly. Yes, we all agree that "black is beautiful", but when was the last time you saw a black female celebrity consistently wearing her hair without a perm?

Black America suffers from some serious schizophrenia on this issue. Charges of light-skinned bias are issued against the fashion, music and film industries on a regular basis for their choices of representation. But black folks complained little when Halle Berry was described as the first African American woman to win an Oscar. In fact, more often then not when racially mixed celebrities buck the black race patrol and refuse to one drop themselves, the outcry of "sell out" and "race traitor" is not far behind.

With the exception of those biracials who are too light to pass as only black, no
one suffers more from this hypocrisy then black women. Not only are they unable by nature's design to compete with European standards of beauty, they are also forced to contend with so-called black women whom they could never look like either. It seems obvious that black women will only be able to develop healthy self images when authentic representations of their physical traits are depicted. Conversely, this means biracial and mixed raced people who refuse to identify as such will continue to disadvantage black women in their ability to find beauty in their African features, kinky/curly hair and dark skin.

Black Americans do not come in all shades and colors. Vanessa Williams does not descend from a blue-eye
d, light-skinned tribe of Africans kidnapped from the coast of West Africa. She is a multi-generational mix of Africans and Europeans who created her right here on this side of the pond. She is not a black woman. She is not a white woman. She is biracial. The sooner black America understands and accepts this fact, the sooner black people - especially black women - will be able to create attainable standards of beauty for themselves that are healthy and affirming.





Technorati Tags: - - - - - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Saturday, December 09, 2006

The Political Significance of The Flavor of Love



Flava Flav's meteoric rise from sidekick rap hasbeen to pimped out leading man is not just another example of mainstream media's plunge into the depths of mediocrity. It just may equal the final nail in the coffin of Hip Hop as a mainstream source of positive social change in the lives of African Americans.
Formerly one half of the most important political rap group of all time, Flava Flav presently takes minstrelsy to new heights as the monied mac daddy slumming among a harem of 20 video hos for a chance at finding true love. On its face the exploits of the clock slinging lothario are degrading and offensive for the stereotypical way in which women, especially black women, are portrayed as man hungry beasts and black men are hypersexual thugs with only one thing in mind. You won't be finding much in the way of black love on this show.

However, it is this caricature that has been catapulted into the popular culture juxtaposed against the waning significance of counterpart Chuck D that is most instructive. As the front man for Public Enemy, Chuck D was probably the most important political lyricist of the golden age of rap music. Flava Flav's yesman cooning was acceptable solely because it complimented the serious challenge Chuck D's nationalist lyrics posed to mainstream America. In the post Civil Rights era where integration was the (social) law of the land, Public Enemy's
insistence on fighting the powers that be threatened not only the structural racism of white society, but also the efficacy of the Movement and its leadership. Flava Flav's antics confused some and offended others, but smart people understood that he took the heat off of Chuck D to enable those politically challenging messages to see the light of day.

Fast forward 17 years later...Chuck D has seen nowhere near the resurgence in popularity as has his sidekick. His lone regular media outlet bumped him out of a daily primetime morning slot in favor of Jerry Springer. Jerry Springer! The rap icon has been relegated to a Sunday evening talk show that reads more like a description of a James Brown godfather of soul revue than a serious analysis of the day's events. But one has to wonder how much of this is really him. The rank paternalism of a show that insists it's doing its audience (i.e. black people) a favor by delivering news "tidbits" so that they "won't be bored", and because "its positively futile" to think that "journalists can change your unique perspective" with "two hours and one beat to death topic" could hardly be called pro-black or nationalist. But can anyone be surprised of the content when it's produced by Air America - a group of aging white liberals who still haven't figured out that telling people that they just don't know what's good for them is not a winning strategy?

Divorced from each other, the political agency of either partner has been inverted. Chuck D's message of black self sufficiency and black political power has actually become the opposite within the framework of Air America's programming. True it's sad, but hitched to the wagon of the bankrupt station, his redlining has less of an impact than the explosion of Flav's cooning on the pop culture scene. Any political agency Flava Flav had, was by definition as Chuck D's dissembler. Severed from that role his playacting of minstrelsy actually becomes minstrelsy.
One wonders when watching Flav today if he ever understood the nature of the game Public Enemy was playing. If not, he is one of the biggest dupes of all time. If so, he is one of the biggest sell outs of all time. Of these evils, can one really pick the lesser?



