Fox TV's New Minstrel Show

[Roger Wilco]

I said "the majority". Of course Dexter is a murderer, many of the guys in Sons of Anarchy are criminals and just about anybody on "The Tudors" is an over-ambitious entitled douche, but overall most of the (overwhelmingly white) characters on screen are what I said they are: "smart, ambitious, successful and respectable". If you deny that I think you don't know these shows. They are people, and people aren't perfect, but despite their flaws most of the characters on the shows mentioned are doing pretty good for themselves.

 

[FordSVT]

I said "the majority". Of course Dexter is a murderer, many of the guys in Sons of Anarchy are criminals and just about anybody on "The Tudors" is an over-ambitious entitled douche, but overall most of the (overwhelmingly white) characters on screen are what I said they are: "smart, ambitious, successful and respectable". If you deny that I think you don't know these shows. They are people, and people aren't perfect, but despite their flaws most of the characters on the shows mentioned are doing pretty good for themselves.

And Cleveland is a good man who tries to take care of his family in the crazy world they live in. What's your point then?

 

[Roger Wilco]

I said I don't know or care about the show this thread is about, I was just commenting on the suggestion that white people are displayed negatively in the shows, Temis mentioned.

 

[exodus]

It could be because for the first time America has a Black president and the First Lady is a sista, and together with their two beautiful Black daughters overnight improved the international image of Black people, let alone Americans. But leave it to the diabolical minds at FOX Networks to pick up where BET left off with the debut of their newest show “The Cleveland Show,” where in just 22 minutes they managed to portray Black mothers as unmarried promiscuous sexual objects, Black teenage girls as headed down the same path as their mothers, young Black boys as sexual deviants, and Black people period as being unable to speak anything other than Ebonics — all in the name of comedy.

Just like with the character Shirley Q. Liquor, a Black, unmarried, welfare mother who guzzles malt liquor, drives a Caddy, and has 19 “chirrun” some of whom are named Cheeto, Orangello, Chlamydia, and Kmartina, who is routinely performed by a White man in blackface, there's nothing funny about an animated television series that seeks to legitimize and reinforce every negative stereotype about Black people during primetime to the delight of White audiences from coast to coast.

When President Barack Obama was sworn into office, it signaled a new beginning for American politics and the end of mainstream media news reporting as we knew it because every day for the next four years, at least, a Black man was going to be the lead story on the evening newscast, and not for committing a crime, dunking a ball, or singing a song. In return, the news media sought to find balance by quietly, yet intentionally, removing Black anchors and reporters from newscasts around the country. I guess they figured one Negro making news on a daily basis was enough without having to hear about it from another as well.

All Black or majority-Black casts on television are a rare commodity. Blacks almost all but disappeared from broadcast television years ago, putting Black actors and actresses on the endangered species list with their news media counterparts.


Click here for full videoEven in today's economy and with the status of Blacks on television, be it entertainment or news, FOX is willing to capitalize off the continued objectification of Black women by using animation to over-sexualize their physical characteristics. (At least if the show weren't animated, a Black woman would be getting paid cash money for being objectified on screen, and a lot more than she would for just doing a voiceover, if you know what I'm saying.)
Just like BET knew they were pushing the envelope when they tried to go there with “We Can Do Better,” FOX knows it's pushing something with “The Cleveland Show,” and it isn't an envelope. FOX is making an attempt to capitalize off of the negative stereotypes of Blacks and laughing all the way to the bank.

Don't think so? How much do you think companies paid to advertise during a show that featured an overweight, recently divorced Black man and his overweight, developmentally challenged Black son, who go Down South where the father hooks up with his Black, overly voluptuous yet promiscuous high school crush only to play father to her delinquent Black children—all while speaking White people's version of Black Ebonics? I'm just saying.

Fox TV's New Minstrel Show

Well "The Cosby Show" tired showing a successful Black family who had a Lawyer for a mother & Doctor for a father and the American public called it "unrealistic" yet that combo is commonly used on many dramas where the majority of the cast is White.

