I largely agree with all that you've said here. Your analysis of the current state of blacks in the media is a riveting as it is informative. Since my area of expertise is in education, not in media sciences, I'll defer to almost all of what you said there. A couple of points:

>As far as your comments go about the dynamics of the
>relationship of the youth to education, that's all good
>information. When I refer to an ambivalent attitude toward
>education, I am not just speaking about the youth--it is a
>problem that exists among us across generations, in my
>experience. The young people have it because they have
>learned it from the older folks.

True, and I was only speaking directly to the context that you and k orr got into, that is kids in school, you know the ones that don't value education and don't respect authority. I certainly understand, though, that the issue is systemic and generational.

>As for the media issue, there has obviously been a long
>tradition of negative portrayals of blacks in American media
>(i.e. minstrelsy), but it is important to understand that
>the early minstrelsy stuff was done by *whites* in
>blackface, not blacks.

Indeed.

>What has happened today is that the people in the
>entertainment industry don't *need* whites such as Al Jolson
>or Eddie Cantor to make us look like fools, because there
>are *blacks* who are quite willing to portray even the most
>ignorant stereotypes about us.
>Before anybody brings up the example of Amos 'n Andy, or
>anything like that, they need to remember that those cats
>*had* to do that if they wanted to work at all--there was no
>other choice in those days. Nowadays, the country has
>supposedly 'come so far' in dealing with overt racism--so
>why does so much of current black entertainment continue to
>resemble a modern version of Amos 'n Andy--but worse? It's
>even worse because while Amos 'n Andy were portrayed as
>buffoons, they weren't glorifying violence, drug dealing, or
>the prison life.

Sure the modern portrayals are in many ways, *worse*. But the motivations of these thespians are in many ways the same as there minstrel forefathers: to get paid. It's the hollywood shuffle syndrome, brah. They get offered a spot in the movie to play a thug, or are offered a record deal with the understanding that they wll adhere to a certain image and sound, and they take it, regardless of their desires or wealth of talent. I don't think its fair to say that blacks "had to" take those roles way back when, because if your poor or even middle class today, and you know you can instantly raise your economic standing by rapping, acting, writing in these ways, you face the same fundamental dilemma that Bert Williams and others faced.

>To be sure, the situation has *never* been good for us in
>the media, but anybody who is old enough to remember knows
>full well that the situation has become much worse in the
>last 10-14 years or so. I think that this is the biggest
>part of the 'generation gap' part of this issue--the gap
>occurs because people who are younger than a certain age
>don't really have any direct knowledge of a time when blacks
>were *not* portrayed in the negative way that they are
>today, so they can't understand why somebody like Cosby
>takes such exception to what is going on.
>The fact is that 30 or 40 years ago, while there were
>negative portrayals of blacks that could be seen in the
>media, blacks were more *invisible* than anything else. For
>example, You didn't really have sitcoms or serialized TV
>shows specifically about blacks, with large all-black casts
>and stereotypically 'black' content, until the 1970s.

While these facts are true, the impact is subject to debate. From what I know, the protrayal of blacks in the media has always corresponded with certain social and political agendas.
The early minstrel shows featured white characters playing on the childlike follies of the sambo, and suggested a certain need for caretaking on the part of white america (a certain slavery nostalgia). Later, as blacks began to compete with whites for economic position after the migration north, you saw a more savage portrayal of blacks, particularly in film (Birth of a Nation, anyone?) Over time blacks have been seen in more human light, but still rarely represent the wholistic and rounded dramatic figures that we have today, as illustrated by the oscar drought (and I won't get into the irony of the eventual wins). Also, let's remember that this historical negative and one-demensional portrayal of blacks came at a time when there was far less interaction between blacks and whites. If you went to a mistrel show, that might be the only thing you know about black america. I wouldn't underestimate the impact of those portrayals, even when today there seems to be more pervasive negative images. Also, while today there are certainly a lot of negative images in the media of blacks, there are definitely WAY MORE positive ones. Thus, while white america gets a dose of 50 cent, it also gets a dose of Smart Guy.

Whereas 20,50, or 100 years ago the media portrayal lead to a more universal characterization of blacks, the danger today, in my opinion, is two-fold:
1) A perceived black dichotomy, where white americans begin to characterize the urban black underclass with these negative perceptions and view successful blacks as a different breed
2) The fact that black youth tend to identify with the negative media images rather than more positive ones.

The effects on our youth are alarming, and the irony of who's really behind the mass production of these images, as you point our, is a huge problem.

In all, I wouldn't characterize the media protrayals today as more problematic than they have been historically. They're just problematic in a different way. And I don't think that the prominence of thug images is the reason whites have "turned their back on us." In Fact, I tend to think that it's more because of the visibile economic success that the black middle class has had. It gives them someone to point to and say, "Look, it's possible! Stop whinning."

“We have to face the very
real possibility that the
President of the United
States is loony tunes” -
unnamed Republican source

"Don't hang up on Karl
Malone!"