Blogs and Stories
Stuff White People Like
Matthew Imaging/ WireImage
As anxiety about the declining television business permeates the Emmys, the show relies on … Kanye West jokes.
"Like hires like," as they say. At last night's Emmys, which were permeated by an industry's anxieties about the future, the actors and producers and directors looked pretty much like the cast of Mad Men when that nice black elevator operator wasn't around. "I know that everything is changing but I'm not afraid of it," said Mad Men's creator, Matthew Weiner, while taking home the Emmy for Outstanding Drama.
You maybe should be? Yes, pretty much no one watches the networks, the cables will soon be almost equal players for almost equal pay, and no one's quite sure what to do. So how about doing something different, at last, for once in your lives?
If you worked for one of those shows, could you really face the shame parade of all-white faces at next year's Emmys? Wouldn't you go back to work and try to fix it? Maybe not—because you would have done it years ago.
What last night's Emmys proved was that The Industry as a liberal menace is a total frame job. Really? A bunch of yutzes from Yale, who haven't managed over the years to get a single Sonia Sotomayor onto their supreme joke jury? They're not liberals—they are nice, funny, probably awesome, mostly Ivy League comedy nerds who, through action or inaction, conspire to keep people of color out of the big gigs.
• Watch the top 10 Emmy moments.As has happened before, last night brought that horrifying moment—when the writing staff of many of the shows up for best comedy or variety show were displayed, including Jon Stewart and Conan O'Brien's. Let's look for the people of color! Hey, there's Wyatt Cenac, the lone black man, hired last year by the Stewart team! And—oh, no, that seems to be it. But at least that young white Simon Rich, the son of the New York Times columnist Frank and also Harvard '07, is working as a writer for Saturday Night Live.
If you worked for one of those shows, could you really face the shame parade of all-white faces at next year's Emmys? Wouldn't you go back to work and try to fix it? Maybe not—because you would have done it years ago.
And what's saddest about this is that all these nice white people at the top feel the cruel financial pressure of the industry. It's "the last official year of broadcast television," said Julia Louis-Dreyfus, and I don't think she's that sad to see it go. Tina Fey's crack about how she's glad NBC hasn't canceled 30 Rock for a cheap talk show is funny because surely someone at the network has run those numbers. Expensive, fantastic shows like Mad Men and Damages are, well, expensive, in this era when quality is revered by a small, cosmopolitan audience. Advertisers still respond to an average viewer income that's double or quadruple America's median, so it's no surprise that they can sell that ad space. But still they lose on total viewers. The execs are stressed—and everything else falls through the cracks, including what real America looks like.
Instead of programming for "them," TV execs are trying to squeeze the last big bits of cash out of TV before it basically becomes satellite radio—a million shows, always on, some in Tagalog, some always starring transsexuals. Last night's remarkably penetrated brand interventions were supposedly a sign of what's going to save the industry, but really were its death rattles. The diversity of America is relevant because also like watches like—which is why there are at least a few working black and Latino and Asian people in front of the cameras. Here comes LL Cool J—and the guy who played Robin in that one Batman movie to present an award and pimp their show that appears on the same network! And here's John Hodgman doing the announcing, and Justin Long on Drew Barrymore's arm—and here's John and Justin in the commercials! It's Total Brand Permeation.
That's already old business. Is your tacky intra-cross-platform brand explosion really going to drive some extra viewers to NCIS: Los Angeles? It may, for a while! Enjoy it while you can. At least that show is designed to look like that good old-fashioned Lethal Weapon ebony-and-ivory buddy system. Back then, in the last 80s, we thought that was the beginning of the end of the "black men can't open a big movie" era, when black actors were also making inroads on TV. But sometime between the original Melrose Place and the new one, all that progress stalled. What did we get last night? A lot of white people, a bunch of oddly nervous Kanye West jokes—and a lot of people eyeing Tracy Morgan suspiciously. Looks like Mad Men is the perfect show for our time in every way.
Choire Sicha is co-proprietor of The Awl and is at work on a nonfiction book for HarperStudio.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Five Gays on Project Runway's Demise
Choire Sicha is co-proprietor of The Awl and is at work on a nonfiction book for HarperStudio.
Saw, Scrutinized
Choire Sicha is co-proprietor of The Awl and is at work on a nonfiction book for HarperStudio.
Voilà, Le Gap!
Choire Sicha is co-proprietor of The Awl and is at work on a nonfiction book for HarperStudio.
"What last night's Emmys proved was that The Industry as a liberal menace is a total frame job..."
No, not really. The ratio of businessmen/corporation = inherently evil/bad guy to environmental activist/government agent = good guy is incredibly large. It's not a 'total frame job', while it isn't necessarily agenda-driven like Rob Reiner, the pro-government/anti-corporation worldview is easily pervasive in Hollywood. Yes, that does make them hypocrites but they don't exactly put a lot of thought into what they do, do they. Their movies and tv are usually shlock, so goes everything else they know.
I appreciated the hits on the Yale Mafia (elitist assholes) and Simon Rich (Frank's little boy). That criticism was fresh and daring, no one else will dare write about that.
But your 'all the white faces, all these caucasians!' material was tiresome, especially coming from what appears to be a White Boy.
