Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby General Discussion topic #13354603

Subject: "Is Byron Allen a genius or the greatest snake oil salesmen ever?" Previous topic | Next topic
ThaTruth
Charter member
89038 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 03:02 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"Poll question: Is Byron Allen a genius or the greatest snake oil salesmen ever?"


  

          

Breakfast Club interview: https://youtu.be/gEsMFlh1MLk

It's over an hour long, clips have been released but it really needs to be watched in it's entirety to hear his full story and see the holes in it

Poll result (6 votes)
genius (4 votes)Vote
snake oil salesman (2 votes)Vote
I'm white (0 votes)Vote

  

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top


Topic Outline
Subject Author Message Date ID
I perceive him as Tyler Perry-ish.
Nov 02nd 2019
1
what's low quality to you might be high to someone else tho
Nov 02nd 2019
4
I think it’s interesting that he made a big deal about being able to.....
Nov 02nd 2019
6
Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 possibly being struck down
Nov 02nd 2019
2
Oh and, btw, only a handful of CBC members even signed an amicus brief
Nov 02nd 2019
3
wild n/m
Nov 02nd 2019
5
I think you have to look at his history with politics and the CBC...
Nov 02nd 2019
7
I know what you mean, and I believe he spoke to some of that in the
Nov 02nd 2019
10
congress isn’t voting on this, an “amicus brief” is literally a...
Nov 02nd 2019
12
      I never said they were. And I get that you clearly have reservations
Nov 02nd 2019
13
he said obama bailed out the banks.
Nov 04th 2019
25
He owns The Grio btw so anything from there should be taken with...
Nov 02nd 2019
8
      I hear where you're coming from but... I just don't think the case
Nov 02nd 2019
9
           He’s the one playing both sides...
Nov 02nd 2019
11
yup. we should care about this case because of precedent
Nov 03rd 2019
14
He's a smart ass snake oil salesman who owns the weather channel
Nov 03rd 2019
15
Really?! You don’t say
Nov 03rd 2019
16
      i take it that you're not a fan
Nov 04th 2019
19
Arctic Dogs BOMBED
Nov 04th 2019
17
kids saw it..loved it lol
Nov 04th 2019
23
I think he's trying to force a settlement
Nov 04th 2019
18
Yeah more power to him but this is all a PR campaign to give him leverag...
Nov 04th 2019
20
He WON his appeals though. THEY escalated to Supreme Court instead
Nov 04th 2019
21
I’m specifically talking about going on the radio show
Nov 05th 2019
28
nah its headed to the supreme court with the sole purpose
Nov 04th 2019
24
      I don’t believe it’s that pre-determined
Nov 05th 2019
29
He was NEVER Black until now, still hope he wins though.
Nov 04th 2019
22
His lone ask of the Obama administration was to bring in Black
Nov 06th 2019
33
rupert murdoch is his idol.
Nov 04th 2019
26
He said Jesus wants more billionaires. LOL.
Nov 05th 2019
27
& listening to him on Maron's WTF, back in September
Nov 06th 2019
31
Oh I feel him on this tip...like BIG TIME!!!
Nov 07th 2019
35
he exploits loopholes
Nov 06th 2019
30
How so?
Nov 06th 2019
32
Niether
Nov 06th 2019
34
What’s at Stake in Byron Allen’s Supreme Court Showdown with Comcast
Nov 13th 2019
36

Monkey Genius
Member since Mar 04th 2005
8032 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 04:21 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
1. "I perceive him as Tyler Perry-ish. "
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

Maybe a little smarter.

Making big money through low quality output.

----------------------------------
I have a webcomic: www.watchthecomic.com

My webcomic has a page: www.facebook.com/watchyourheadcomic

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Damali
Member since Sep 12th 2002
33816 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 06:38 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
4. "what's low quality to you might be high to someone else tho"
In response to Reply # 1


          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ThaTruth
Charter member
89038 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 07:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
6. "I think it’s interesting that he made a big deal about being able to....."
In response to Reply # 1


  

          

control content that would shape his black(biracial) children the when asked about the black shows produced by his networks all he could come up with was Meet the Blacks which was pretty funny but not exactly a piece to shape the black community.

Then at the end when asked what he and his companies specifically were doing for the black community he said “hey I’m here talking to you!” then started preaching lol

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

kfine
Member since Jan 11th 2009
1163 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 06:13 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
2. "Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 possibly being struck down"
In response to Reply # 0
Sat Nov-02-19 06:13 PM by kfine

          

by the Supreme Court because Comcast and 45s DOJ want to make an example of him is a far scarier takeaway from that interview. It's excellent and should be required watching for any minority in the US right now. And watch/listen all the way through bc he doesn't get to the case until towards the end.

