Why I am thankful in 2010

I am so thankful that so far 2010 has started off better than 2009. It's a sign that I can only hope continues throughout the year.

Now I don't mean that 2010 is better politically, economically, or in most any other measurement (see VASS for why). I do mean that the year is starting off better socially. At least as far as all reports have shown to date. Which is questionable at best.

In 2009 the year of "Change" started with the murder of 2 men, young African American fathers, and the critical shooting of another by police officers across the country. And when I say start I mean that literally. These men were shot within minutes of the ball dropping at Times Square.

Many still do not know the names of Oscar Grant, Robbie Tolan, or Adolph Grimes. Because the major media ignored these men and their stories of police abuse that I believe was motivated by their race. To this minute I doubt almost anyone other than my long-time readers are aware of what has happened (or more accurately not happened) to the police officers and the cases (click the link at the bottom of this post to learn more about these men). Which initself is another problem that 2009 shared with virtually every year since I was born.

But so far in 2010 I can see no report of such police brutality. I can see no hint of a murder born solely in racism and prejudice. In that at least the year has improved versus 2009.

Of course in 2009 it took days before any comment or hint of the year opening murders and assault caught any attention. In fact it took weeks of inaction and excuses leading to a riot before the major media even remotely noticed the most egregious murder of Oscar Grant. And even then, the major media address the riot and hinted at a cause of some sort.

Thus I am left with the same wish I had prior to the New Year's start, and the same as every year. That this might be a year without a racially motivated attack on African Americans (particularly young men) by police officers. I continue to hope that police won't "accidentally" shoot a Black man in the back while he lays on the ground in California. I hope that 15 officers will not pounce upon Black men like a gang of thugs in Philadelphia. That officers won't kill and wound Black men celebrating a bachelor party in a hail of bullets more akin to a gangster movie in New York City. That young Black men coming home from the store won't be shot in their driveways while their mother watches in Texas.

I can hope that none of these events will happen again in 2010 or ever. I can look forward and imagine an America where being Black (and young) does not place a crosshair on African Americans by trigger happy police officers across the nation. I might even take a moment to fantasize that equally violent and unnecessary acts will not happen to Latinos, Asians, and other people of color in this nation.

Perhaps if we all can imagine a year, just 1 year, without these kinds of events we will finally be 1 step closer to an America that is finally beyond racism, prejudice, and other acts of small petty minds.

I don't want to be proven wrong. I hope I won't be proven wrong. But I still won't go to Las Vegas and make a bet about it. Not yet, but I would like to.

V - the 2009 television series

Last night I had the chance to watch the original V series. I remember the television miniseries from back in the 80's when it was originally shown. It was a moving work of television at its best back then, and now.

But in watching the original, which was promoting the upcoming "revisioned" television series, I thought about what we know is different now in the coming premiere on ABC on Tuesday. Sadly, I doubt the impact, message, or interest will survive this "reimagined" program.

Right off the back there are a few things that are readily seen. The first is that the city this will be highlighting is New York City instead of Los Angeles. Another is that unlike the original, and unlike NYC, the diversity of the characters has gone out the window. Add to that the fact that several of the main characters have had their race and gender changed.



In 20 years, somehow NYC has become a place where people of color are incredibly unseen (or more accurately underseen). Which is amazing since NYC is possibly the most diverse population anywhere in the world. And it is that diversity which is a major theme of the program. That ALL human beings are involved and affected. That this can happen to anyone, everywhere. But in the new version, basically if you are a person of color, you just don't matter.

The original had several major characters that were women, or people of color. They were not authorities or people invested with the way of life. Just ordinary people that had to rise to the circumstances they found themselves in. The leader of the resistance is a woman who had no aspirations of power or leadership. But she became more than she knew she could be.

The new version will have women assuming several roles of the male characters from the original. The father that is divorced yet still tries to maintain a good relationship with his ex-wife and son is gone. The image of a strong man, that can work with and support a strong female leader is gone. The thought of ordinary people being more than they ever envisioned is gone.

