Monday, October 27, 2008

DL Hughley: Did You Mean That?

This brilliant piece was written by my truly respected colleague, Christopher Metzler at Georgetown University. He expresses my sentiments on DL Hughley exactly. I lost respect for DL Hughley during the Don Imus situation, when he appeared on Jay Leno and stated that the women on the Rutgers University basketball team really were "a pack of nappy headed hoes". Since that time, he has lost my respect. The idea that CNN would co-sign on the horrific stereotypes used by DL during his latest show disappoint me even more. I just don't know what to say, I should probably calm down first.

So, rather than saying something that might get me in trouble, I will think it through and let you hear what my brother Christopher has to say. As I mentioned before, I endorse every word of his commentary.

CNN's new Hughley show reinforces black stereotypes

by Dr. Christopher J. Metzler

In just eight days, America may well elect its first black president. Throughout the long campaign, race has been an omnipresent issue with many asking whether whites and some blacks would reject Senator Obama because of his race.

Most news outlets and commentators have discussed race in a vacuous way for fear of being called racists. In fact, if this election taught us anything about the media and race, it is that most journalists -- including white liberals -- simply lack the vocabulary to discuss and analyze race, choosing instead to engage in a cacophonous politically correct gab fest.

As the election draws to a close, one major cable news network decided to discuss race in a mephitic way, reminiscent of Amos and Andy, a situation comedy based on reinforcing stereotypes about blacks and widely popular in the United States from the 1920s through the 1950s

The show's anchor warned that the election of a President Obama would lead to a health plan with grills for all. Grills are shining metal caps worn on the teeth of blacks while they drink malt liquor from a paper bag. His guest, "Freddie Mack," attired in the traditional pimp attire complete with hat and bling, described Obama's fund raising prowess as "Big pimping." In fact, Freddie Mack went on to say, "Politicians are pimps and the electorate are their hoes." Thus, he reasoned, "bitch better have my money." In a response dripping with racism and misogyny, he reminded Americans that the financial crisis was about his sister Fannie May or Fannie may not again, utilizing the hoe moniker for black women.

The anchor also predicted that the election of a President Obama would result in a meteor striking America. His expert guest assured him of two things. The first is that such would not happen during an Obama administration and that if it did, blacks would be protected because of the complexion of our skin while whites would not. As if this was not enough, the anchor conducted an interview in which a black maid of a Jewish woman decried her years as a maid for that Jewish woman and warned that she would "clean her clock" if the old Jewish woman did not vote for Obama. Of course, besides portraying black women as violent, it also escalated the issue of Jews voting for Obama during this election. The message, it seems, is that blacks cannot convince with the facts but with fists.

The anchor also interviewed former Miss Alaska Maryline Blackburn, who beat vice-presidential candidate Sara Palin for the title. Asked whether Palin needed substance in her debate with Biden, Blackburn replied yes. No, the anchor replied, "All you need is to be in a tong and, I would vote for you."

Throughout this election, I have written prolifically about the role that race is playing. I have also said in several radio, television and print interviews that McCain and Palin created a racially charged atmosphere at some of their rallies which resulted in shouts of "kill him, off with his head, and terrorist" referring to Senator Obama. I have said that such an atmosphere is akin to the lynch mobs rallies which resulted in the gratuitous lynching of black men especially during the Jim Crow era. These rallies and the attendant racially tinged atmosphere were condemned by CNN.

Now, in a shameless show of hypocrisy, CNN -- like the slave masters who profited from racism and slavery -- has decided that there is still money in racism and found just the Negro to help it cash in. At 10 P.M. on Saturday, October, 25, 2008, CNN premiered D.L. Hughley Breaks the News.

By introducing D.L. Hughley Breaks the News, both CNN and Hughley have picked up where McCain and Palin have left off. During the course of this election, CNN has portrayed itself as having "the best political team on television." It can now portray itself has having, "the best racism team on television." This is so for at least three reasons. First, in the course of one hour, Hughley and his CNN producers managed to rearticulate the vilest stereotypes of blacks, especially the notion that at our core, black men are pimps and black women hoes.

Second, as if to give legitimacy to its racists portrayals, CNN had former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan endorse Obama after Hughley skinned, grinned and jived while broadcasting black stereotypes worldwide. The message was this a "real" news show; even the white man came on here to make an endorsement.

Third, Hughley demonstrated that blacks still suffer from internalized racial oppression. That is, too many blacks, including Hughley have internalized the racial stereotypes of us created by whites and remind whites that it is not necessary for them to purvey them through mass media, as we will do it for ourselves.

To be sure, both the white brass at CNN and Hughley bear equal responsibility for trafficking in and profiting from racism. CNN could not have done it without him or him without them. This symbiotic, collusive relationship is responsible for keeping racism alive. The white brass at CNN laughs all the way to the bank as we continue to denigrate ourselves for the entire world to see, racists delight in the voyeuristic enjoyment of racism and America continues to call itself "post-racial."

This election has taught us that outrage over racism is too selective. Ostensibly liberal networks such as CNN get a pass as evidenced by the lack of outrage about this show and ostensibly conservative networks such as Fox get pilloried as evidenced by the fact that Bill O'Reilly was taken to task for his comments about the "normal" atmosphere at Sylvia's restaurant in Harlem. It was not too long ago that Don Imus was banned from the airwaves because of his "nappy headed hos" comment. In fact, advertisers fled in droves. I have yet to hear any advertiser flee from this show.

So America, as Election Day approaches, would the election of a black president mean that we would have addressed race or that we will continue to rearticulate it?