Flava Flav is back at VH1 - don't set your Tivo

I was going to write about Tiger Woods and his yet again record breaking feat, when I ran across a bit of news that stopped me in my tracks. It's news that I am sure Sumner Redstone felt was groundbreaking. hundreds of fans will be elated to know that... Flava Flav has a new reality television show.

Yet the king of VH1 "reality" programming will be back. But sadly this time there will not be a slew of morally corrupt, attention starved, stereotypical women or men on the program. That's right, instead of highlighting grown adults (particularly of color I'm sad to say) acting like complete fools for 15 minutes of fame the show will instead highlight kids in high school - likely also acting like fools hoping to gain 15 minutes of fame.

Of course the program is not focused on presenting the kids as buffoons. That's just the general way that people on reality programming wind up being portrayed. The goal is

"I just want to show the world it's never too late to get your diploma, and show kids they should stay in school and not wait until you're old to get it," Flav said. "Everybody sees me as this big love mogul. Now I got a baby girl, I've been there and done that and now it's time for the next episode."

Don't get me wrong, I commend most things that seek to highlight the importance of education. I want to emphasize that knowledge is the key to improving your life. But I neither believe nor trust Flava Flav, Sumner Redstone, and Viacom in getting that message out.

If this were an attempt to seriously promote education, especially to children of color, why is this not being presented on BET (which Viacom owns and Sumner Redstone controls)? If this were only about a positive message why not put it on broadcast television in primetime - because even with the lower viewership of broadcast TV it would still be available to a larger audience than VH1 will get.

Do I trust Viacom? Why should I. They took BET and removed all of its best features. They promoted the worst of music videos, of insanely stupid programming (remember Hot Ghetto Mess was their surefire hit idea), of the very least worth of movies (unless you think Soul Plane was unfairly overlooked by the Oscars). Viacom promoted Flava of Love at VH1, for multiple seasons, and then spun off even more brain-numbing spin-offs of the program. And let's not forget the decade+ long exclusion of music videos featuring African American entertainers - except Michael Jackson - at MTV.

As for Flava Flav, he has sold out in the worst way. Many younger readers may be completely unaware of how Flav got to become a celebrity. They likely have no idea what his enourmous clock is meant to represent.

Flav was a member of Public Enemy, a rap group that existed before gangsta rap was promoted as the only form of rap by music executives. Back when rap music was diversified, and positive political messages were empowering listeners - back when the music industry was calling rap a fad - Public Enemy was huge.

The rap group was controversial, but overall spread a message of empowerment and power of the people. They were political in a way similar to Malcolm X as compared to Dr. Martin Luther King. And at that time, the clock was meant to signify that time was running out. That people of color has to wake up and realize that they were becoming pawns in the political and societal goals of people that didn't care about issues in our communities.

Flav has gone a long way since those days. From protesting the minstrel show, to hosting it.

So given these facts about the key people involved in this "reality" program, do I think anyone will realize that Flava Flav is trying to promote education? I doubt it. But it does give me one more program, timeslot, and channel I don't have to consider in my choices of entertainment.

Viacom zaps my Youtube channel again.

Well Viacom did it again. They really must not like me. Of course I have no love for the Corporation either. Which includes Sumner Redstone.

In fact I believe it was my huge uproar about BET and it's "programming" that put me on their radar. The fact that I followed all that up with a logical discourse against Jon Stewart, did not help. And now it seems they are upset with my coverage of Deadliest Warrior: Tshaka Zulu vs. William Wallace.

In each case, with greater speed than the last time, Viacom has blasted my Youtube page and forced my videos to be removed. In each case the video clearly noted that this was not my product, and there were several dozen other Youtube channels with the exact same footage. But I am on the hit list it seems.

Now I respect that they have copyrights. And I am acting according to their wishes in removing the material from my Youtube channel. But I just find it odd.