I can't believe more people aren't talking about the case tbh... doesn't it have implications for not only racial discrimination claims, but even reparations??

Like, it's crazy that there's SO MUCH OTHER fuckshit going on that a repeal of literally the first civil rights statute enacted to protect black people in America doesn't even make news. 45 literally trying to pick up where Andrew Johnson left off in 2019.

A summary of the reconstruction-era law that's at stake:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1866

SCOTUS hearing is Nov. 13

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
kfine
Member since Jan 11th 2009
1163 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 06:23 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
3. "Oh and, btw, only a handful of CBC members even signed an amicus brief"
In response to Reply # 2


          


to support this man:

https://thegrio.com/2019/10/30/which-members-of-the-cbc-have-spoken-up-about-the-attack-on-the-civil-rights-act-of-1866/


Like damn. The CBC can't even summon enough party discipline to stand up against a clear attempt to roll back the law underpinning the 13th Amendment? If not them, then who??

Shameful.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
J305
Member since Dec 07th 2008
7187 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 07:27 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
5. "wild n/m"
In response to Reply # 3


  

          

peace

J305
___________________

People of color are NOT a minority. Think Global.

Don't Let Hollywood fool you.

http://www.twitter.com/Jtronic
http://www.last.fm/user/Jtronic

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
ThaTruth
Charter member
89038 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 07:44 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
7. "I think you have to look at his history with politics and the CBC..."
In response to Reply # 3


  

          

he flip-flopped on Obama a couple of times in this interview he’s a salesman and an opportunist

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
kfine
Member since Jan 11th 2009
1163 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 08:47 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
10. "I know what you mean, and I believe he spoke to some of that in the "
In response to Reply # 7


          


interview re: campaign donations and other unsavoury tactics to quell their advocacy

But it's still very disappointing. Like if the SCOTUS rules to roll back this statute's protections, the CBC is gonna look mad weak in the history books.

If the caucus can't even voltron against an attempt to defang the 13th amendment, what are they doing? Like if there's any fight they should be united on, it's something like this.

Starting to look like a damn coffee club up in there.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
ThaTruth
Charter member
89038 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 09:09 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
12. "congress isn’t voting on this, an “amicus brief” is literally a..."
In response to Reply # 10


  

          

piece of paper

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
kfine
Member since Jan 11th 2009
1163 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 09:38 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
13. "I never said they were. And I get that you clearly have reservations"
In response to Reply # 12
Sat Nov-02-19 09:38 PM by kfine

          

about Byron Allen, but come on lol an amicus brief serves a bit more purpose than as "a piece of paper" in legal proceedings.

I mean, one could argue what good congressional advocacy would even do given what the right wing has done to the judiciary, incl. the Supreme Court. But for the vast majority of the caucus to be silent on this? Wack.

You don't find it even a little bothersome that the current admin's DOJ filed an amicus brief in "support" of undermining this statute?? Comcast's literally giving them some of its time that day to argue with in front of the Court. Admin's super pressed to insert themselves in this case and it's slightly fucked up.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Reeq
Member since Mar 11th 2013
7644 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 09:26 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
25. "he said obama bailed out the banks."
In response to Reply # 7


  

          

which isnt true (gw bush did).

its like when people say obama withdrew the troops from iraq too early (when gw bush signed the status of forces agreement before obama was inaugurated).

his 'access to capital' demand sounds like some abstract ballroom seminar talk to persuade casuals. obama had some pretty wide ranging policies that directly addressed racial disparities (particularly black) in banking, auto loans, education, etc.

------

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
ThaTruth
Charter member
89038 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 07:48 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
8. "He owns The Grio btw so anything from there should be taken with..."
In response to Reply # 3


  

          

multiple grains of salt

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
kfine
Member since Jan 11th 2009
1163 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 08:37 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
9. "I hear where you're coming from but... I just don't think the case "
In response to Reply # 8
Sat Nov-02-19 08:56 PM by kfine

          

warrants a "both sides" take at this point. The statute at stake underpins the 13th amendment. Supreme Court is a big deal. The case is real. The statute is real. And it'll be on record which members of congress did or did not speak out about this clear attack on a fundamental civil rights statute that a Congress over 100 years ago passed to advance reconstruction.

I don't think a complicated opinion on Obama matters a whole lot in this context (besides, Byron can join the club. a lot of people have lobbed criticisms since Ob's sheen wore off).

