Guest Contribution & Commentary
by Donnaire W.
By now, all of you have either heard about or watched CNN's "Black in America" series that aired back in July. I was not a big fan of the series for a variety of reasons. To learn what those reasons are, check out my commentary on the series here and here.
Now I have yet another very important perspective on the series to share with you - a black man's. Welcome a very dear Sauda Voice friend and family member to the guest blogger fold, Donnaire W. Donnaire shares a piece by Askia Muhammad followed by his personal commentary on the Black in America series. Enjoy family!
***************************************************************************************************************CNN's Faulty Portrait of "Black in America"
by Askia Muhammad
One scholar I spoke with said that he did not see the
program. By way of explanation, he said that he doesn’t watch much television
at all. Maybe that too is my problem
with the program. I don’t watch enough other
TV. In my view, the report seemed to borrow stylistically from
some of television’s more successful formats. In order, here are the things that stood
out:
Each segment was introduced by what
seemed like a BET or MTV-wannabe. During
each segment transition, a young man spoke in faux rhymes, as if to slightly suggest a muted, very toned-down hip
hop artist, articulating his message rather than rapping it.
Host Soledad O’Brien seemed to be kind of an
Oprah-in-waiting, charming, friendly, helping participants recall decades-old
experiences, even taking them back for nostalgic strolls down memory lane,
helping make their worst dreams come alive again.
There was even a Jerry Springer-show-like confrontation
between an absent father holding his one-year-old daughter, while his baby’s
mama (now pregnant with twins fathered by another man) accused him of neglect. It was theater meets
journalism meets reality TV all-in-one.
As far as the substance is concerned, the show reflected
what must be the “New Breed” of Black thinkers and leaders: Dr. Michael Eric
Dyson instead of Dr. Cornell West or other militant intellectuals; comedian
D.L. Hugely but not Dick Gregory or Bill Cosby; and filmmaker Spike Lee was in,
but the Rev. Jesse Jackson was not. And
the report seemed to center around Little Rock, Arkansas (which doesn’t even have a major league franchise
in any popular sport), not Atlanta, not
Harlem, not Chicago,
not Detroit.
The most offensive of the program’s content: There was only one very, very oblique reference to the most important change-agent among Black men in 20th
Century America - The Nation of Islam - and that came by way of a brief mention
of the poor commercial success of Spike Lee’s film “Malcolm X.” In that regard, there were many, many church
scenes, including one in which the pastor is now known by an African name, but
there was not one mention of the life-changing work of other Black leaders and
their followers and supporters.
The Black in America program began with 1968 and the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr. It discussed how young black men
responded in Little Rock, but never mentioned
the Vietnam
anti-war resistance, Muhammad Ali, the Black Panthers, and the many other major
figures on the national Black American scene during the late 1960s, early 1970s
and beyond.
Sure, much deserved attention was given to Black men in
prison, most petty criminals and some who committed felonies. But where were the black political prisoners
in this report? George Jackson, members
of the Black Liberation Army, members of the Republic of New Africa,
major figures in the 1970s? Beginning in
1981, Mumia Abu Jamal was and is an important figure, a political prisoner, along with countless others still behind
bars.
Granted, 1968 was a long, long time ago in this country when
youth was prized above wisdom and proper guidance. But not a single word about
the miraculous work and unmatched achievements of the former slaves of this
nation? In my book, this is a major
credibility problem.
After viewing this report through the un-erring lens of
hindsight, there is no reason why Islam (which has increased in importance
exponentially over the last 40 years in this country, not decreased), the
question of Black Identity, and reparations for slavery were not part of CNN’s
discussion, except to say, “It was not that kind of a party.”
It seems to me that CNN invested a lot of money and
resources into “tweaking” the history of Black
Men in America so that the last 40 years resembled a series of unfortunate
circumstances for some Black men, while others, who were willing to “act White”
and pursue educational opportunities, were able to “make it” by getting nice
jobs, nice cars, and nice homes in nice integrated neighborhoods. In so doing with this report, CNN was able to
make what many black men have rejected as the “American Nightmare” now appear
to be the “New American Dream.”
Donnaire W's Take:
This is an unfortunate situation on the part of
CNN. The money and time invested in this
special was a waste in both time and resources. I feel that this was either an inability of CNN’s investigative reporters
to dig deep into Black culture, or a calculated attempt to, once again, air our
dirty laundry in front of the world. This
was an attempt at embarrassing us once again, to demoralize our self-worth even
more than our high school history books already do. This was of no use to Black
people. Most blacks already know this
information and/or have family members who are dealing with some, if not all,
of these issues. In my opinion, this was nothing more than a Black-sploitation
documentary. As for the host Soledad O’Brien, it’s sad that she exploited her
1/3 blackness to advance her career. And
for those who say that this program was not for black people, then why was it
advertised heavily on the Steve Harvey Show,
amongst a host of other traditionally black TV and radio venues. And if it was
intended for whites, then only God can help us!!
Recent Comments
Light Skin/Dark Skin Divide
Lou Jing