I can only guess if the Holocaust survivor character will remain, but I doubt it. I can only guess that the hard working factory employee Black single father is also gone. I would bet that the references to social climbing succubi - as portrayed in the original - will be gone. In fact I expect every female character to be a version of Wonder Woman, and every male character to be little more than a boy Robin at best and more often a pack of impotent Renfield's. Just to suck up to the current political correctness of the day.

In the original the change from everyday freedom to a totalitarian society takes mere weeks. The change is fast but based in the very credible fears and weaknesses we all hold. And the Visitors obviously learned a lot about us, as they took the prime example of Hitler and the Nazis to implement their plans.

The new version will forgo that idea. Instead they will focus on a post-9/11 world. Aliens are among us, and have been for years. They have infiltrated our lives and we don't know it. And the world has been prepped for a siege none of us are ready for.

But that takes away from the story. It forgets that some of the most dangerous times in the world have been not when we are under attack (even unknowingly) but when we are feeling completely safe. When the Government and laws change ever so little, but sliding away from what we grew up with.

These are things that have been changed to suck in younger viewers. Because they never saw the original. Because Hollywood executives are sure that younger viewers will not understand the impact of the Nazis or how that could happen in America. Because they believe that feeding off of the hype of recent events is more entertaining than providing a lesson about how history repeats itself when we watch with dull minds.

The fact that this will be a weekly series means that people will not have to pay attention to what is going on. That if you missed something you can just wait for reruns to get it. That watching the show out of sequence will not destroy the meaning of what is going on. And it loses a lot in that.

The original series hit people because it left no stone unturned. It happened in a real world of people from all facets of life. It involved the real issues we all face. It delved into the need for security and comfort of routine. Even with a sci-fi background, it was something everyone could relate to.

The new series proposes to substitute a false image of the world. Where a great number of people don't exist. Where the frailties of society are replaced with the hype of politics. Where some will be able to hide - even if that is just a subliminal effect of what they have done. It is a watered down, self-serving, and quite possibly useless exercise in grabbing ratings.

I will watch the show. I will be more than happy to write a post detailing exactly how wrong I was on every point I have made. I will be delighted to headline a post with my failure to see the benefit of this "revisioned" show. But I wouldn't place a bet in Las Vegas that any of that will happen. Not because I am unwilling, hell I'm hoping, but because there won't be enough substance to cause it to happen.

In addition this new V series will be a ratings whore. It will be shaped by the number of viewers it will get. It will be modified by the popularity of the stars involved. Because every television show is. And when they aren't they get canceled for low viewership.

Television has always been an escape. A way to be amused by the antics that we all can feel safe are restricted to a small screen. When it is at its best and true to the purpose of its creation, television informs and educates. And that happens best in a small dose that has no regard for weekly ratings, star power, salaries, or fickle Hollywood executives. Roots is another great example of what can be done in a miniseries that cannot in a television series.

Will this version of V be interesting? I hope so. Will it provide the same political and societal message? Not at all. Will it rise to the highest goals of television? Most likely not. Will it last? Undoubtedly only a season or 2 at best.

I hope to be wrong. I hope to see a great program that is well written. But what I know I will see is a show that panders to popular political ideals, and seeks to garner ratings over delving into real issues.

Where are the women of color?

As much as I deplore the secondary status that is generally imparted on actors and actresses of color, I do have to admit that there has been huge progress over the years. It's not that I accept the roughly 7% immersion of people of color in Hollywood, just that it far exceeds the perhaps 1% or less that was Hollywood just 3 decades or so ago.

But often I have to admit that I do not focus on actresses of color as much as the men. The fact is that male actors of color have found more success as Hollywood painfully slowly realizes that audiences aren't concerned as much with color as quality of acting. In just the last 2 decades we have seen Will Smith, Denzel Washington, Wesley Snipes, Samuel Jackson, and a handful of others gain leading roles in big budget movies. At the same time women of color have barely gotten recognition.

