John Ridley's Visible Man
 
 
July 27, 2007

BET's Hot Mess

Political correctness is a double-edged sword. Cut with the "upside," you're left with civility in discourse. The downside is, plainly, censorship from the left. Fortunately, most times common sense carries the day. By now we know (I hope) that group X shouldn't be publicly using a slur when referring to group Y.

But what if someone in group X is using what someone else in that group perceives to be a slur or seemingly promoting stereotypes against themselves?

Such the dilemma for Black Entertainment Television with its new limited series, We Got to Do Better. Originally titled Hot Ghetto Mess, the program is based on the Web site of the same name, which basically satirizes "urban" black culture by running true photos of black folks dressed or behaving in extreme examples of, oh, "urban blackness."

Controversial enough for the Web. But just hours before the program debut this past Wednesday, in the face of sizable protests, BET was forced to change the program's name to "We Got to Do Better," the Web site's tagline. Ironically, the push for change was driven by another Web site, Whataboutourdaughters.blogspot.com. Gina McCauley, who runs that site, would have been happier if the show had been pulled altogether.

So, then, is this a victory (even if a partial one) for decency, or is it another example of PC authoritarianism? If Jeff Foxworthy can make a fortune counseling whites that they "Might be a redneck if..." can't Jam Donaldson, the founder of Hot Ghetto Mess, do the same? If BET can make its bread off selling the gangsta lifestyle in its videos and programming such as American Gangsta and Lil' Kim: Countdown to Lockdown, why can't it counterprogram with a show that dares to wink at a single aspect of black culture?

Perhaps it's just a "money" thing, the feeling that urban blacks are being mocked because of their socioeconomic status. But the reverse has long been acceptable. There remains a degree of anti-black intellectualism in entertainment. Middle and upper-middle class blacks have often been portrayed as buffoons in popular culture; witness the characters of Carlton Banks on The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air and Braxton P. Hartnabrig on The Jamie Foxx Show. In real life, the likes of Condi Rice and Colin Powell have been derided as being an Aunt Jemima and a House N-- with barely a word of protest spoken.

So, what can we say about ourselves, and when can we say it? If some of us can get an Oscar for extolling that it's hard out there for a pimp, why can't others of us admonish: "Then quit acting like a pimp"?

If you're looking for answers, don't look to Hot Ghetto Mess. At least not under that name on BET.

 
July 23, 2007

The Unforgivable Blackness of Barry Bonds

description

Barry Bonds of the San Francisco Giants

Jed Jacobsohn/Getty Images

Barry Bonds stands just a few at bats away from breaking Hank Aaron's career home run record. So, naturally, there have been any number of polls like this one and this one that take a snapshot of how people feel about Bonds and the record in light of his alleged steroid use.

This just wouldn't be America if somehow race didn't factor into things. And what jumps out is that blacks tend to be twice as likely as whites to support Bonds' grab for the history books. Going with a New York Times/CBS News poll, 57 percent of blacks are rooting for Bonds to break the record, with only 29 percent of whites showing similar support.

Some people have weighed in with disparate takes on the variance between blacks and whites; if the underlying fundamentals aren't flawed, then the polls in concept are nothing but media race baiting.

Maybe, and maybe.

But I think there's a different take on the divergent approval numbers beyond the simplistic notion that some people of color simply "love Bonds 'cause he's black."

First, we've got to take steroids out of the equation. Bonds has never been found guilty of nor admitted to the knowing use of steroids (key word: knowing). Also, we get to talk to a lot of sports writers on the TV show I appear on, Morning Joe on MSNBC, and to a person they tell us the reason Bonds is so disliked is not because of steroid use. Though he certainly doesn't get a pass for that. Rather, he generates animosity because he's a straight up, uh...jerk. He's a cocky guy with a bad attitude who does not care one thing for being liked, and I think that plays differently with some blacks -- some, in this case, being that divergent 28 percent. Why? Because likability has never been an issue with blacks.

From the moment we were first dumped in Jamestown and had our teeth checked before getting sold off and later considered three-fifths of a human being, an abundance of "likability" hasn't been something blacks have had to stockpile. Instead, it's been a centuries-long battle for respectability. That quest has given rise to persons of color who don't even give lip service to the "You like me, you really like me!" mentality. Instead they embrace "unforgivable blackness," the desire to achieve without regard to the concerns of others, black or white.

To be real, I have always admired those who did not give a good golly gosh darn (note, my editor's choice of words) what other people thought about anything. Jack Johnson, Sonny Liston, Sade, Ali, Sammy Davis Jr., Josephine Baker, Adam Clayton Powell . . . Even Dennis Rodman, clown that he was, did as he pleased. All of them -- they romanced whom they wanted. Married whoever they liked. Divorced whoever they were married to when the marriage became tiresome. They drank and smoked and sassed backed. Carved their own path. But primarily, they achieved. While most trudge through their days straight-jacketed in the social compact, living for others as much as or more than for themselves, a select few excel.

