Prometheus 6

Although, actually, I mostly don't like it at all. I'm trying to figure out a good outcome for this (for the CBC) and, so far, none presents itself.

  What started out as, I guess, a protest against Fox News has now turned into concerted attacks on the CBC, and the labeling of all its members as fools, too stupid to lead, too stupid to know what is good for them, too corrupt to lead, too venal and willing to do anything for money - including sell out their constituents - and on and on. Mostly, of course, on the white political sites, with the Color of Change wittingly or unwittingly providing the "Black People Said" cover for the attacks. 

Mind you, the attacks themselves aren't new - they waned a bit when members of the CBC were about the only ones to stand up as anti-Iraq occupation and to demand answers on other issues related to the Bush admin, even when the Democrats were out of power, endearing themselves to some White progressives - the whole 'conscience of congress' thing that was bandied about regarding them and so on. That didn't last long tho, as the McKinney issue came up and, of course, the Wm Jefferson one.  

Anyway, I don't see a good way out of this for them. If they don't drop the debate, they will be "corrupt, venal, stupid, etc, etc". If they do drop the debate, they will still be "corrupt and venal", but will have been "schooled" in how to do the right thing (as some have put it). 

So. It bothers me, this... especially as now, for the first time ever and after many many years of waiting in the wings, so many members of the CBC are now in charge of important and powerful areas in congress - and they have been and are being consistently marginalized from many directions. 

 I don't like Fox (although I haven't had cable in years, so I don't watch it anyway), and I know some of the issues with it - I don't actually see why at all considers it a legitimate news agency anyway, but still. I am perturbed. 

You want the truth, I'm picking my phrasing carefully. It's why I insist on talking about the CBC Institute, which I keep as separate from the CBC as I keep the NAACP Legal Defense Fund from the NAACP proper.

On the other hand, I don't do anything I'd have to deny when it comes out. Basically, Rev. Jackson needed to talk to the CBC before dropping his opinion.

Yes, you are careful in your language, and others are too, making sure to say it's the CBC Institute... people are going to conflate the two anyway though, because of the connections. 

 If the CBCI is determined to carry this through, they should be out there somewhere making their case for it. All I've seen from them is boilerplate press release type stuff, although I may have missed where someone from either group actually conversed about it and answered questions. Jesse for sure should have spoken to them first and gotten whatever information before stating his first opinion, and I am not sure if his statement reflects their thinking or if he just added his thinking to it or what. 

 I do sort of understand his point, though, as far as that goes... Fox News is bad, especially when dealing with minority folks or issues, but the other news venues are not much better. I don't exactly know how having Fox host a debate is supposed to change that, either, though. 

Anyway, sigh. There are so many competing interests and priorities surrounding this... some good, some not so good, and some downright bad, that it's difficult to separate any of them out from the others (with just a quick read). I trust most Black folk to have their priorities in the right place (although I, probably quite unfairly, dislike the Color of Change people), but that's as far as I'll go. :)

More power to them.

Less, actually, if their claim to represent the Black communities is repudiated by the Black communities.

seperate.

 But, here's the deal.

While 'we' don't get a fair shake on any of the major news networks, I consider that business as usual.

Faux News IS NOT ' business as usual'.

They've let a consistent, persistent, relentless ATTACK ON BLACK PEOPLE FROM THE DAY THEY WENT ON THE AIR.

 And NOTHING that is remotely connected to anything representative of Black folk...

SHOULD HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH FAUX NEWS!

It is truly that simple for me.

Less, actually, if their claim to represent the Black communities is repudiated by the Black communities.

Well, I'm not so sure about that. That their claim, at least in this instance, is being repudiated by the Black communities.

I've come across a few people who are definitely in favor of the CBCI holding the debate on Fox, for different reasons. One politically aware and connected woman who says that just about all her relatives and friends watch Fox network news (where I gather the debates will be simulcast), especially the ones that don't have cable. The other CBCI debate is on CNN, which doesn't catch the non-cable people.

 Also a couple of Detroit residents who feel, or at least hope, that with the debate happening in their city that some of the issues that concern them will be brought up, at least in general. 

Others apparently couldn't care less about Fox holding the debates... other stuff going on, I guess.  

So, I don't think there is consensus on this, especially among those that even know about it offline. 

Apparently there is also talk about the CBCI accepting donations from Murdoch or some part of the Newscorp empire (the being bought off part, I suppose), but (some of) the same ones talking about that are  same ones that happily gobble down money from Exxon Mobile, or Glen Beck or Ann Coulter, and so on, all the while talking about how they don't care if people don't like it, they don't mind if the right wing funds progressive work, and whatnot. 

Me, I'd never even heard of the CBCI until all of this, and I think that they are handling this pretty horribly for sure, with the CBC itself being dragged in for good measure, but I think there should be more discussion. 

Well, I'm not so sure about that. That their claim, at least in this instance, is being repudiated by the Black communities.

Hence the if.

The CBC will survive this because it's more a voting bloc than a social institution. The members need only maintain their connection to their immediate constituencies.