It took some 50 years to go from Dorothy Dandridge to Halle Berry. And even with that, Berry is hardly in the position to pick and choose her films as other Oscar winners routinely do. There just aren't roles being provided to her. Kind of like how the proposed spin-off of James Bond, her Jinx character was supposed to receive just died on the vine. Name another Oscar winning actress' highly popular character that was proposed to get a leading film and was just forgotten about. I can't.

Of course there is Oprah Winfrey. But while she has more than enough power to appear in various roles, that generally has come to fruition due to her ability to fund her own projects. Her vast popularity may be the kiss of life to consumer products and recreation, but Hollywood is indifferent to her massive appeal.

There is also Queen Latifah. After decades of work honing her skill on television and small roles she has become a serious star. Yet serious roles are denied her, likely both due to the color of her skin and the fact she wears a dress size larger than 5 models put together. That's not fair, it would probably take more models as they can be stacked together like toothpicks but you get my point.

When I think about it, there just aren't any roles being given to women of color. That is unless they can pass as White. Which is not something they have control over, it's something that Hollywood seeks out. Take Carmen Diaz. How often is her Hispanic heritage ever spoken about? How many roles is she ever placed in that gives attention to any ethnicity to her?

I suppose my point is simply that there is more to the failure of Hollywood to see the talent before them. It is willful and it denies audiences of an experience that might be far superior to what they are getting. That alone just irritates me from time to time.

Obvious facts in teen health study

Do you ever read an article, about some scientific study about this or that, and you just say to yourself – “Scientists are just so stupid. I knew that.”

Of course scientists aren’t stupid. But some of the studies they do have to make you wonder. Like a recent study on 20,000 young kids. The study sought to see how kids feel about surviving. Were they optimistic or not about living to 35, and what choices did they make based on that outlook.

Scientists are shocked that some 15% of those interviewed over 7 years believed they’d never live to 35. I’m shocked they didn’t realize how common a thought that was. I mean I was very sure that I probably wouldn’t make it past 25. And that’s considering I was a far better than average student, not into drugs, ghettofabulous did not exist, I never joined a gang, plus I was working since I was a young teen.

Today I can see even more reasons that a person of color in their late teens might think they won’t make it to 35. Gangs are worse, drugs are rampant across the nation, music videos and rap music directly state they should be violent, addicted, criminals. Fewer kids are getting the educations they deserve, and more sources in society are telling them to give up on higher learning. I mean there is a huge societal influence that says a person of color should only hope to be ghettofabulous. All of that is separate of the fact that if you are a criminal, or just a person of color, there are seriously great odds [comparatively] that a police officer will abuse and/or kill you.

"Nearly 25 percent of youth living in households that receive public assistance and more than 29 percent of American-Indian, 26 percent of African-American, 21 percent of Hispanic, and 15 percent of Asian youth reported believing they would die young—compared to just 10 percent of their Caucasian peers."

Is there any surprise then that this study came out and “revealed” the obvious thought among people of color that they won’t make it to 35. Personally I think the shock is that White kids are also feeling these same thoughts of impending death, most from the same sources as those for the kids of color.

Back when crack hit the streets in the 80’s, I recall the lack of concern by police and elected officials. No one was bothering to do anything about that drug or the addicts initially. Not until White kids started to get addicted and drop dead. A couple of elected officials kids got hooked, and overnight there was news of the epidemic of crack. Just about 5 years after the fact.

In a similar manner this report is the same thing to me. 20+ years ago I understood that the chances of me dying before 25 was 1 in 4. In fact about 25% of my friends from elementary school didn’t make it to 25. At that time 2 decades ago I understood that the chances of me going to jail were also about 1 in 4. Again, at least that many of the kids I grew up with were in or had been in jail. That was the reality in the Bronx, and a decent neighborhood of the Bronx.

Given the failures of elected officials and the campaigns to keep kids off of drugs – Nancy Regan saying no and a guy making breakfast vs. a criminal rapper on MTV surrounded by women, drugs, and money, guess which makes more of an impact to a teen – the growth of negative influences, and the promotion by the major media and entertainment industry of the “Ghettofabulous” and “Thug life”, I’m surprised the numbers are not worse.