Because I have videos of other programs, and video of commentators like Bill O'Reilly, that never once drew the ire of thier copyrights. I note this because even when I criticize conservatives, or note racial insensitivity with other corporations, they don't flip out. Just Viacom.

Is it because Viacom hates to be shown as the most racially insensitive and demeaning company in the media industry - in my opinion. Is it because my audience acts upon suggestions to boycott BET, Flavor of Love, I Love New York (the woman not the city), and other equally insulting material that Viacom loves to fill the airwaves with? Is it because Sumner Redstone took my comments to heart - which he should have.

Well it could be all of that. Or just that I have a popular blog and they don't like the negative publicity. Still I will work around it where possible.

So if you see some of my videos in various posts, and they are disabled - blame Viacom. They don't want you to see the glaring racial insensitivity that I have found. They don't want criticism or discussion. They just want people to agree with their point of view, and make them money while doing so.

Oh well.

Black Entertainment Television loses Procter & Gamble, but is it enough?

Viacom must be proud. I really have to believe that they are in a great mood today. If they aren’t all the better because I feel better. Why? Because Procter & Gamble and GM have pulled their ads from the network – specifically those found on Rap City and 106 & Park.

Both of these cable network programs are found on the infamous Black Entertainment Television (BET) [No relation], created by Bob Johnson based on the same theory as that of Marie Antoinette. But whereas Marie Antoinette was beheaded by the starving masses, the intellectually starving made Bob Johnson a billionaire. And Viacom was more than happy to jump on the bandwagon that Johnson started.

If television can be called the opiate of the masses, then gangsta rap and hip hop music videos are its crack. Bob Johnson figured out the formula and how to spread sales when he started his infamous late-night music video line-up. Viacom simply figured out how to sell this crack to schoolchildren during the day. Reginald Hudlin must be proud, because Sumner Redstone surely is.

But many others in the Black community, and those concerned about the welfare of children, were not pleased. Thus when the later re-named Hot Ghetto Mess was first imagined, we spoke out. While the changes were minor (program title was quickly altered, and some of the content it’s rumored) advertisers acted lest they stir the ire of the $1 trillion African American community. And again the voices were raised and that attention has caused action.

As most would agree, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that Rap City and 106&Park promoted videos to kids just out of school that focused on sex, violence and profane language. But for those, like the advertising executives at GM and Procter & Gamble, that obviously never actually watch the program an April Parent Television Council study found the following:

“…among other things, that Rap City featured on average 31.6 instances of sex, 25.3 instances of explicit language and 11.7 instances of violence per hour.”

And Bob Johnson had the balls to allege that Senator Obama was a drug dealer.

Don’t get too happy though. While these 2 companies are in the top 5 of advertisers in the nation they have not made the impact that really would have made a difference to Viacom. GM did take their ads from these BET programs, but it moved them to other programs on this troubled network. Thus the financial slap in the face has become a tap on the wrists and BET continues in silence.

And what about the advertisers that have not changed their position? That would be McDonald’s, YUM! Brands (ie. KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, and A&W root beer), and Verizon. Not one of these companies seems to be fazed by children being spoon-fed sex and violence. Yet not one of these companies would dare advertise on a program targeting White children with the same reported numbers. Obviously their opinion matches that of Sumner Redstone and Viacom. What great company to associate with.

And the Black community must be admonished for supporting these kinds of actions. With so much money being spent on keeping up with the Jones’, so much importance placed on style over substance we effectively beg for more intellectual crack and they whip it up on demand.

But until we act in the same manner as the poor French with Marie Antoinette, expect to eat more cake and have children more damaged every year. I have to wonder how well Debra Lee, Reginald Hudlin, and Bob Johnson sleep? I’d guess as well as the crack dealer on the corner.

Viacom just doesn't stop Part 3 - 8.21.2007.4

Concluded from Viacom just doesn't stop Part 2...

Many wish to target the parts of the Viacom machine. It is a good concept and effective to a degree. Change of one portion of their multiple arms does have an effect. Yet serious change to all the parts might only be possible in addressing the most important part of the corporation, its shareholders.