On the flip side, "The Parkers", "Martin", "The P.J.'s" for example all were pre-Obama shows all run by Black people portraying Black stereotypes, yet were still hit shows watched by both Black & White audiences. While "Girlfriends" a pro-Black show portraying positive African-American business women(which was produced by Kelsy Grammar BTW) & "Kevin Hill"(starring Ty Diggs) a male Black lawyer trying to raise his son as a single parent went virtually un-noticed by White America.

So it seems that FOX is making a buck off what they know White America will watch because it doesn't seem to support the idea of upper class Black business people.

 

[IndyJones]

Well "The Cosby Show" tired showing a successful Black family who had a Lawyer for a mother & Doctor for a father and the American public called it "unrealistic" yet that combo is commonly used on many dramas where the majority of the cast is White...

So it seems that FOX is making a buck off what they know White America will watch because it doesn't seem to support the idea of upper class Black business people.

Yes, The Cosby Show, not supported by white America. Yet, somehow it managed to be the nation's highest rated show 5 seasons in a row. There are only two other shows in history that did that; All in the Family and American Idol. The Cosby Show is credited with bringing NBC to the front of the pack of networks in the 80's. Cliff is always counted in surveys of TV's best dads, and Claire in lists of TV's best moms.

The show spawned a spinoff that ran for six years. For the first four years it was on, A Different World's rating were #2, #3, #4, and #4 in the nation. Keep in mind that for those first three years, it was The Cosby Show that was number one.

The Cosby Show may have presented a black family unlike any that a large number of Americans had seen, but it was certainly embraced by white America.

 

[exodus]

Well "The Cosby Show" tired showing a successful Black family who had a Lawyer for a mother & Doctor for a father and the American public called it "unrealistic" yet that combo is commonly used on many dramas where the majority of the cast is White...

So it seems that FOX is making a buck off what they know White America will watch because it doesn't seem to support the idea of upper class Black business people.

Yes, The Cosby Show, not supported by white America. Yet, somehow it managed to be the nation's highest rated show 5 seasons in a row. There are only two other shows in history that did that; All in the Family and American Idol. The Cosby Show is credited with bringing NBC to the front of the pack of networks in the 80's. Cliff is always counted in surveys of TV's best dads, and Claire in lists of TV's best moms.

The show spawned a spinoff that ran for six years. For the first four years it was on, A Different World's rating were #2, #3, #4, and #4 in the nation. Keep in mind that for those first three years, it was The Cosby Show that was number one.

The Cosby Show may have presented a black family unlike any that a large number of Americans had seen, but it was certainly embraced by white America.

However, I do find it sad that "The Jeffersons" aren't given more credit for paving the way for a show like "Cosby".

So thank you Norman Lear for once again being ahead of your time.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

How dare they depict black people in a negative light! I'm glad that I only watch shows like Dexter, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Sons of Anarchy, Big Love and The Tudors, which depict white people being utterly despicable and reprehensible beyond belief.

I don't watch (or have any interest in) the show this thread is about, but that comparison is absurd. Yes, many of the white characters in these shows are assholes, but the vast majority of characters are smart, ambitious, successful and respectable (possibly with the exception of Breaking Bad, I don't really know that show, but definitely including SoA).

I have no interest in boring "nice" characters on TV, so you must be watching different shows than I am. The SoA characters are far from respectable, considering their proclivities for committing murder to further their tribal loyalties. Even Tara is now being corrupted and becoming a violent tribalistic thug (considering that she's a doctor, that's doubly shocking.) The only "nice" character on that show is Hale, and even he's willing to turn a blind eye to lawlessness when it suits his priggish moral values.

The Dexter characters all have their moral failings - one of the interesting points of that series is how every character is similar to Dexter in kind if not in degree. His idea that he is some outlier of human behavior and therefore sealed off forever from real human interaction is tragically and ironically wrong. If only he'd realize how terrible people really are, his painful isolation would be at an end.

Big Love is almost too nausea-inducing to watch sometimes - what a gaggle of sexist, stupid, bigoted, repressed, self-deluded ignoramuses! Even more tribalistic and thuggish than the bikers of SoA, and priggish hypocrites to boot.

Nobody on the Tudors is anything but than a wretched excuse for a human being, either that or a clueless dolt. That goes double for Mad Men, probably the most depressing depiction of human behavior in TV history. When they did the Cuban Missile Crisis episode, I was rooting for Krushchev to nuke them all.