And I would argue "Thank God" Byron owns The Grio; at least there's one platform regularly reporting about the case lol. Most of the only articles you can find talking about it are Grio articles, very little MSM. Which is disappointing (although perhaps not surprising) given the serious implications of the Supreme Court's ruling.

It's almost as though Byron's case is being used to levy a quiet but highly coordinated effort (by the private sector and gov) to dismantle statutory support for claims of discrimination or reparations... hmmm I wonder why...

https://twitter.com/HuffPost/status/1141378858731487232

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
ThaTruth
Charter member
89038 posts
Sat Nov-02-19 09:00 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
11. "He’s the one playing both sides..."
In response to Reply # 9


  

          

It will set a precedence to make it easier to discriminate...

>I don't think a complicated opinion on Obama matters a whole
>lot in this context (besides, Byron can join the club. a lot
>of people have lobbed criticisms since Ob's sheen wore off).

he tries to play the “Obama legalized gay marriage but didn’t do shit for black folks” angle, for one the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage and then towards the end talks about he we need to “partner” with our gay brothers and sisters after trying to separate the agendas for most of his interview.

>And I would argue "Thank God" Byron owns The Grio; at least
>there's one platform regularly reporting about the case lol.
>Most of the only articles you can find talking about it are
>Grio articles, very little MSM. Which is disappointing
>(although perhaps not surprising) given the serious
>implications of the Supreme Court's ruling.
>
>It's almost as though Byron's case is being used to levy a
>quiet but highly coordinated effort (by the private sector and
>gov) to dismantle statutory support for claims of
>discrimination or reparations... hmmm I wonder why...
>

and when he does lose he’s going to go back home to his blonde haired blue eyed wife and continue to make trash tv and not giving a rats ass about black people.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
kayru99
Member since Jan 26th 2004
15622 posts
Sun Nov-03-19 02:48 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
14. "yup. we should care about this case because of precedent"
In response to Reply # 2


          

Allen is an afterthought.
But since Black politics post clinton is such a massive fucking collection of failure
Indie Black Media been on this story for a couple of years now

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

naame
Charter member
20811 posts
Sun Nov-03-19 09:25 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
15. "He's a smart ass snake oil salesman who owns the weather channel"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

He's gonna be printing money

America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ThaTruth
Charter member
89038 posts
Sun Nov-03-19 09:35 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
16. "Really?! You don’t say"
In response to Reply # 15


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
naame
Charter member
20811 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 04:05 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
19. "i take it that you're not a fan"
In response to Reply # 16


  

          



America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

handle
Charter member
16016 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 10:34 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
17. "Arctic Dogs BOMBED"
In response to Reply # 0


          

The movie opened in 2,844 theaters, Early estimates show Arctic Dogs only made $3.1 million.

------------
My prayers have been answered!

Gone
My Discogs collection for The Roots:
http://www.discogs.com/user/tomhayes-roots/collection

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
tomjohn29
Member since Oct 18th 2004
16411 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 08:30 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
23. "kids saw it..loved it lol"
In response to Reply # 17


  

          

______________________________________

Navem nu, cuando sol
Tutu nu, vondo nos nu
Vita em, no continous non
Nos nu ekta nos sepe ta, amen

When the sun shades the ship
We sweat and life is not safe
To swim or to touch not
When we unite we hedge amen

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Cocobrotha2
Charter member
10579 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 10:47 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
18. "I think he's trying to force a settlement"
In response to Reply # 0
Mon Nov-04-19 10:48 AM by Cocobrotha2

          

He mentions the cable companies originally wanted to settle this issue AFTER he gave up his suit, which would put him in a weak position in negotiations.

I think him going public now is trying to shame them into talking numbers NOW.

I think his rhetoric is generally positive and uplifting but the fact he usually moves rather quietly made me take a step back and wonder why he's going public NOW?

The only thing I can think of is that he wants to tie this albatross around the cable company's necks. It's not like public opinion will sway the Surpreme Court... or black public opinion will sway this administration.

No, he's got to threaten their dollars by making it look like they're trying to take racial progress back 200 years.

Again, I really don't have a problem with the ideas he mentioned on that interview but he is being a little indirect about his ultimate goals. He wants that check.

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Buddy_Gilapagos
Charter member
44480 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 04:45 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
20. "Yeah more power to him but this is all a PR campaign to give him leverag..."
In response to Reply # 18


  

          

in negotiations. The only downside I see is if it reaches the Supreme Court and they end up striking down the Civil Rights Act or other civil rights in this case that, from what I have read, seems weak.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
kfine
Member since Jan 11th 2009
1163 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 06:47 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
21. "He WON his appeals though. THEY escalated to Supreme Court instead"
In response to Reply # 18
Mon Nov-04-19 06:49 PM by kfine

          

of just going to him to settle the $20B he originally sued for, or whatever they could negotiate...