If you are tired of your mother, sister, girlfriend, wife and/or daughter being equated to a drug-addled, stupid, lump of flesh place on the earth for the mere pleasuring of any guy with money in his pocket, you might want to check your 401k and stock investments. If you are more than the potential subject of a police line-up, are only connected to Grand Theft Auto by the video game, can spell the word investment and know what it means, have meaningful relationships, all without the aid of a government handout you also might want to check with your stockbroker. Pull all of your shares and any mutual fund that owns Viacom except one share.

The reason to keep one share of Viacom, or a reason to buy one, is so you can go to the annual shareholder meeting and bring up a referendum on why the management has such disrespect for African Americans. Done with a letter signed by each shareholder that agrees with this question and a copy of this question and the signed letter of those asking going to each advertiser of VH-1, MTV, and BET. That can get Viacom to change regardless of the direction Redstone and Dauman seem to continue to take.

In the meantime, I see less and less of a reason to watch the programming of the Viacom company. It’s beyond insensitivity, as the post from Miss J states. This is active stereotyping and exploitation in my view. I cannot support such actions by lending my viewership. Can you?

This is what I think, what do you think?

Viacom just doesn't stop Part 2 - 8.21.2007.3

Continued from Viacom just doesn't stop Part 1...

In looking at, and not watching, a rap video we see the violence, drugs and abuse of women that is being promoted. Many have mentioned that. And each of the channels that are abovementioned dedicate time to promote the most sexual and derogative videos, even if they claim that the programming places the worst of it after 10pm or it is focused on the one channel targeted solely to Black people. What is also being promoted is criminal activity (can you name all the rappers and hip hop artists that have not been arrested on drug, gun, or violence related charges? Are there any?) lack of education (name any current rapper that has graduated college? Gone to college? Graduated high school?) and base materialism (unless you can explain a need for spinning rims and platinum teeth beyond wasting money).

What about the ever so educational Flava of Love programs, and its spin-off. Can anyone name the benefit of that program? Is there any reason that this has to be the only presentation of Black people to millions internationally?

How about the movies on these channels? When was the last time you saw a movie that starred an A-list Black actor? When was the last time that a film, made for more than 15 million, that did well in the movie theaters was on? Have you ever seen a single film starring Mr. Denzel Washington, or Mr. Lawrence Fishburne, or Mr. Wesley Snipes? Have you seen a single film that did not feature primarily Black-on-Black violence?

It seems quite obvious that Viacom believes that African Americans are mindless, poverty-stricken, fools that will accept drinking sand because that is what they are offering. Why else would a public service announcement be featured that is as vulgar, crass, and crude as the subjects it is supposed to be combating. (It even creates questions of issues I have never heard used against Blacks)

Given this, can anyone be surprised that a program that might feature Black women, or men, that have intelligence and successful careers would be cancelled? I’m surprised the concept was allowed to progress far enough that news about it could be written.

If Nike were to have an ad, with a bunch of Black guys playing basketball, with rap music in the background, and a hoochie with a baby in her hands and a stroller walks up to a drug dealer asking for crack offering a pair of new Nike sneakers as payment; there would be outrage. Yet Viacom does this same thing, just in separate parts and sometimes using separate channels.

I have mentioned my contempt for Viacom head Philippe Dauman, and real power Sumner Redstone. These 2 men control the publicly traded company. It is their vision that shapes the programming on their cable network, and motion picture empire. They ultimately determine what images of African Americans are broadcast to the world via their media.

Concluded in Part 3...

Does a name change make BET and Viacom good guys? Part 3 - 7.24.2007.3

Conclusion from Does a name change make BET and Viacom good guys? Part 2...

I hope, sincerely, to find that this entire post is moot. That the program does live up to the statements of Ms. Jam Donaldson and Mr. Reginald Hudlin. Improvement in the Black community is more than worthwhile, and my shoulders via this blog are wide enough to carry being wrong. But in my decades of life and many years in the stock market, I have learned to value something my father told me back when I was about 10.