If the scientists doing this study want to move things along, for a mere contribution to my site, I will give them my insight.

Change the music videos – no more mostly naked women jiggling, no more drug paraphinallia, no more violence. At least not until say 1 am.

Provide real funding to schools – no more books older than the students and teachers burnt out or incapable of teaching.

Ensure that when entertainers break the law they get convicted – No more multi-year delays, like R Kelly, or slaps on the wrist, like DMX and Snoop Dogg and so forth.

Convict corrupt police officers – Officers that kill innocent citizens need to get big press coverage and massive jailtime. Like ex-officer Johannes Merhserle who killed Oscar Grant – which the media has avoided like the plague.

Allow rap and hip hop to be more than the minstrel show – the genres were more diversified and positive when they started, but now are just cash cows of negative reinforcement

Actually spend money fighting drugs – it took 4 years for a crack house near my family members in the Bronx to be closed. Police rarely sweep known drug hangouts and locations (in my knowledge) daily. Major media rarely focuses on the death and destruction drug dealers are responsible for, instead highlighting the lifestyle and money. IE They talk about how much money and drugs were found, or the superficial material things a drug dealer may own, not that dealer X may have caused XXX people to die from drug overdoses and to live on the streets as prostitutes.

These are just a few ideas. But each is effective in its own way. Far more so than a study of the obvious or elected officials polispeak.

Death Penalty: Is it worth having?

**Since I am redesigning VASS due to technical difficulties, I have not been able to present recent thoughts that would appear on that blog. I hope you will bear with me as I present posts that belong on that blog on this one. This is a temporary situation.**

I received an interesting notice from the NAACP today in reference to Gov. Bill Richardson and New Mexico. I had not heard about this before, but it seems that tonight Gov. Richardson will either repeal or allow the death penalty for his State. The NAACP is against the death penalty.

This is an interesting question. Is the death penalty worth having?

Well the first question for me is one that the NAACP emphasizes in its hope to repeal the law. It is disproportionately used against African Americans and Hispanics across the nation. Some 43% of those sentenced to the death penalty are people of color. That is virtually double the percentage of people of color in America.

When you consider, as I discussed in the post and comments of The most Dangerous people in America, that the single largest group of violent criminals in America are White males 18 – 25 years of age, you would expect the death penalty percentages to be different. But the fact that, as I recall, a jury is some 6x more likely to convict a person of color in a death penalty case (and higher when the victim of the crime is White) shines through and explains it all.

Even if you chose to ignore that, there is no question that people of color – especially African Americans – are more likely to be tried and convicted of any crime and sentenced more harshly. The Department of Justice figured that out. Not that any African American didn’t know it already.

So I understand the NAACP’s position. Since the legal system is skewed against people of color, and we are more likely to be victims of incarceration and death – even if innocent – it should not be allowed. And I can’t argue that feeling. It’s perfectly reasonable logic.

But I still believe in the death penalty.

Given the fact that people of color are most likely to be given this punishment. Given that the legal system is broken. Given even the thought that some have moral or religious convictions that are antithetical to this action.

But here is my problem. I do not believe that men like Jeffrey Dahmer (given a life sentence – killed in prison), Timothy McVeigh (executed in 2001), Johannes Mehserle (finally awaiting trial) should live out their lives on my dime. This is also true of crack, heroin, and meth dealers, repeat child molesters, and/or gang bangers that kill innocents in the spreading of their warped views.

Were it up to me, they all would be stuck in rooms half their size when they weren’t busy breaking boulders into tiny pebbles. Were it up to me they would be lucky to hear a radio, never mind a television.

But I am a harsh individual when it comes to those that prey upon society. Many would find my forms of punishment far too brutal, perhaps even torturous. Thus my option is to have them killed. DNA and other absolute proof provided beforehand as a requirement, never on the sole evidence of an eyewitness. But then once there is no longer reasonable doubt, death.