Not to mention then partnering with the DOJ on it. Seems like "they" are the ones trying to manipulate the situation against him. The DOJ getting involved is a whole other layer of shadiness, no?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Cocobrotha2
Charter member
10579 posts
Tue Nov-05-19 11:42 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
28. "I’m specifically talking about going on the radio show"
In response to Reply # 21


          

I don’t see much value in appealing to the public right now unless he’s trying to use it as leverage to get them to drop their case and just cut him a check.

On the other hand, It’s really late in the game to be doing this so maybe it’s just a way for him to steer the narrative a little bit before the oral arguments.

This all certainly isn’t altruistic. He made it clear he was insulted they didn’t try to settle with him the normal way so he’d go back to building his empire privately if they cut him a big enough check.

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Reeq
Member since Mar 11th 2013
7644 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 09:20 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
24. "nah its headed to the supreme court with the sole purpose"
In response to Reply # 18


  

          

of overturning the precedent (supreme court picked it up from appeals court for a reason). and thats exactly with the doj signed on to it.

anyone keeping track of the john roberts court for the last few years (and the barr doj) knows the program by now.

------

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Cocobrotha2
Charter member
10579 posts
Tue Nov-05-19 11:46 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
29. "I don’t believe it’s that pre-determined"
In response to Reply # 24


          

I agree they want to address that precedent but I’ll admit that I’m not the most sophisticated Supreme Court follower but the Court consistently surprises me with its decisions.

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

isaaaa
Member since May 10th 2007
30498 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 06:50 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
22. "He was NEVER Black until now, still hope he wins though."
In response to Reply # 0


          


Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg
http://www.Tupreme.com

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Cam
Charter member
13179 posts
Wed Nov-06-19 12:35 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
33. "His lone ask of the Obama administration was to bring in Black"
In response to Reply # 22


  

          

money mangers to manage a percentage of the federal employee pension fund, back when he was just a Senator.
& the catalyst for the Comcast lawsuit is not based on the slights against him and his companies, but specifically what they did to Curtis Symonds during his initiation of that HBCU sports Network.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Reeq
Member since Mar 11th 2013
7644 posts
Mon Nov-04-19 09:39 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
26. "rupert murdoch is his idol."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

and hes also teamed up with sinclair recently on their regional sports deal.

hes a black capitalist and views black 'freedom' largely through that lens (wealth, buying/spending power, market/capital access, etc).

------

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Buddy_Gilapagos
Charter member
44480 posts
Tue Nov-05-19 08:53 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
27. "He said Jesus wants more billionaires. LOL."
In response to Reply # 26


  

          


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Cam
Charter member
13179 posts
Wed Nov-06-19 11:47 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
31. "& listening to him on Maron's WTF, back in September"
In response to Reply # 27


  

          

He's seemingly anti-labor, as far as creative productions.
Or at least values the quantity over quality.
He explained that he finds there to be enormous waste among production crews, 'who all just want to work 2 hours and be paid for 12'and has changed his production model into one that more resembles a GM factory line, so that if he sends a crew out to shoot a formula series race on location in Monaco, he'll also have them use the time there to also shoot content for his other channels, like the chefs and restaurants for a cooking channel, homes and resorts for a luxury lifestyle channel and pets for a pet channel.
He has one of the most expansive libraries of original television content, but has won only one a single Emmy.

I'd never want to work for him, but I do like what he has to say about solutions to combat the racial wealth gap.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
isaaaa
Member since May 10th 2007
30498 posts
Thu Nov-07-19 08:23 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
35. "Oh I feel him on this tip...like BIG TIME!!!"
In response to Reply # 26


          


>hes a black capitalist and views black 'freedom' largely
>through that lens (wealth, buying/spending power,
>market/capital access, etc).
>


I fucks with him now.

Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg
http://www.Tupreme.com

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Rjcc
Charter member
90505 posts
Wed Nov-06-19 01:32 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
30. "he exploits loopholes"
In response to Reply # 0


          


www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Cam
Charter member
13179 posts
Wed Nov-06-19 12:29 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
32. "How so?"
In response to Reply # 30


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Lurkmode
Member since May 07th 2011
3377 posts
Wed Nov-06-19 02:31 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
34. "Niether"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          


He's doing what the cable companies are doing, fighting with the tools available.