Technorati Tags: - - - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz



Monday, December 04, 2006

Can There Be Any Doubt Now That American Democracy Is Finished?

Leading up to the mid-term congressional elections I had many a conversation with friends who were estatic about the impending Democratic take over. The endless Republican scandals spelled doom for the party, my friends insisted, and Bush's wave of terror on both the Iraqi and American people would soon come to an end.

My expectations were far less optimistic.
The Republican alternative was just not all that great to begin with. As the loyal opposition the Democrats have done little to protect the interests of the American people in the face of the Constitution-busting Bush juggernaught. One party rule has certainly enabled the Bush administration to steam roll over our democracy. But the Democrats give new meaning to the phrase "who needs enemies when we've got friends like these?" Having done absolutely nothing of substance to even attempt to slow the Republican roll, minority party or not, the Democrats were no more likely to change the course of the country while in a position of power, either. They, too, are slaves to corporate interests just like their pachydermal cousins.

Not to mention, we have suffered two elections packed with vote fraud that virtually no one within the political elite lifted a finger to address in any substantial way. We know Gore actually won, and it appears that Kerry probably did too, despite himself. The mainstream media waited until the last minute to focus on our broken democratic process, and in doing so at such a focused and intense level just prior to the election may have made voters feel powerless and stay home. After all, those Diebold machines weren't going to accurately register your choice anyway, so why bother showing up to the polls?

But no matter how much Karl Rove insisted he was Archimedes, and the mainstream pundits minimized the sound beating about to be doled out to their great white hope, the Democrats swept both the House and the Senate. Pundits were reluctantly forced to conclude that the vote was a referendum on the Iraq War and Republican malfeasance - and the American people gave a resounding "NO!!!!" to the whole kit and kaboodle. The world engaged in a collective sigh of relief as it became clear that the American people were not completely out of the minds after all.

This December 1 NYTimes article by David Sanger, however, confirms my prediction that none of it would matter anyway. The Democrats are soundly in bed with the Republicans on this thing. Liberals have been making excuses for this completely lame, so-called party of the people based on their inability to wield power from a minority position. I can think of at least two different minority groups in world history that made their all-powerful opposition eat it. The Democratic Party is for the most part composed of a group of rich white American men - the most powerful and privileged people in the history of the world! So what's their fucking excuse?

Wake up America! The first step to recovery is admitting we are in denial.
We can call Chavez authoritarian all we want, but at least he won an overwhelming majority of the Venezuelan votes cast - twice. We can no longer call it a democracy when the people we vote for refuse to do what we've voted them in to do.

Technorati Tags: - - - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Tuesday, November 28, 2006

How Ironic is this Picture?


Comedian Michael Richards apologizing for his use of the "n" word on Nov. 17 at a club show in West Hollywood. Is that Jesse Jackson he's pictured with?





Technorati Tags:
- -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Monday, June 26, 2006

We’re Here! We’re Queer! Get Used to It?

The atmosphere was merry as I walked along 7th Ave yesterday with my brother who was back from Indiana for the summer. Now a vegan and unable to chow down on the customary college kid cuisine (burger n’ fries, pizza, et al), he required more humane, meatless fare. So we chose Gobo, a vegetarian joint right smack in the middle of all the gay festivities.

We left the serene confines of the West Village restaurant for the raucous street atmosphere, and immediately I was annoyed. This was not at all like me as I normally enjoy a good party. In fact, six years earlier I had marched in PrideFest
2000 along side the God’s Love We Deliver float. My sister had been volunteering for the AIDS relief organization and I gladly joined in, pleased that I could simultaneously let loose and support a worth while organization’s efforts.

But this year’s queens were getting on my damned nerves. Ironic as it may be, they just seemed so contrived. Was I getting fag fatigue? Or worse still, becoming a republican?!!! No, no my progressive credentials were still intact. Something else was amiss. It was the fags themselves that were wrong.

All that gender-bended sashaying may once upon a time have been a revolutionary challenge to mainstream sexuality and gender roles. But when straight men willingly allow five men’s queer eyes
to give them the once over on cable TV, when a primetime sitcom about a gay-straight couple who shack up and play married tops the ratings year after year, and when those three annoying little words “you go girl” refuse to evaporate from the national lexicon, you know that gay culture is in no fear of disappearing.