“Believe half of what you see and nothing you hear.”

Those are sage words. So until I see We Got To Do Better, I will tend to remain fixed in my views gained by the run-a-round BET and Viacom lead me in on a 2 day attempt to gain a comment. I will brace myself, because the history of programming at BET includes Uncut and College Hill. I will trust my understanding of what BET, and Viacom, thought were acceptable statements and images to lure me into viewing their programming.

And I stand ready with a stick of my own, just in case my fears, BET’s history, the vacuous words and deafening silence are all justified, and African Americans are shown in a lite that a colleague and friend of mine mentioned today,

“A show like that, in the eyes of some people, justifies every negative thing said about Black people. I would never let a show like that be made about me. It’s bad and the world gets the wrong image.”

Mr. Dauman, Mr. Redstone, shareholders of Viacom, be alert. Bloggers pay attention to details, and people pay attention to us. We won’t drink sand because you give it to us, we can affect your profits. You want us to accept your services, and we want proper service. The scale must balance or there is hell to pay if they don’t.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Does a name change make BET and Viacom good guys? Part 2 - 7.24.2007.2

Continued from Does a name change make BET and Viacom good guys? Part 1...

While many believe the victory has been won, many more are still cautious and I count myself in that group. My misgivings were not based on the name of the program but it’s content. The description that I found troubling remains. Without the ability to review the program, just as all critics have been denied, I cannot say anything has changed. Almost.

Viacom knows one thing clearly. Black bloggers, and by extension all bloggers don’t play. There were plans for protests of every advertiser of the program, and regardless of the name, there still could be. Several blogs, including my own, featured information concerning the real decision makers at Black Entertainment Television, Viacom. Several detailed questions for the President of Viacom Mr. Philippe Dauman and majority shareholder Mr. Sumner Redstone, and addressed the means by which the rest of the shareholders of the public corporation could be called to task for the programming. The other hand of protests, addressing the shareholders and their profits, came to bear such that Viacom could not ignore the probable outcome.

They should keep that in mind. It can still happen.

I am unconvinced by the platitudes that have come from the corporate public relations machine of Viacom. This has not assuaged my fears. Changing 3 words to 5 does not change the meaning of the content, nor does it provide a new context for that content to be understood internationally. That takes real change, not a new coat of paint. I hope, as I always have, that such change has occurred. But I am leery.

The press release seeks to deflect attention from the real issues. Like the rare comment from Mr. Reginald Hudlin who sought to, in my opinion, poorly compare the stated description of this program to the efforts of Dr. Bill Cosby and others. While that sounds nice, examination of what was presented about this program failed to hold up such a comparison. For Viacom to imply that there were misconceptions on behalf of bloggers and myself is to blame a wall for being flat. You cannot fault a conclusion that is based on information you (VIACOM and BET) have provided the public, and denied all sources further details. When a snake rattles it’s tail you don’t assume it’s not poisonous because you can’t see the venom.

The further attempt by BET to show their open palm while hiding their closed fist are the statements made in the press release about the future programming BET states they will have. A carrot to the stick that Hot Ghetto Mess, or We Got To Do Better if you prefer, is does not change how it may strike you. Public relations statements are great tools of obfuscation at times, but for those skilled at reading them they are not as powerful.

Comncluded in Part 3...

Mr. Reginald Hudlin of Black Entertainment Television speaks Part 2 - 7.17.2007.2

Continued from Mr. Reginald Hudlin of Black Entertainment Television speaks Part 1...

I submit that his television shows have been a constant statement on self-improvement and the rewards of education. In 1965 he was the FIRST Black actor to star in a dramatic series. His Cosby Show television program, that started in 1984 and lasted 8 years, was massively positive, well received, and a direct statement of success for Black families. Obviously the cartoon series Fat Albert has made a huge impact on generations of Americans, and children around the world. Non-violence, morality and humor featuring an All-Black cast that has lasted decades and was in first run production for roughly 15 years.

