It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

OOps ‘Hamilton’ Casting Call For ‘Non-White’ Performers/May have violated the Law..???

page: 5
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:07 PM
link   
I hope an all white one is cast by a new RW director. No rapping and it goes deep into the story of Hamilton marrying a woman who made a lot of money in slave trading which was the main reason he married her and the true story. Casting call should read WHITES ONLY!!!




posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

www.jacksonlewis.com...
crisisforums.org...


Here is the proof that they did in fact write the call for one ethnicity.


The audition notice, on the show’s website since the fall, said the production was “seeking nonwhite men and women, ages 20s to 30s.” The story was reported by CBS New York, and sparked reactions on Twitter and other media outlets, with views coming down on both sides.

Casting specificity is common and legal in theater, but the invitation failed to include standard language used by the union Actors’ Equity to encourage any and all performers to try out.
Related coverage

“Hamilton” producers responded by saying the casting call will be amended to include language welcoming all ethnicities.
www.wsj.com...



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

I see you don't want to want to reply to me anymore...after I showed your hypocrisy and how you think it's ok for them to discriminate at will just not white people...how you still have credibility with anyone here is beyond me. Thanks for indulging in what limited conversation you have and for showing everyone your true feelings here.
edit on 19-11-2016 by RickyD because: Quote system fail on my phone...

edit on 19-11-2016 by RickyD because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

They clearly broke the law.

Not being held accountable only points to systemic racism and "diverse" privilege.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

And they changed it immediately.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

Not really.


To be clear: from a legal standpoint, this is really a question of semantics. According to the rules of professional theatre, the use of “Non-“ anything is considered discrimination. What they should have done was specify what races they wanted, not what race they did not want. That was their mistake.
www.huffingtonpost.com...



The wording was changed, no fines, no harm to foul.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

I thought not. I am seeing a lot of stuff like this around her. Someone tosses up a thread concerning some 'reported' 'specific' action and then go on about how that was an example of some larger problem that they see. Then, when other people come on and challenge or debunk the claims of that specific example, they then go on to defend their accuasations because it is true according to their larger sense of the issue. So the example that was supposed to demonstrate proof of the larger issue can only be defended if one already accepts the truth of the larger issue. An example is not proof if the only way it can be proved is in light of it's conclusion.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

I would think a civil court would be more than able to decide if this simple oops is simply semantics or a huge payout to a plaintiff.

What do you think a jury would think, I think I know.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

What?



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Yes because unions are always honest and upstanding...and folks with agendas would never use their position to further them...that's all folks nothing to see here...he said they didn't find any wrongdoing...



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

So we agree they did in fact violate the law?




And they changed it immediately.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

You got set about using Hamilton as a whipping post against the cast that you said treated Pence unfairly. Once your notion in that thread had been demonstrated to be very weak at best, you began another thread about Hamilton being unabashedly racist. Once it was pointed out that that issue was over half a year old and that it was not current news and that the problem over wording in the casting call had been presented to the producers of the show and then was immediately corrected, you continued on in your denunciation of the show and crew. Your staunch accusations, made, I assume' to prove some larger points you think need addressing, were undermined by any number of replies to which you then proceeded to try to validate the accusations, not on their own credibility but rather only on the credibility that you have given to those larger issues in your own mind. That's what.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Ok, I think we disagree.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Deny Arrogance
Agreed



They clearly broke the law.

Not being held accountable only points to systemic racism and "diverse" privilege.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

These are likely some of the same people who bitched about Star Wars having a black lead actor.

I admire your tenacity



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimSmith
a reply to: reldra

These are likely some of the same people who bitched about Star Wars having a black lead actor.

I admire your tenacity


No, if the person is chosen because he is best for the job it is completely different. I could care less if the lead in Force Awakens was a black man, as he fit the part and the movie was good.

I personally have a problem with discrimination period. Discrimination is not only against non-white people regardless of what some people think, the act if discrimination is shall we say non discriminatory.

edit on 19-11-2016 by Darkphoenix77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: JimSmith

Hardly the main point of this thread was that the diverse actors and the producers put an illegal add that called for a specific ethnicity. I find it to be hypocritical of the group to call Pence out with the back handed grand standing at a stage show.




These are likely some of the same people who bitched about Star Wars having a black lead actor.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Darkphoenix77

Depends on the production. White people in Roots would be pretty damn awful. In a case such as that, the producers are absolutely right to make a casting call for black actors.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I think a jury would think you were full of #. How would this even get to a jury? Some actor that didn't get cast because the script called for a black person to play the role?

How many white men do you suppose read for the OJ Simpson role that Cuba Gooding played in the People V OJ? Any of them suing, so you suppose?



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimSmith
a reply to: reldra

These are likely some of the same people who bitched about Star Wars having a black lead actor.

I admire your tenacity


I'll bet some of the people here are also the some of the same ones who complained that Gods of Egypt's cast was too white.

And you know what? I'll bet the two pools of people are very different lists.




top topics



 
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join