Co-opted by the corporate powers-that-be for mainstream consumption, gayness has been thoroughly diluted and is loosing its edge. The empire has struck back folks and unlike Luke, many of those gay boys are joining their fathers. Plagued by the same bugaboos of the 60s feminist movement, racism and classism, the gay rights movement fell prey to the Faustian bargain
of mainstream acceptance: a place at the table in exchange for adopting the values of America’s patriarchal, supremacist majority.

Mainstreamed gay culture is extremely elitist and subtly racist. The popularity of the show Will & Grace can no doubt be attributed to their fantastic Manhattan living. Could you imagine TV viewers being as interested in Billy Bob & Grace, the story of a closeted middle American high school drop out who shacks up with his pregnant teenaged friend as cover for his “alternative” lifestyle? And how about the “Fab Five”? African Americans have consistently been at the forefront
of cutting edged fashion in the US. Yet, how is it possible to have five gay male leads on a show about fashion tips and not one be black? The coding is all there – to be gay and fabulous one must not be black, or poor (hell not even middle class!). So much for that famed Stonewall "rebellion” against the powers-that-be.

And the propaganda is clearly working, as evidenced in the instructive documentary Flag Wars
about the gay-driven gentrification of the working class black community of Columbus, Ohio. In one memorable scene a wealthy white realtor, Nina Masseria, rails on camera in a drunken fit about the local blacks’ unworthiness to own property. In real life, it appears that this dike’s racism isn’t so subtle (Oh Oscar Wilde, you genius you). This same situation has replicated itself in other formally black neighborhoods like Boston’s South End, where now in an ironic twist gays are being priced out by even more upwardly mobile (mostly white) breeders. Faustian bargain, indeed.

In short, gays have ARRIVED and all the tactics they put into place to get themselves here now seem unnecessary, passé even. We know you’re here, and we’ve gotten used to it. Now what?

Technorati Tags: - - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Friday, June 23, 2006

Engulfed by Katrina: Photographs Before And After The Storm

Curated by Deborah Willis Ph.D. and Hank Willis Thomas

Artists: Marc Asnin * Harold Baquet * Nathan Bassuouni * Charlene Braud * Keith Calhoun * Gerald Cyrus D. Michael Cheers * Cheryl Finley * Vangy Franklin * Russell Frederick * Delphine Fawundu-Buford Lonnie Graham * Wyatt Gallery * William Greiner * Jessica Ingram * Chester Higgins Jr. * Eric Julien Melvina Lathan * Chandra McCormick * John Pinderhuges * Joe Rodriguez * Benjamin Orion Rush * Sophia Schechner * Will Steacey * Frank Stewart * Eric Waters * Lewis Watts * Carla Williams Clarence Williams * Nathaniel Ward

On View: June 15 – September 22, 2006

Opening Reception: June 29, 2006, 6-9pm

The Nathan Cummings Foundation
475 Tenth Avenue (14th Floor) Between 36th & 37th Streets
New York, NY 10018
RSVP – (646) 485-1284
For private viewing please contact Karen Garrett (212) 787-7300, ext.206.

This exhibition project examines and interprets the experience of Katrina on the Gulf Coast. Featuring more than 80 photographs, this thematic exhibition will explore the devastation of cities within the Gulf Coast, as well as life before and after the storm. The focus of the show is to fulfill the promise made by everyone almost immediately after the event which was to not let the impact of this horrific experience be forgotten. The exhibition will invite viewers to recall their own experiences of watching the events unfold on television, and attempt to counter the complacency that has already set in the aftermath of this on-going tragedy and to "re-member" images of the city.

Technorati Tags: -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz




Thursday, June 22, 2006

Some Happenings on the Other Side of the Pond...

What: RISE short film festival
When: Sun 2 July 1-3pm
Where: Tricycle Cinema

The Tricycle Cinema is screening a selection of shorts celebrating London's cultural diversity, made by members of London's black and ethnic minority communities as part of the RISE FESTIVAL (formerly RESPECT). Including films by Lawrence Coke (winner of the BFM Best Short Film 2005/Images of Black Women Film Festival), Julius Amedume and Wayne Campbell. Q & A with a panel that includes some of the writers, directors and performers featured will follow the screening. Tickets are FREE and are available from the Box Office 020 7328 1000.