Breaking Bad may be the worst of the bunch. It depicts a main character who starts out doing evil shit because he needs to take care of his family, but by S2, the writers are honest and upfront enough to change the story: Walter no longer is under the gun, but he won't give up his new badass lifestyle. Why? Because he won't let go of the thrill of danger and living a macho fantasy. This guy is destroying people's lives just to have fun! The whole point of the airplane crash plot twist was to illustrate what Walter is doing to people offscreen all the time. We may not see the carnage he leaves in his wake, but the body count is probably in the hundreds by now - a jumbo jet of dead bodies. Brilliant writing, and entirely uncompromising.

My point, which you completely missed, is that there's nothing particularly laudable about characters on TV being "nice." It's always the nasty ones who are the most interesting (and no doubt the most fun for the actors to play.) Anyone who looks to TV for role models is truly barking up the wrong tree. It's only entertainment and if you don't find it entertaining, turn it off.

The problem blacks face on TV is that they are underrepresented in the kind of characters that make waves in a story, that people want to watch and screenwriters want to write about, and that carry shows - the Dexter Morgans, the Gemma Tellers, the Walter Whites, the Nicolette Grants, the Henry XIII's. Those are the characters people tune into shows to see, and screenwriters are scared to write characters like that and cast a black actor in the role, which reduces the power those actors have. Michael C. Hall, John Hamm, and Bryan Cranston can do whatever they like in Hollywood now because they are immensely popular and millions of viewers will follow them to their next shows, whatever they are. Black actors need to get in on that action. That is where the power is. Being "nice" will get you zipola.

 

[Roger Wilco]

I don't really want to say much about this since I don't think it's on-topic. But my point wasn't that the people in these shows are "nice". Those are some of my favourite shows and that wouldn't be the case if the writing were so simple. Most of the characters are complex personalities, some are even really bad guys but overall they are usually either likable (even Dexter is a cool guy somehow) or have a job or life that's desirable (like Donald Draper).

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you wrote there, especially the last paragraph. The only thing I disagree with (and maybe I misunderstood you about that) is, that there's anything remotely comparable in the way white people are shown in these tv shows to racism against black Americans in tv.

 

[exodus]

I don't really want to say much about this since I don't think it's on-topic. But my point wasn't that the people in these shows are "nice". Those are some of my favourite shows and that wouldn't be the case if the writing were so simple. Most of the characters are complex personalities, some are even really bad guys but overall they are usually either likable (even Dexter is a cool guy somehow) or have a job or life that's desirable (like Donald Draper).

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you wrote there, especially the last paragraph. The only thing I disagree with (and maybe I misunderstood you about that) is, that there's anything remotely comparable in the way white people are shown in these tv shows to racism against black Americans in tv.

Well, while "Mad Men" is also an American history lesson of that period. The only re-accuring Black character is a maid and I believe the only other Black character that's ever had a speaking part in two years of the show was the elevator operator.

The only people of color(Black or Latino) shown in "Breaking Bad" all have been drug dealers. You never even saw police men of color until Bryan Cranson's characters brother-in-law took a job running boarder patrol in one episode. Isn't "Breaking Bad" taking place around the L.A. area? Where are all the Black & Latino police? However, I do give "BB" credit much like "The Shield" for showing that it's not just minorities that are part of the drug trade.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

I was gonna type up a really long response with some history showing why this is racist, for this and the Song of the South thread, but...really what's the point?

We'll argue back and forth and the majority of people can't, won't, or don't see the racist depictions of this show no matter how it's explained. And if they do, they don't understand why it's harmful.

The discussion of race in America is always so touchy because of the chasm in perception of what is and isn't racism. Blacks see it as a more complex and institutional problem that is "perpetuated within structural settings, even without deliberate and bigoted intent, due to the normal workings of long entrenched policies, practices, and procedures." and whites simply see it as interpersonal meanness and think that the majority of society has moved on...