Mr. Hudlin would compare what BET describes as,

“…like the traffic accident you can’t look away from.”

I have never heard any television show or public speaking event that Mr. Cosby has appeared at given a similar description. I do not know Mr. Charlie Murphy, but I am not aware of his collegiate degrees, positive public comments on the Black community (outside of comedy). Neither am I aware of Mr. Murphy receiving a Presidential Medal. I am not putting down Mr. Murphy, just stating that there is little similarity between him and Mr. Cosby.

For Mr. Hudlin to compare the program to the social commentary of Mr. Bill Cosby there must be similarities. They don’t appear to be in the host, a basis in education, or breaking ground in television history.

The comparison of Mr. Cosby’s social commentary – stating don’t shake your booty for a camera, or be a pimped-out high schooler – seems diametrically opposed to videoclips of exactly that. Mr. Cosby’s comments to seek out education seem to not be conveyed, as I am befuddled how a car accident is educational. So I ask Mr. Reginald Hudlin, where is the connection?

Mr. Hudlin appears to be a good corporate leader. His comments are rare, brief and sound great as a soundbite. Sadly they have no substance. These are the kinds of comments that as a stockbroker listening to earnings reports for a decade, caused me to drop a stock – and caused financial institutions to lower ratings. The comments don’t hold up to review.

I pose the same questions I asked Mr. Sumner Redstone and Mr. Phillippe Dauman to Mr. Hudlin. Perhaps, if BET is as independent as is claimed, he can answer the questions that his bosses will not. I again invite Mr. Hudlin to explain why my conclusions based on his comments, and those on the BET website are “an erroneous presumption” or how they can be considered based on “absolutely zero information.”

I have not seen the show, but I can only hope that it will not be what has been promoted. But if it is, there will be a reaction and I guarantee I will hold Mr. Hudlin, Mr. Dauman, and Mr. Redstone accountable.

To these men, and you my readers, I state – even if the major news media refuses to comment or acknowledge this subject, the blogosphere is. We are more powerful than traditional media believe. We are a voice of the people, and our influence (via you our readers) is immense. To ignore us is to dabble with peril.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Contact with Viacom and Black Entertainment Television Part 2 - 7.11.2007.2

Continued from Contact with Viacom and Black Entertainment Television Part 1...

• 4. Why do several divisions of the company promote programs that display little or no positive benefit in the portrayal of African Americans? I submit as examples VH1 – Flava of Love and all it’s spin-offs, BET – the abovementioned Hot Ghetto Mess, Uncut.
  
• 5. Given that African Americans, directly or indirectly have contributed to the positive earnings of Viacom, which in the Media networks division (of which BET is a part) was an increase of 10% to $1.73 billion, why has Viacom not used it huge network of resources to provide original or re-run programming the equivalent of other divisions of the company?
  
• 6. Considering that 1/3 of the movies released in the first quarter of 2007 seem to directly target African Americans (Norbit and Black Snake Moan), and that these same movies contributed to the 62% increase in revenues vs. 2006, without including the positive contribution of other movies release prior to 2007 (Dreamgirls), it can be surmised that African Americans are a strong source of a portion of the revenues for Viacom. Why then would this revenue source be seemingly neglected in a division that directly targets African Americans? I site the strong dependence of the programming on music videos, discussion of music videos, and B or less quality movies (ie. Soul Plane, Leprechaun: in the Hood) on BET.
  
• 7. Why is a division that seeks to target a seemingly lucrative consumer segment of the company, dedicated to programming that is and may be considered insulting to that audience. I cite the large number of African Americans that have crusaded (for over a decade) against the violence, misogyny, and promotion of drugs that music videos (particularly hip hop and gangsta rap) focus on. In addition I site the over a dozen blog sites and articles written denouncing the proposed Hot Ghetto Mess program, its logo, its stated content, the description of that content, and the loss of advertisers to the BET website page promoting this program.
  
