Black only channel will ONLY cover DNC covention. , page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times


reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 11:39 AM by Andrew E. Wiggin
So, black people should just leave it up to white-oriented networks to allow their celebration of black history on TV all the time?

Don't you realize what you're saying?

"typical" white people wouldnt watch it.

Do you watch BET or TV ONE?

Personally - i don't. I rarely find it interesting, because it doesnt apply to me, im white.

But i don't have a problem with black people celebrating their history.

Whats my history? Hell if i know. I couldnt give you a guess as to where my ancestors originate. Because *I* dont care.

So black people are left with 2 choices


  • Leave it up to old white men from the 50's and 60's to allow BLACK PROGRAMMING on white oriented networks
  • Or start their OWN network with black oriented programming


Did you have any problem with "the original kings of comedy" who "happened to be" all black comedians?

me? I laughed my ass off. Though i thought George Carlin should've been in there, IMO, he IS the king of comedy.


Maybe the HISTORY channel should report on current events and predict the future...maybe they shoudl hire Miss Cleo to do her own "this will happen" series


Maybe National Geographic should run animated cartoons from the old days, like PopEye and Roadrunner


Maybe CMT should allow Jay-Z and tupac videos to be played on thier networks

or


Maybe you should realize that you're making a mountain out of a no-hill and making everyone h ere think you're racist.

Its okay man

Let it go. There is nothing to be angry about

[edit on 7/9/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]


reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 11:44 AM by dbates
reply to post by Dronetek


I don't have any issue with B.E.T. only showing black programming or Latino Magazine only featuring Latin American people.

What you're focusing on is simply a symptom of the issue. The real issue is that blacks are going to overwhelmingly vote for Obama. What's new? They usually vote Democrat anyway (75% - 90%). I don't see how this changes anything or even makes a difference in the elections. They'd be showing the DNC convention even if it was Hillary as the nominee.


reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 11:44 AM by Dronetek
Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

me? I laughed my ass off. Though i thought George Carlin should've been in there, IMO, he IS the king of comedy.


Maybe the HISTORY channel should report on current events and predict the future...maybe they shoudl hire Miss Cleo to do her own "this will happen" series


Maybe National Geographic should run animated cartoons from the old days, like PopEye and Roadrunner


Maybe CMT should allow Jay-Z and tupac videos to be played on thier networks

or


Maybe you should realize that you're making a mountain out of a no-hill and making everyone h ere think you're racist.

Its okay man

Let it go. There is nothing to be angry about

[edit on 7/9/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



All my my favorite comedians are black. Why cant you get it through your head that I don't have a problem with black people. I'm the most UNracist person you'll ever meet. That doesn't mean I'm going to blindly accept a media channel basing their political coverage solely on skin color.

I see where your coming from, but I think your way is the wrong way. It only serves to build resentment and continue the racial cycle. At some point, we have to quit basing every sittuation on skin color and just focus on the people. Just like Dr. King advocated. I think hes rolling in his grave these days.


Originally posted by dbates
reply to
post by Dronetek


I don't have any issue with B.E.T. only showing black programming or Latino Magazine only featuring Latin American people.

What you're focusing on is simply a symptom of the issue. The real issue is that blacks are going to overwhelmingly vote for Obama. What's new? They usually vote Democrat anyway (75% - 90%). I don't see how this changes anything or even makes a difference in the elections. They'd be showing the DNC convention even if it was Hillary as the nominee.



I honestly think that people with this opinion have the best of intentions. The problem is, your accepting a practice that has been categorically denounced as legitimate when it comes to white people. You cant keep having a different standard for non-white people and white people. Its a slippery slope and gives people mixed messages.

[edit on 9-7-2008 by Dronetek]


reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 11:48 AM by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by dbates
They'd be showing the DNC convention even if it was Hillary as the nominee.


So, you think they're just lying about that part?

BET, TV One Gear up for Convention


The four-year-old TV One, which is covering its inaugural presidential campaign, will provide blanket coverage of the four-day convention, including live primetime coverage and a nightly post-convention show, said its president, Johnathan Rodgers.

Both networks say the historical presidential run of the U.S. senator from Illinois is the driving force behind their unprecedented coverage of the 2008 presidential campaign.

“If Obama were not the presumptive nominee, we would not have covered the convention at all,” said Rodgers. “This is a huge event in the history of African-Americans and we are a network that's proud of the fact that 93% of our audience is black. Not only do we feel an obligation to cover it well, we feel it is part of our promise to our viewers.”




reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 11:49 AM by Dronetek
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by dbates
They'd be showing the DNC convention even if it was Hillary as the nominee.


So, you think they're just lying about that part?

BET, TV One Gear up for Convention


The four-year-old TV One, which is covering its inaugural presidential campaign, will provide blanket coverage of the four-day convention, including live primetime coverage and a nightly post-convention show, said its president, Johnathan Rodgers.

Both networks say the historical presidential run of the U.S. senator from Illinois is the driving force behind their unprecedented coverage of the 2008 presidential campaign.

“If Obama were not the presumptive nominee, we would not have covered the convention at all,” said Rodgers. “This is a huge event in the history of African-Americans and we are a network that's proud of the fact that 93% of our audience is black. Not only do we feel an obligation to cover it well, we feel it is part of our promise to our viewers.”


Why wouldn't they cover it? What do you think the reason is?


reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 11:55 AM by Johnmike
reply to post by Dronetek



Don't worry much about Wiggin, he's paid by the Obama campaign to post here.

They're racist, plain and simple. Only covering one party's convention is an obvious form of bias, no matter how you spin it. "Black only" programming is racist in itself. It's okay to have a show about black people, but...come on. "White only" programming would be shut down, and most of TV today is pretty diversified.


reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 11:59 AM by dbates
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Do you think blacks are only interested in politics if a black man is in the running? I don't think that's a fair assumption. They would still show parts of the convention even if it was Hillary. Now they might now show hours and hours of it, but it would be shown in some manner either way. Obama has just made this a bigger event for them.


reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 12:05 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin
Originally posted by Johnmike
reply to
post by Dronetek



Don't worry much about Wiggin, he's paid by the Obama campaign to post here.



That's hilarious....especially if you knew me

Thats right, i must be paid by the Obama campaign to support a black guy, right?





reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 12:07 PM by Dronetek
Originally posted by dbates
reply to
post by Benevolent Heretic


Do you think blacks are only interested in politics if a black man is in the running? I don't think that's a fair assumption. They would still show parts of the convention even if it was Hillary. Now they might now show hours and hours of it, but it would be shown in some manner either way. Obama has just made this a bigger event for them.


Nope, thats not what they said. They pretty clearly said they were only interested in covering the black guy. They wouldn't cover Hillary because shes white.


Would you expect MTV to cover the Country Music Awards?
Would you expect the TBN (Trinity Broadcasting Network) to host a Yom Kippur ceremony?
Would you expect the Sci-Fi Channel to cover the Oscars?

It's a specialized TV channel. There are a lot of them. They air what the viewers want to see.


Yes and this one is based on race. Geez, you guys are killing me here. You cant see that you have a different standard for racism, based on the color of the offenders skin.

The fact is, some of you support racism. You don't see it that way, but by definition you are accepting discrimination based on race.

[edit on 9-7-2008 by Dronetek]


reply posted on 9-7-2008 @ 12:11 PM by Dronetek
Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
Originally posted by Johnmike
reply to
post by Dronetek



Don't worry much about Wiggin, he's paid by the Obama campaign to post here.



That's hilarious....especially if you knew me

Thats right, i must be paid by the Obama campaign to support a black guy, right?



You can really dish it out, but you sure cant take it.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^