Given the choice of spending $30,000 a year (more than the average American makes in a year) to imprison one of these men for life or killing them I choose the death penalty. If it takes 10 years for all doubt to be removed it cost $300,000 plus another $300 or so in electricity cost (less if you use a firing squad – which can be automated). If you take the average serial killer, a White male about 30 – 40 years old, a life sentence equates to some $900,000 before they die. Possibly more.

So the cost is cheaper to kill them.

Morally is a tougher thought. Though I find it reprehensible that a repeat child molester or a crack dealer, as examples, who can cause irreparable harm to (and possibly lead to the death of) tens if not hundreds of people should come to the end of their lives relatively peacefully in prison – while watching a rerun of Seinfeld. That’s atrocious to me.

So yes the problem is the manner in which the death penalty is applied, and moreso the need to fix the biased and unjust legal system. But those are problems separate of the people that mandated the existence of the death penalty in the first place.

I would not spare the life of a mass murderer because some are squeamish. I would not spare a crack dealer that actively poisoned hundreds just to get a ghettofabulous set of clothes because some are uncomfortable. Think of how uncomfortable the victims of these types of criminals must feel. Think of how squeamish the families felt at seeing loved ones dead body.

Is the death penalty a perfect punishment? No. But there is neither perfect justice nor legal system. Yet when applied properly it is an eye for an eye, and that is the basis of all laws and justice when you think about it.

The argument I think the NAACP and others against the death penalty should be making is one where the ultimate punishment is applied appropriately. Evenhanded in the manner and type of people that receive it. If there is to be a change in the death penalty in New Mexico, or anywhere in the U.S., that is the direction that energy and time should be dedicated to.

But that is my opinion. Let me know what you think. And if you wish, pass this on to Gov. Richardson. I would love to know his position to my thoughts.

A discussion of police, race, America, and what to do

This will be in 2 parts. I hope you read it all.

A friend of mine recently contacted me about news of Robbie Tolan. While listening to a NYC sports radio program he learned of the shooting that happened on January 1st of this year. He knew that this is an issue I am deeply concerned about and wanted to make sure I was aware of it.

I clarified that I was aware of the Robbie Tolan police shooting, as well as of Adolph Grimes and Oscar Grant's murder on the same day. My friend had not heard of the Grimes case, and was vaguely familiar with the Grant case. Which is sad since we are nearly 3 months after the facts, but the blame for that I place on the major news media.

Now my friend informed me about the radio broadcast. He told me how the radio DJ reamed a caller who blatantly took the side of the police in this matter, on the basis that the victims were Black. The caller felt that alone justified the use of deadly force - on an unarmed Black male in his driveway that was co-operating with police and I emphasize unarmed.

This made my friend ask the question; what can be done to prevent this from happening again?

My thought on this goes to what I believe is one of the biggest factors in this issue - communication. At this moment most of America is unaware of events of police brutality and overkill against Black males (not to mention Latino/Hispanics and other people of color). I have found that often many side with the police, without ever knowing any of the facts. And the news media is reluctant to display or report these actions - though they are expedient to portray African Americans as criminals at almost every turn.

Thus I feel America must talk about this. Talk about the fact that these "isolated" events are in fact tied together and a pattern. Talk about what is the cause of these issues, and why the news media prefers to mold stereotypes about people of color.

Now my friend does not agree with me on all points of this. He feels that the media is more or less fair. He pointed out the number of African Americans that can be found on any day in various media.

I countered with the fact that 95% of all television and/or films ignore the existence of people of color. And for a majority of the time that they are provided a chance to appear onscreen they are portrayed as violent and criminals. My friend thought this was inaccurate. When I provided the fact that this is based on NAACP studies (most recently as of this year) and my own experiments done and reported over the last 3 years I have been writing this blog, he questioned the veracity of the NAACP findings and assured me that today you could turn on the television and not see Blacks as criminals on any of the broadcast programs (or at least the majority of those shows).