• 8. I ask Mr. Redstone, Mr. Dauman, and all other executives responsible for programming at BET and the other divisions of Viacom, why there is such a vast difference in programming when comparing BET to any other divisions. I state that there is no comparable program to the Blade series, as an example, on BET.
  

I hope we can get a response to these questions from BET and Viacom. I feel we have been neglected and used for the monetary gain of Viacom. I believe that Viacom can provide quality programs that do not infer or actively promote insult to African Americans. I further accept that they chose not to do so with the one division of the company that solely targets us.

Whether that is due to the inefficient nature of the corporate structure of the company, as observed by my attempts to get comment from BET and/or Viacom, or because of the seemingly laissez faire attitude of executives responsible for programming (those executives ultimately being Mr. Redstone and Mr. Dauman) I do not know. But I do know that it can be changed. I submit that if shareholders of Viacom are holding onto a stock that is losing profits because of protests against the actions of the company, change will be swift. Protests may happen, especially if Hot Ghetto Mess is the insult that is inferred by the description provided on BET’s website and the logo chosen to symbolize the program.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Contact with Viacom and Black Entertainment Television - 7.11.2007.1

I tried to be fair. I tried to hear both sides. But there is a limit to what can be done. I am referring to my attempts to contact Black Entertainment Television for a comment on the massive and growing displeasure with [to say the least], and potential boycott of sponsors for, Hot Ghetto Mess.

Let me be clear. On Monday the 9th I started the process. I called Viacom and was directed to CBS. CBS stated that they no longer have anything to do with BET and then forwarded me to individuals at BET that could not comment due to company policy. I respect that they could not comment on the record. I was then directed to speak with the public relations department for BET. It turns out that it was for CBS. I was then directed to another person, who was also for CBS. Then I finally get BET to give me a number for their legal/corporate communications department. That’s in DC as opposed to NYC where their offices are. When I called that number I waited 4 minutes to get a human operator on the phone. I never got a human being to pick up. The call to DC was today, the second day in my efforts. I think I have been more than fair.


So let me state that I feel Mr. Sumner M. Redstone, who has controlling voting interest in Viacom according to the most recent 10Q, needs to fix his company. To be clear, while Mr. Phillippe P. Dauman is the CEO of Viacom (which owns BET) the voting rights and thus ultimate control lay with Mr. Sumner Redstone via his NAI company.

The fun part of this is I was a stockbroker and can read a 10Q. For those less familiar, essentially that is a document that public companies (ie. traded on the stock market) must file every 3 months, is available to the public, and states how much money was made, from where, how it was spent, and who is in charge. So when I stated previously that Viacom was ultimately responsible for Hot Ghetto Mess, and the general state of BET, I was incorrect. Ultimately it would be NAI and Mr. Redstone.

So I ask Mr. Redstone and Mr. Dauman a couple of questions. [Feel free to copy this post in part or whole and send it to Viacom, Mr. Redstone and/or Mr. Dauman]

• 1. Why is it that Black Entertainment Television (BET) is not allowed to comment except through its corporate communications which there seems no way to contact directly or with ease? Is there a reason that out of several people I have spoken with in 3 companies over 2 days no one can give me a number or name that can comment?
  
• 2. Why is it that Viacom owns MTV, VH1, Nick at Nite, Paramount Pictures and Dreamworks, among other properties and working relationships yet programming at BET fails to consistently provide diversity, quality, and/or positive content?
  
• 3. Why is it that divisions of the company are able to provide quality programs/content and BET promotes what I and other believe are caricatures of African Americans? I submit these examples: Spike TV – The original program The Blade Series, Comedy Central – The Dave Chappelle Show, Dreamworks – Hustle&Flow, Paramount Pictures – Dreamgirls.
  

Continued in Part 2...