Let's be very clear: Living "unforgiven" is not the sole domain of blacks. It can be found in any successful person. Successful because they scaled the highest ivory Wall Street tower, no matter the sign hung on the door read, "NEED NOT APPLY." Successful because they've raised a wonderful family despite the fact society said, "You can't marry that person." They, all of them, do it with metaphorical Tommie Smith/John Carlos black-gloved fists raised high in defiance.

How one ultimately feels about Bonds and steroids, I guess, could be reflected in how they feel about James Kirk's solution to the Kobayashi Maru test.

I do believe, however, having learned to live without "likability," some blacks, and before your little push-back fingers get to typing, I stress SOME -- perhaps personified in that 28 percent -- are predisposed to appreciate the virtue of selfishness when we see it.

 
July 19, 2007

Obama's IQ Test

description

Sen. Barack Obama greets the crowd after speaking at an Independence Day celebration in Beaverdale, Iowa.

David Lienemann/Getty Images

Here's the story as I recall hearing it. Maybe it's just Beltway legend. If you know better, hit me back with the details.

Hubert Humphrey's running for president. One of his campaign managers runs to him all excited: "Mr. Humphrey, good news. The polls show we've got the intellectual vote!" Humphrey says, "Great. Now how do we get the other 95 percent of America to vote for me?"

Point being: Capturing the intellectual vote doesn't win elections. Intellectuals just buy those CDs full of that funky music they play between stories on Morning Edition.

This is an issue Barack Obama's now facing down. In other words, he's got the Lake Shore liberal vote locked. And, hey, I'm not knocking that. Much as banks don't care where your money's coming from, the Electoral College is all "don't ask, don't care" when it comes to votes. But how does Obama get the votes that matter; votes from real folks and not just elitists?

Well, along comes Oprah to solve Obama's problems. If this woman can sell crappy novels to soccer moms, she can certainly sell a guy like Obama to regular America.

Except...

Oprah's reportedly throwing an ULTRANORMOUS star-studded fundraiser for Obama at her Santa Barbara, Calif., super shack in September. The price at the door starts at $2,300. It's $25,000 to make the VIP reception and if you want a meal with your star-ogling, better be ready to flip 50k OohGottas or be put to the curb.

Wow, what a great way to get in touch with the regular Joes.

Look, I understand politicos gotta make bank. But cloistering with the Hollywood elite is not how you prove you're a man of the people.

If I can be so bold as to give Oprah and Obama a little career advice, how about this: Hold a couple of old-fashioned BBQs on Chicago's south side or up in Waukegan. Price of admission? A can of food to be donated to a food bank. Eat, talk, break bread with real people. Then pass the around the hat and see what you get. Obama and Oprah together? Even if it's just five bucks a person he'd still haul in a mint. And solidify a new base while they're at it. DO THAT FIRST, then fly out to Hollywood and make the bacon.

Barack, if you don't connect with the people who really matter, well, come November you might find you're swilling lattes and listening to some of this.

 
July 18, 2007

Elizabeth Edwards: The Sexiest Woman in Politics

description

Elizabeth Edwards

Yuri Gripas/AFP/Getty Images

I'm sorry, but chick fights are sexy.

If you don't think so, you're either an uptight woman or a lying man. And if you're offended thus far, then please just jump on back to the "cancer guy" blog. Ladies throwing down is just plain hot, and that's true whether they're drunk and tussling on the Vegas Strip or if they're doing some verbal mud wrestling in the media. And the woman least afraid to get her li'l dukes up, and therefore currently the sexiest in politics, is Elizabeth Edwards.

Ms. Edwards originally landed on my politically hot-meter after giving it to Ann Coulter. The slap-fest starting after Coulter questioned -- among other things -- John Edwards' sexuality. Which I find interesting 'cause I'm never sure myself if Coulter is pre-op or post-op.

Anyway...

There was Liz on MSNBC's Hardball doing one of those WWE surprise smackdowns. Doing her version of: "You do not come into my house and mess with my man!"

And maybe you figured that was a one-time stunt for the cameras. That Coulter's an easy, obvious target for John to pass off to the Mrs. to deal with.

Then comes the latest cat scratching from Liz: digging her Grrrl claws deep into Hillary Clinton, a woman who's also proved she knows her way around a cage match. And this one you gotta love: Liz impinges Hillary's womanliness by claiming her husband's more in touch with the female electorate than the female candidate. That Hillary is just not as vocal a women's advocate as John is. In fact, in an interview with Salon.com, Elizabeth is quoted as saying Sen. Clinton is "just not as vocal a women's advocate as ... John is."

Me-Ow!

Now, Elizabeth offers up scant evidence that Hillary is truly out of touch with women or "women's issues." But that first swipe makes me wanna grab a beer, kick back and wait for these ladies to rip each other's intellectual shirts off.

The real loser in all this is, of course, John Edwards. His wife picking fights for him makes him look like an even bigger bee-yatch than that eight-minute primp-vid of his that was viraling around the Web.

But, hey, keep it up, Elizabeth. You're making the pro forma Clinton coronation worth watching.