Technorati Tags: - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Monday, June 19, 2006

Al Gore is a Marketing Genius

Check out An Inconvenient Truth’s MY SPACE page for the “artist on artist” interview. Mos Def interviews Al Gore about global warming, and asks why the former presidential hopeful thinks it’s the most important domestic and foreign policy issue for the 21st century.

At one fell swoop not only does Gore recast himself as an “artist” as opposed to a failed political figure, but he does it on MY SPACE, which even with the flap over their fine print
is the (virtual) place to see and be seen. Everybody who is anybody is on MY SPACE. Guess it comes easy for the man who invented the internet to know how to exploit it.

Not to mention, Gore’s hipness factor increased about 500% by appearing with hip hop icon Mos Def. (Hmmm…seems straight outta the Clinton playbook, yet slightly modified. Ditch the triangulation
, but keep the miscegenation.) The “Mighy Mos” is hands down the most important hip hop artist today. Through his various film and TV roles he’s garnered mainstream cross-over appeal, while maintaining mad street cred among EVERY segment of the notoriously divergent hip hop community. (Remember East Coast vs. West Coast?).

Whether Mos’ mass appeal translates over to Gore is yet to be determined, but it’s a safe bet that a lot more young people, black and non-black alike, will see the film. Fan or not, hip hop is where it’s at! Those who ignore its power as the race-crossing (or class, or gender, or fill-in-the-blank) worldwide cultural force that it is risk going the way of the Dodo bird. Perhaps Al got hip to the game after he read this?

Technorati Tags: - - - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Saturday, June 03, 2006

The Iraq War, Journalist Killings and the Problem of Leftwing Media

As I got ready for work Friday morning I engaged in my regular routine, which is to get dressed while listening to WBAI's Wake Up Call morning show with Mario Murillo. He had a guest on from some association dedicated to protecting the rights of journalists, especially during wartime. The interview was sparked by the recent news that two CBS news crew members had been killed with a third seriously injured while reporting in Iraq.

The representative of the association (I think it was Reporters Without Borders, but don't quote me on that) said that the number of journalist deaths over decades of the Vietnam War was far less than the close to 100 who have been killed in Iraq the last three years. She then recounted the plight of an Italian journalist who was held hostage by an Iraqi terrorist group. As a condition of the journalist's release, the terrorist group demanded the release of Iraqi women imprisioned at Abu Ghraib and the ouster of Italian troops from Iraq. The representative opined how this situation was such a shame because the journalist had lost her objectivity in the eyes of the Iraqis, and had now become a symbol of the Italian government. The host Murillo signaled his agreement.

At that moment I was suddenly pulled out of the conversation, and my mind began to ponder the exchange a little closer. Something didn't seem right to me. In fact, wasn't the kidnapped journalist a symbol of the Italian government?

This discussion was taking place on a leftwing, American alternative media outlet. One of the very groups that criticizes the "embedded" mainstream journalists riding around with US troops in Basra. One of the very groups that regularly denounces these corporate-funded, mainstream journalists precisely because they become the defacto propaganda arm of their government.

If the American alternative news media can recognize mainstream news journalists for the purveyors of propaganda that they are, what makes them think that Iraqis can't? Sure, it's easy to wax poetic about the imperative of protecting journalists during wartime from the safety of your Wall Street studio, but the embattled Iraqis who are experiencing an illegal US-led occupation, neo-colonial style, don't have that luxury. Most Iraqis can't start up their own grassroots radio to offer an alternate version of events. They're too busy trying to survive being massacred by US marines.

By no means do I advocate the killing of journalists. But the leftwing alternative news media can't have it both ways. With this logic, Iraqis can challenge the official story (and by extension the occupation) only if it's done by the rules as laid out by the West. The whole thing stinks of a paternalism that is endemic to the Left, and explains why leftwing groups continue to find it hard to build enduring coalitions across race and class lines.

Cuz the bottom line is this: if an NYPD swat team invaded my apartment building to root out the gang members that were allegedly hiding out there and then 1) bombed out the first floor 2) killed all the women and children on the next three floors 3) rounded up and tortured the men on the fifth floor, and then finally came knocking on my door - cop, embedded journalist or whatever - I'd shoot first and ask questions later. And anyone else fearful for their life would, too.


Technorati Tags: - - - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz