>you believe that marketing is a reflection of a pre-existing >reality - where consumers sell the product and marketers serve >as a medium to mass communication, letting folks in oregon >know that the latest styles in new york are mid-high kicks >with the jumpman label.
>i wasn't around in the 70's, so i can't speak to shaft and >foxy brown, but shift the gaze for a second. italian-americans >began to gain ACCESS (not control) to media around the same >time.
I'd recommend Baadasssss Cinema because the first ten minutes sets the political climate of the time and explains Hollywood's role. Because of the success of Sweet, Sweetback...only one door was open for Black filmmakers and actors.
>did we throw pimps, gangsters, hustlers and promiscuous women >into our films? yeah, and it's the "hollywood shuffle" (robert >townsend) that got a lot of black folks in through the back >door.
I love Hollywood Shuffle and what it spoofs. Aaaafros!!!
>i'll let you in on a secret >(it was 'cause white folks thoughts have special powers : ) >it's because these images are powerful. and here's the most >important argument that you can present to me - i'm calling >for control of these images...in other words i'm calling for >censorship, like the far-right wing conservatives of the >republican party, i want to control what you see, what you >hear, and what leads you to your final purchase. from my >perspective it's control for a good cause. more realistic >images of blacks will lead to a more critical viewing >audience, and ultimately reflect reality.
>see - this entire discussion is about the lack of control. >nobody believes that "whitey" is controlling our images.
>but i'm really starting to believe that k'orr was right, >and you think pimps, hustlers, pushers...are reflections of >reality and that's why they sell - so there's no point in the >question 'cause there is no common ground. > >>WHO WOULD THRIVE "NOT"PUSHING THESE IMAGES!?!? > >anyone trying to reach a black consumer base. only those >trying to reach the general "white" market would thrive, and >they'd thrive because of sheer numbers.