Now, bring on Mrs. Thompson!

 

FAQ for John Ridley's Visible Man

What is John Ridley's Visible Man?

For seven years, Ridley's award winning and distinctive commentaries have been heard on NPR's Morning Edition. Now, his intellectually aggressive take on the intersection of politics and pop culture appears twice weekly on NPR.org.

I'm too lazy to look up all of Ridley's bona fides. Can you hit me up with them real quick?

He's the author of seven published novels and contributor to such media outlets as Esquire, Time, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Boston Globe, as well as a commentator for MSNBC, CNN and Fox News. Clearly Ridley's doing something right. With the Visible Man, Ridley will be all the more conspicuous.

What's the point of the blog?

To add yet another forum for Ridley to express his frank point of view, delivered with an ironic style. It won't be confused with the sea of sameness that dominates the media which typically only bring in pundits of color to comment on "minority stuff" when some "black thing" is happening somewhere in America. Added to Ridley's POV is what's been described as the perspective of the "new black Americans" which brings a garnish of "who cares what you think" to everything he writes.

Why is it called "Visible Man."

Please.

Does this mean Ridley won't be doing on-air commentaries any more?

You wish.

Who can comment?

All are invited to comment, even those who disagree as long as they are thoughtful and respectful to all. Seriously, act like an adult.

Do you have rules about what can, or cannot, be said in the comments?

Yes. Please see our guidelines for comments. Comments should be limited to the specific blog. Comments which are deemed to be off topic will be removed.

How often do you post new entries to the blog?

At least twice a week.

What if I want to e-mail Ridley privately?

It's good to want things in life.

Can I link to your blog?

Absolutely!

Will you link to my blog?

What's in it for me?

Do I need to sign up to be eligible to post comments?

Not at the moment, but that may change some day as we add new community features to the Web site.

 

Discussion Guidelines

Every Web site has its own rules, and these are ours. If you break them, don't be surprised if we block your comments.

First things first: If you can't be polite, don't say it. Of course, we don't want to stifle discussion of controversial issues. Some topics require blunt talk, and we're not always going to agree with each other. Nonetheless, please try to disagree without being disagreeable. Focus your remarks on positions, not personalities. No name calling, slander, comments about someone's mother, comparisons to notorious dictators -- you get the idea. And under no circumstances should you post anything that could be taken as threatening, harassing, sexist or racist.

Don't use obscenities -- even if the word in question is often used in conversation. We're not going to list the words we object to; you know what they are. Remember, this is a public forum and we want everyone to feel comfortable participating.

Anything you post should be your own work. You're welcome to link to relevant content and to quote from other people's work with attribution. But that doesn't mean you can copy and paste wholesale.

Please stay on topic. Think of it this way -- if you hosted a book club meeting at your house, you wouldn't want someone to show up and insist on discussing reality TV shows.

Rambling is the kiss of death. We don't want to place a word count on how long your comments should be, but anything beyond a few paragraphs had better be very, very interesting to the larger community. We reserve the right to edit for brevity as well as clarity.

Please respect people's privacy. We love to learn about new and interesting individuals, but most people will not be happy to have their phone numbers or e-mail addresses published. If you need to share someone's contact information, please submit it through our contact form.

Feel free to share your ideas and experiences about religion, politics and relevant products or services you've discovered. But this is not a place for advertising, promotion, recruiting, campaigning, soliciting or proselytizing. We understand that there can be a fine line between discussing and campaigning; please use your best judgment -- and we will use ours.

We appreciate the news tips members of the public send us. However, NPR reserves the right not to publicize allegations, conspiracy theories and other information which we know to be false or unsubstantiated.

Please don't use public forums for private communication. Most of our forums have a link (it's on the right side) for sending private messages to a blogger or host. Similarly, if you have comments about NPR coverage or policies generally, please don't use the blog discussion threads to air them. For issues regarding NPR editorial content or policies, write to the office of the ombudsman. To contact an NPR program or any of our business and technical departments, use the NPR contact form.

If you want to know even more information on what is and isn't allowed on NPR.org, please see our very official Terms of Use page.

 


   
   
   
null


 
E-mail this page Print this page
 
 
 
John Ridley.

John Ridley

BLOGGER

 
 
 

About Visible Man

For seven years, John Ridley's award winning and distinctive commentaries have been heard on NPR's Morning Edition. Now, his intellectually aggressive take on the intersection of politics and pop culture appears twice weekly on NPR.org.

When he is not projecting his voice through NPR's megaphone, Ridley is often busy writing books. He is the author of seven published novels, including The American Way and What Fire Cannot Burn.

If you'd like to know more about John and his Visible Man blog, please consult the FAQ entry.

 
 

Discussion Guidelines

Read the discussion guidelines for John Ridley's Visible Man.

 
 

Comment Privately

If you would like to send private comments or questions to John Ridley's Visible Man, please use our contact form.

 
 
 

Search 'John Ridley's Visible Man'

Search for the word(s):
 
 

Browse Topics

Services

Programs