He went on to state that African Americans are not all just portrayed as criminals anymore. He pointed to Denzel Washington, Cuba Gooding Jr., and Samuel Jackson as examples. But I pointed out that while in the last decade they have improved their stature, virtually all major African American actors had to start their careers as criminals or antagonists before they could become anything else. Samuel Jackson came to be known for his portrayal as a crackhead, Lawrence Fishburn played thugs (a la King of New York) before moving on in his adult career, Wesley Snipes had to portray a drug kingpin, Chris Rock was a crackhead, and so on.

Now my friend countered that not all Black actors have had to have this kind of start. And that I was unfair because this was like saying that DeNiro and Pacino were negatives since they played gangsters to start their careers. Which is not the same as there were dozens of films at the same time, and multiple characters in the same films that were showing an opposite and positive image for Whites. The effect is not the same, the same impression is not being made. When you primarily are shown one facet of a people, if they are shown, then people tend to believe it is true over time.

But we felt that this was a digression from the main point. Which I felt was that to have things change we must delve into the fact that there is a problem. That police wantonly abuse their power without reason, and the media covers for them in these cases.

Continued in part 2...

Forbes recognizes the obvious about Will Smith and people of color

Oh how shocking. Will Smith is the most bankable entertainer in Hollywood. With the record for the most movies grossing over $100 million in a row, who could have guessed?

Honestly I am not amazed. But I really hope that the executives in Hollywood are paying attention to the numbers. Because it flies in the face of the notion that

“American audiences want to only watch people similar to themselves.”

That is the industry code words for the functional equivalent of “White only” - to me - which is present in the overwhelming number of television shows, movies, and even work behind the camera.

In fact, according to Forbes, the top of the Star Currency list includes Denzel Washington at number 8. On the Celebrity 100 list the start is with Oprah Winfrey and Tiger Woods. That list goes on to include Beyonce Knowles and Jay-z in the top 10.

Yet for all of that, and the many other people of color that made each of the lists, Hollywood avoids us. Which is odd for an industry that is best known for copying anything that is successful to death.

Just look at the 30 remakes that are going to hit screens or announced so far in 2009. Look at all the copycat stories that fill the television screens and theaters; they even copycat success from other countries (Life on Mars, Leverage, Bangkok Dangerous, ect.). And there is hardly any escape from some form of reality programming on every network including cable television. There are few original ideas in the industry, especially over the last decade or so. Except if it involves people of color. Then there are really none.

Will Smith, Denzel Washington, Laurence Fishburne, Samuel Jackson, Jamie Foxx and Eddie Murphy are the key male African Americans that fill screens and bring in revenue. Halle Berry and Queen Latifah are the Black female counterparts. Several of them have been doing so for decades. Yet Hollywood ignores the majority of Black actors, preferring to fill the ranks of new actors with virtually only White faces. And it’s not because there is a lack of a potential pool of actors to select from.

Television shows like the Cosby Show, A Different World, My Wife and Kids, The Fresh Prince of Bel Aire dominated the small screen. And once they were off the air nothing even close replaced them. The various networks didn’t even try to copy the shows.

It’s not that I expect every show to have people of color in them. I don’t want to see a television schedule of crap that is made to have people of color fill the screens and then be rejected with a casual ‘well we tried.’ But to honestly expect that in the 21st century, as people are declaring the era of “post-racial America”, we see almost the same number of African Americans, Latino/Hispanics, Asians and so on in any medium you wish to chose as were around in the 70’s. It’s deplorable.

Perhaps I wouldn’t get as upset if other aspects of the media were better. But news media still loves to depict people of color as violent and guilty of any wrong-doing or lack of success whenever a video is needed. And it is conspicuously remiss in reporting any news event that identifies people of color as victims of crimes via police brutality or other circumstance.

Just look around for the coverage of Oscar Grant, Adolph Grimes, or Robbie Tolan. All you will see is continuing coverage of Casey Anthony and the Petersen case in Ohio. Or how about the last time you saw national attention of a Black child that was missing?

But at least Forbes is taking notice that America loves it’s celebrities and entertainers of color as much as anyone else. Hopefully one day Forbes might just get involved in entertainment and things will improve. Or the racially blind execs in Hollywood will be replaced by open minded people. If only.