This is where it starts. And I think today's perceptions of racism in media stereotypes are a result. Historically minority representations in media are a result of racism, and today its legacy perpetuates those stereotypes used to demean, delegitimize, and dehumanize minorities. Those stereotypes still color our perceptions and are ingrained in the foundation of our society.

Looking back through history, the majority of Whites have been wrong about the problem of racism in every single generation. For example, a Gallup poll conducted in 1962 showed that a majority of Whites didn't think that Blacks had less opportunities in employment and education in the 1960's! Today, only a moron would deny that racism was a problem in the 60's. But back then good, and otherwise rational people denied its existence.

So if good people can so strongly deny what is right in front of them then, why is it so hard to believe that denial occurs today?

I understand that people have their own issues to worry about, but why are people either oblivious of issues of race or in denial? The evidence overwhelmingly points to on going effects of institutional racism. Rather than discussion centering on how to fix problems, time is wasted on discussing if there is a problem, or if certain imagery or phrases are racist. And as some have demonstrated here, they find that discussion absurd and laughable for completely different reasons than I do...

So no post providing background and history to show how it's racist, which will lead to an argument about whether it is racist or not. It IS a racist show. It's a clueless white guy's perception of black people in America and it's disgusting. It shouldn't be up for debate. I]Most[/I] Whites ignore the experiences of blacks and deny or explain away racism. I can't say what people are thinking, but what is said leads me to believe that many think that blacks are paranoid and always seeking to be the victims, trying to find racism lurking behind every corner.

I'm not saying that I'm not going to stop debating (on the rare occasions that I post) and trying to change minds on issues of race, but people in this forum get downright hostile when discussing issues of race.

Which is why I've emphasized certain words in this post. Because no matter how I try to make my criticisms as impersonal as possible, people always think I'm calling them racist.

I'm not, I don't know you or what's in your heart. Just please don't take criticism of society as a personal insult and keep an open mind...

I'm in complete agreement with you.

I had the same problem on a post about the naming of ships in Star Trek after certain historical figures; as I said that WASP's need to understand their history better by reading better history books, I got accused of racism by several posters. I'm not surprised at the responses on this thread.

 

[exodus]

So if Seth McFarlane is a clueless white guy by by poking fun of stereotypes in Black America and it's disgusting, what of Martin Lawerance using those same stereotypes for humor within his own show?

What about when Eddie Murphy puts on White make up and behaves in the stereotype of a White guy?

How is Seth McFarlane any different than the humor in "Blazing Saddles" or "History of the World pt1" which made Mel Brookes and rich & respected man?

We never used to be offended by any of this.
We used to call people that saw racism & stereotypes for what they were enough to poke fun of them geniuses.

When is it ok to stop being offended and start feeling secure in laughing at ourselves again?

..and for all this blasting of "The Cleveland Show". When there was a show with a mostly Black cast that projected them in a positive light, did you watch it? Did you support it?

 

[Harvey]

Because the humor in "Blazing Saddles" is smart and nuanced, poking fun at the inherent racism in westerns? I haven't seen "A History of the World Part I," but you're honestly going to compare "Blazing Saddles" to "The Cleveland Show?"

 

[exodus]

Because the humor in "Blazing Saddles" is smart and nuanced, poking fun at the inherent racism in westerns?

It was poking fun of racism in general, the western was just the back drop. The jokes can be put into any setting and still hold true.

What I'm comparing is why is there a double standard.
Why is Mcfarlane's stereotyping offensive but Martin Lawerance' not?
Why is Brooks a genius & McFarlane clueless?

If "Blazing Saddles" were made today, do you think people would still find it smart or would the PC world be offended?

 

[Teelie]

If "Blazing Saddles" were made today, do you think people would still find it smart or would the PC world be offended?

It would never get close to being made today as it was back then. Racism is only acceptable if it's against white people because that's the new trend, instead of racism being flat out wrong in any instance as it should be.

 

[Harvey]

It was poking fun of racism in general, the western was just the back drop.

Most film historians would disagree with you. I certainly disagree with you. And Mel Brooks, quoted here in this easily found article with quotes from several interviews, disagrees with you.

It was time to take two eyes, the way Picasso had done it, and put them on one side of the nose, because the official movie portrait of the West was simply a lie. I figured my career was finished anyway, so I wrote berserk, heartfelt stuff about white corruption and racism and Bible-thumping bigotry.