---------------------------
Signature

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

naame
Charter member
20811 posts
Wed Nov-13-19 11:23 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
36. "What’s at Stake in Byron Allen’s Supreme Court Showdown with Comcast"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

What’s at Stake in Byron Allen’s Supreme Court Showdown with Comcast
By Maurita Coley

First Published in Morning Consult on November 13, 2019

Later this month, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a suit between Comcast and Byron Allen, a prominent African American programming executive. What began as a fairly routine television carriage dispute has turned into risky gambit that may give the Court’s conservative majority an opportunity to roll back fundamental civil rights protections.

The lawsuit arose out of Comcast’s decision several years ago not to carry several Allen-owned television channels, such as Pets.TV and Recipe.TV. Comcast has argued its rejection of Allen’s channels was purely a business decision, reflecting what it viewed as the channels’ limited audience appeal. Allen then promptly filed a $20 billion lawsuit against Comcast, alleging that the company’s refusal to contract with Allen’s company was racially motivated, in violation of Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

District Court Judge Terry Hatter – a well-respected African American judge with a strong record on civil rights – dismissed the case three times, finding that Allen had not established a plausible argument that Comcast would have contracted with his company “but for” Allen’s race.

Allen appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which remanded Judge Hatter’s dismissal with a new guideline to the lower court that a plaintiff can state a viable claim under Section 1981 if discriminatory intent plays any role in a defendant’s decision not to contract, regardless of whether race discrimination was a “but for” cause of that decision. Comcast petitioned the Supreme Court to review the 9th Circuit’s decision, and the Supreme Court agreed; oral argument is scheduled for November 13, 2019.

Carriage disputes between cable operators like Comcast, and programming content providers like Byron Allen, are exceedingly common. In my more than 30 years in the industry, I’ve represented both sides – networks seeking distribution and distributors seeking content – and in the early days of cable, I even represented minority - owned distributors such as Barden Cablevision of Detroit, and minority - owned programmers such as Black Entertainment Television.

In my experience, this Comcast - Allen case doesn’t fit the usual framework for a race discrimination case. As best I can surmise, Allen’s channels are not ethnically or culturally diverse; instead, he chose to press his case on racial grounds by asserting that Comcast was already carrying white-owned
food and pet channels but chose not to carry his particular food and pet channels. His suit rejects Comcast’s defense that it prefers the other channels because of better ratings, higher - quality programming, or other business considerations; rather, Allen alleges that Comcast’s decision was racially motivated.

This case, which started as a private contract dispute, now puts at risk the civil rights enjoyed by all Americans, because a conservative Supreme Court majority hostile to civil rights has a chance to fundamentally re-examine Section 1981. The Court will get to decide – not just for this case, but in a precedent that will impact all future discrimination cases – whether
a plaintiff must prove that intentional race discrimination was the decisive factor in a decision (the “but for” standard of proof), or whether race just needs to be one factor in the decision (the 9th Circuit’s “mixed motive” standard, which civil rights leaders strongly support).

If the Supreme Court gets to decide this case, it seems very likely that – at a minimum – the court will choose the “but for” standard that is currently used in most jurisdictions outside the 9th Circuit. That would be a major setback to the civil rights community’s advocacy for establishing nationwide the 9th Circuit’s broader “motivating factor” standard. It’s even conceivable that this conservative Supreme Court could go even farther, exploiting the facts of Mr. Allen’s private contract claim to justify an even more regressive outcome by applying the “but for” standard in EEO retaliation, fair housing, voting rights, or other claims.

Civil rights groups such as NAACP have jumped into this case, filing amicus briefs that seek to convince the court not to embrace the “but for” standard. What I suggest now is that the civil rights groups try to persuade both parties to help get us out of this precarious place in history. To do that, it’s essential that Allen withdraw his $20 billion lawsuit, and that Comcast withdraw its petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, preferably before the November 13, 2019 oral argument.

Given Allen’s success as an African American businessman, these channels cannot be so important to him that it’s worth placing all of our civil rights at risk. Likewise, Comcast, which ranks #2 on Fortune’s Global 500 for workplace diversity and has one of the strongest records of programming diversity in the industry, should demonstrate those values by
withdrawing its petition for Supreme Court review if Allen also agrees to step back from the ledge.

Both parties should close their eyes, take a leap -- and hold their noses if they must -- but do their part to take this case off the docket of a deeply conservative court. Otherwise we might all find ourselves facing an uncertain future, stripped of key civil rights protections.

No contract or channel is worth the risk.
America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Lobby General Discussion topic #13354603 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com