CNN’s Black In America; How People Took It
Posted by Mitch Mitchell on Jul 26, 2008
On Wednesday and Thursday night, I watched the two-part show on CNN called Black In America. Wednesday night was supposed to be more about women, and Thursday night's show was supposed to be more about men. There was some mixing, but overall, the statistics for each were on the correct night, though some of the stats were shocking, and the stories that were told were right on, if tough to watch at times.
First, let's get this out of the way; this wasn't a program for black people. That was evident from the beginning, and later on, almost every black person I talked to said the same thing: "I knew all of this already." For black people, there was little new ground that was covered; for me in particular, though, I still thought it was an important program to show, and though it's also easy to say "they should have shown this" or "they should have shown that", overall it was a credible enough representation, if people were paying attention.
I say it that way because of a conversation I was having with someone who didn't see the show. I was talking about a statistic that came up during the show when it was posted that the number one killer of black women between the age of 25 and 34 was HIV, and he said that it must indicate that a lot of single black women are being promiscuous; ouch! That's not what it was saying at all, but it points out how some statistics are be interpreted in different ways, and one meant to highlight a problem could be interpreted as "people are getting what they deserve based on their behavior."
Half of the black people I talked to said the show should have said more about what could be done about some of the inequities; I said that's not what the show was supposed to be about. In my mind, this was a snapshot of the different things black people in America go through because they're black, not because they're poor or uneducated or any other reason.
There were some good things also, such as showing the one little boy who gets great grades while getting paid to learn and gives half of his money to his dad to help with bills. I even liked the first story on the first half of the family where the patriarch of the family had a white wife and a black mistress, had many children by each woman, and now they get together in a large family reunion after many years of not acknowledging each other. After all, life isn't all bad for black people; thank goodness for that.
I could talk about it some more, but the truth is if you saw the show then you know all the stories, and if you didn't then you're probably not going back to watch it. I wonder overall how white people took this story, and how they cared, if they cared. Was there anything surprising in this story for you? Was there anything that made you think that you wanted to help people? Was most of it alien to you? Did you think the people in the story were mostly responsible for themselves and should get off the couch and get to work (though, I hope you were paying attention to the second part, where many black men were trying to get jobs)?
This was an important show, even if it couldn't be a complete show. Will it start a conversation, or will it disappear from people's minds within a couple of weeks? Let's see how things play out; I'm betting on the latter, though.
You’re about the only person I have seen who has anything good to say about the program. I don’t think it was a fair portrait at all. I think for instance, if 1 out of 3 Black men have a criminal record then the program should have devoted 2/3 of the time to men without records. It should be that way for other things. If the majority of Black people live a certain way then they should have shown that the majority of the time. They said 70% of babies born today are out of wedlock, but if you were to survey most Black adults, maybe that rate would be a lot lower. So if most Black adults are born to married parents, then they should focus on that because thats how most adults were brought up. They can point out that the marital rates are going down, but most adults didn’t grow up in single parent households (at least I don’t think so). I think that most people should have related to the stories rather than only the select few who have had hard lives.
Someone on another blog said that the problem with the program was that it was marketed towards Black people when it was actually meant for a White audience. I thought they would have shown more complex psychological and philosophical ideas about being black. Anyways, I’ve discussed a lot of this on my blog if you want to visit 🙂
Bronze Trinitys last blog post..What I Thought About CNN’s "Black In America"
Thanks for your comment Trinity. I agree that it really wasn’t for black audiences, though someone else wrote in another blog that she thought parts of it were condescending to black people, and I didn’t feel that either. I’m sure D. L. Hughley certainly didn’t feel it was condescending.
It was good for what I feel it was meant to be about. It could have been better, but so could everything.
Mitch, I watched both nights and liked the program. I can’t tell if this is an ongoing series, but there was another part that aired earlier (see http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2008/black.in.america/). There was also the “CNN & Essence: Reclaiming the Dream” program.
In four hours, there is much that can be said and much that cannot. For blacks, I think the program showed us the breadth of what is occurring with us. No, not much that was new, but a good reminder. We’re experiencing both the best and the worst.
For those who are not black, I think it introduced them to the issues, but may not have “made it real” for them. For example, one man talked about the number of months it had taken him to find a job. I’m sure many who are not people of color (POC) could say the same thing. So was it clear the disadvantage that blacks have from the git-go? Yes, but not fully understood.
I would like to know the demographics of the audience that watched the program. A few people have posted video responses to the program (IReports, http://tinyurl.com/6ryoc4). I saw a few on the news this morning and people had mixed reactions to the program, as you might imagine.
BTW Ron Goode (http://tinyurl.com/5dh7r5) was on TV this morning talking about the poems he wrote for the series. He received transcripts of the program, then wrote various poems for it; giving CNN a choice for each segment (5 for each). He said that he always included one where he pushed the boundaries and one that was more safe.
Besides Ron Goode’s poems, which were like summaries of what we were seeing, I liked how they stages the stories, for example, using men who had attended the same school as the stating point for second night.
What I didn’t like was the gentleman who used to be on the Cosby show. I didn’t like his point of view, but recognize that they were trying to show a broad range of views.
Finally, I think one change I would like to have seen in the series it that I wish they had posted the statistics they used online. I would like to be able to see that statistics in writing and see where the statistics came from.
See, this is what happens when you have white men (News Director) running the show. As a veteran news journalist, I can tell you first-hand that their perspective is so much different and if they’re calling the shots, who’s going to challenge it. Certainly not Soledad. She wants to keep her lucrative job.
It was terribly produced and did nothing but place the blame on black folks for their problems. While I admit, we’ve dug alot of our own holes, we didn’t create RACISM.
Beverly Mahones last blog post..5 Tips to Help You Sleep Better
Hi Beverly,
No, we didn’t create racism, but I don’t think the special was all that bad. It’s funny how you and Trinity kind of agree on not liking the special, but saw it in different ways in not liking it. I hope you visited her site to see her take on it. Thanks for commenting.
Hi Jill,
I wasn’t crazy about the guy who used to be on the Cosby show either. I have to say that, hearing him talk, it explains why I didn’t think he was all that good an actor, since it was literally the same guy.
You know, maybe I liked the documentary because, even though all the stories weren’t happy ones, so to speak, they were stories, and I like hearing a good story. I didn’t think the special did any injustice to anyone, but what I’ve been reading on the blogosphere is that people were wondering why there had to be an examination of black people to begin with, and it’s black people who are saying that. I have my reasons for it, bt suffice it to say that it’s gotten people talking, and that’s not such a bad thing in my opinion.