What I'm comparing is why is there a double standard.
Why is Mcfarlane's stereotyping offensive but Martin Lawerance' not?
Why is Brooks a genius & McFarlane clueless?

Brooks is a genius because he upends stereotypes and cinematic conventions. McFarlane just reproduces a formula of stereotypes and conventions. His style of comedy has become a thoughtless sausage factory.

I can't speak to Martin Lawrence. I think his Blue Streak is hilarious, but that is less due to his personality than the brilliant supporting characters that populate that movie. I haven't liked any other films he's been in (except for Do the Right Thing, but that's an early role and not one of his comedy vehicles) and I don’t believe I’ve seen any of his stand-up. Blue Streak certainly isn’t about stereotyping whites, though.

If "Blazing Saddles" were made today, do you think people would still find it smart or would the PC world be offended?

The thing is, a movie like Blazing Saddles would never be made today. It's a comedy about racial prejudice that doesn't soft-peddle the racial prejudice of any of its characters. Hollywood would never produce something so shocking. Can you imagine an old lady speaking the words, "up yours, nigger" in a comedy today?

 

[exodus]

It was poking fun of racism in general, the western was just the back drop.

Most film historians would disagree with you. I certainly disagree with you. And Mel Brooks, quoted here in this easily found article with quotes from several interviews, disagrees with you.

It was time to take two eyes, the way Picasso had done it, and put them on one side of the nose, because the official movie portrait of the West was simply a lie. I figured my career was finished anyway, so I wrote berserk, heartfelt stuff about white corruption and racism and Bible-thumping bigotry.

What I'm comparing is why is there a double standard.
Why is Mcfarlane's stereotyping offensive but Martin Lawerance' not?
Why is Brooks a genius & McFarlane clueless?

Brooks is a genius because he upends stereotypes and cinematic conventions. McFarlane just reproduces a formula of stereotypes and conventions. His style of comedy has become a thoughtless sausage factory.

I can't speak to Martin Lawrence. I think his Blue Streak is hilarious, but that is less due to his personality than the brilliant supporting characters that populate that movie. I haven't liked any other films he's been in (except for Do the Right Thing, but that's an early role and not one of his comedy vehicles) and I don’t believe I’ve seen any of his stand-up. Blue Streak certainly isn’t about stereotyping whites, though.

If "Blazing Saddles" were made today, do you think people would still find it smart or would the PC world be offended?

The thing is, a movie like Blazing Saddles would never be made today. It's a comedy about racial prejudice that doesn't soft-peddle the racial prejudice of any of its characters. Hollywood would never produce something so shocking. Can you imagine an old lady speaking the words, "up yours, nigger" in a comedy today?

So you took the time to look up Mel Brooks, which wasn't the main point but didn't bother at all with the real point, which was the double standard or why shows the have Black stereotypes do better than those with a positive Black image.

 

[exodus]

If "Blazing Saddles" were made today, do you think people would still find it smart or would the PC world be offended?

It would never get close to being made today as it was back then. Racism is only acceptable if it's against white people because that's the new trend, instead of racism being flat out wrong in any instance as it should be.

If racism against Whites is acceptable, then why are we here talking about racism & stereotypes in shows were the majority of the cast is Black?

 

[Aragorn]

So you took the time to look up Mel Brooks, which wasn't the main point but didn't bother at all with the real point, which was the double standard.

The truth of the matter is that there's a lot of money to be made with bigotry and double standards. Just ask Al Sharpton.

 

[exodus]

So you took the time to look up Mel Brooks, which wasn't the main point but didn't bother at all with the real point, which was the double standard.

The truth of the matter is that there's a lot of money to be made with bigotry and double standards. Just ask Al Sharpton.

Ouch!!

However, Yes that is the truth.
Thank you for being bold enough to say it.

 

[Aragorn]

Nothing bad ever happens to Sharpton after he spouts off racist stuff, yet he's calling Rush Limbaugh divisive (pot or kettle?) and aiding Don Imus on racial harmony. Limbaugh and Sharpton are the same, so why can only one of them be called out on the things they say?