Afro-Netizen: No good deed goes unpunished

Friday, April 06, 2007

No good deed goes unpunished

According to New York Times reporter Kate Phillips, Rev. Jesse Jackson is now all but recanting his anti-CBCI/Fox debate position in an apparent capitulation to certain unnamed members of the CBC (or the group as a whole).

This was Jackson's initial stance:

“I am disappointed by the Congressional Black Caucus Institute’s partnership with Fox, and strongly encourage them to reverse that decision. Why would presidential candidates, or an organization that is supposed to advocate for Black Americans, ever give a stamp of legitimacy to a network that continually marginalizes Black leaders and the Black community? Fox moderating a presidential debate on issues of importance to Black Americans is literally letting the Fox guard the henhouse – Fox should be rejected.”

This is what Jackson reportedly is saying now in reporter Phillips words:

[Rev. Jackson] said that statement was sent up as a warning, because “there are some tensions on the part of Fox News . . . Mr. Jackson emphasized that Fox should not be held up for criticism alone; rather he believed the debate negotiations during the presidential campaign could be a lever to pressure all the networks to to hire more African-Americans, both on-camera and off.

While correctly taking all broadcast outlets to task for their lack of racial diversity on-air and within management ranks, Rev. Jackson seems to be giving the CBCI a pass for aligning with Fox.

So where do you draw the line, if not with racist Fox News?

If Fox hasn't made it easy enough for Blackfolk to draw such a line, then who has? How about Premiere Radio Network s, the media company that syndicates right-wing, drug-addled bigot, Rush Limbaugh's popular radio show?! After all, he has the largest radio audience in America (or so his people say).

The CBCI rationalized its choice of Fox solely due to its broad reach. So, if Jackson accepts the CBCI's lame justification, would he back a Premiere/CBCI-hosted debate, given their extensive reach? Interestingly, the bigot who runs Fox New Channel, Roger Ailes, is the same guy who produced Limbaugh's now defunct half-hour TV show from 1992 to 1996. (The plot thickens!)

Surely, this type of partnership would be beyond the pail, right?

Oh, did I mention that Premiere is a wholly owned subsidiary of Clear Channel Communications which is the same media conglomerate that also syndicates Jesse Jackson's radio show, Keep Hope Alive. (Kinda makes you wonder what the value of freedom of expression is in a country where the vast majority of our media is owned by 8 conglomerates.)

No doubt, it was quite a coup for the ColorOfChange-led campaign to get the belated support of Jackson (albeit indirectly). However, one must still consider this: Was the (now brief) backing of Jackson behind this anti-Fox campaign good because 1) he could mobilize thousands to act in furtherance of this campaign, or 2) because Rev. Jackson -- if only for one or two news-cycles -- could potentially validate and raise awareness of these issues via mainstream media? (Gold star for you if you picked #2!)

My people, my people! When and how will innovative, non-hierarchical and highly effective means of communication and organizing truly trump the cult of personality towards reaching the millions of Blackfolk (and others) hungry and curious enough to act without the imprimatur of iconic gatekeepers and corporate media? Indeed, such a paradigm shift will not come a day too soon.

And for those of you who are frustrated with the seemingly interminable series of inquiries I raise in my various blog posts, I humbly suggest that it is much better than the alternative: Regurgitating superficial answers to obsolete questions. Or worse, touting solutions to symptoms of unaddressed systemic problems. (We can count on CNN's Paula Zahn and Lou Dobbs to do that.)

And to be consistent, my final question is (for this post, anyway): If all of these major news outlets are so sub-par on issues of racial inclusiveness and sensitivity, is the best solution to avoid punishing the worst of them or daring to dismiss all of them in favor of investing in more truly progressive and inclusive media alternatives?

Chrisrabb! on Friday, April 06, 2007 at 01:57 AM in Media/Technology, Politics, Publisher's blog | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c0dc653ef00e55055ad398834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference No good deed goes unpunished:

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Posted by: |

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:

Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Afro-Netizen

MSM Newsfeeds

Recent Posts

Twitter Updates

Friday, April 06, 2007

No good deed goes unpunished

TrackBack

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Post a comment

Site Search

Twitter Updates

Categories

Dimensions

More . . .

aN blogroll

Thanx for stopping by!