Why don't you stop writing immediately, stop expressing your thoughts and opinions. Because whenever you write something, you're taking an opportunity away from a Black or Latino writer. In fact, you should insist your column be reassigned to an African-American or Hispanic person. Because in writing your column, you must be taking an opportunity away from somebody else. And most likely it's someone else of color.
Right?
I think you should think about what you're saying. The only way to employ historically (and currently!) underemployed people of color in this country--by the way, the percentage of black men of working age who cannot find work in New York City is well over 50%—is, you are saying, to "take jobs away from white people."
Har har. But guess what? It's not a coincidence when your ENTIRE STAFF is white.
I agree, mostly, with what you're saying but you sound like a total douche bag. Please stop.
Right on. This guy has internalized the far-left racial justice insanity from the liberal academies he rails against.
Jenn: I guess the question would be is this "segregation" de fact or de jure. I think you are being glib but I understand your point
When the majority of eyballs of any given ethnicity are changing the channel to the new WBC(White Boy Channel) or BGC(Black Guy Channel), the content itself gets de facto segregated just like the awards shows are...
New media is a much more bifurcated creature. It will allow a much more targeted audience, but requires a lot more work to manage. It will be interesting how the Big Networks will respond if writers like you try to force them to continue to be everything to every one in all demographic groups, and grade them on the color of faces at the awards shows.
I didn't see quite so many white faces getting awards at the Essence Awards. Terrible isn't it?
I always love it when a white man first notices the lack of other MEN up on stage. How about the fact that WOMEN make up more than half of our population and I sure didn't see many of them up there. Here was the thing I felt during the primary last year that nobody ever seemed to understand: I could care less that Obama was black. For me, he was just another man. I was looking for a new worldview. That of a woman. I think you guys have had your chance in control of the power structure of this country and you have royally screwed it up. I am for giving women a shot. On the other hand, women in this country deserve what they get. Feminism is dead and this is the perfect example.
You don't know what I first noticed, but thanks for reading!
Back in the days when there was feminism--and I agree with you--we understood that you didn't squabble for each other's pieces of the pie, that you actually wanted to go to bat for a whole new damn pie, a prettier pie, one that didn't taste like garbage. Oh well.
So it's okay for women to succeed, but not Black folks? What advantage has a Black man had that makes him such an obvious choice to inherit that which White men created, modified, an preserved for their own use?
"Feminism is dead?" Thank God that's not true; I'm a better man for it.
Thank you for stating the obvious. Men have dominated the media (& politics). To see the Little Dorrit production team, including the director, was exciting and new. Of course they were not from Hollywood or NYC or the USA. But I don't believe that feminism is dead and that women deserve what they get. I remain somewhat optimistic. Still, Hillary was a great choice missed. The few minorities in attendance was also very obvious. But, still, the show had great production value! and I don't care about the Emmy awards.
JennEm: Great post!
Yet another strange, weirdly cruel and just plain awful column from Mr. Sicha. Keep it up, Daily Beast!
Can anyone tell what this article is about?
Three paragraphs in, I gave up. Not worth it.
JennEm:
I appreciate your post.
There are good, talented, white folks out there. And for the sake of diversity-cosmetic or otherwise, we shouldn't deny those folks opportunities. I totally agree. But for the sake of, not so much argument, but intelligent discourse, don't you think there's a chance that when a group of white folks gathers in the living room, break room, or boardroom, they do so not as "white people,' but as "normal people?" Is there a chance, that, at least on a subconscious level, everyone else is viewed as a "social deviant?"
I ask simply because during the Sotomayor hearings, her now infamous "wise Latina" remark drew the ire of Lindsay Graham and his cronies. Their assertion, at least to me, seemed to be that good, God-fearing white men have neither race nor gender. They transcend such things and by virtue of being white and male, they are the sole proprietors of all things just and impartial. I'm quite certain such logic extends well beyond capitol hill.
thank you for stating this. It is really difficult (and evidently upsetting) to make people understand that whiteness isn't the automatic default for normal.
Pretty accurate article. "Mad Men" is far more relevant than any show since particular seasons of "The Sopranos". You have White execs, sprinkled in with "colored"execs who come form the same place the White ones, trying to understand different markets. Hence, Carlos Mencia has a show. When you force integration or go with the watered-down version of Affirm. Act., those are the results. But when people make concerted efforts to reach out, get folks with a wide-ranging perspective on their staff, the results are far more genuine and acceptable.
Please...who cares? Another self-congratulatory award show, this time hosted by Doogie Howser, to honor people, the majority of whom apparently think "reality shows" are real or at least would live viewers to think so. Talk about dumbing down!
Are you really surprised that these folks, who claim to hold liberal social views, behind the scenes mostly hire white people? You must be extraordinarily naive,
See, the thing about comedy is that it does not matter who wrote it. Whether a joke came from a white guy, black guy, asian woman, hispanic woman, whatever. All the matters (or should matter) is the humor. Is it funny? It all boils down to that question, at the heart of comedy. The rest of it is the industry, from the perception of the racial makeup of a writing staff to the cross-branding.
When there was a big uproar on The Huffington Post about two more women being hired by SNL, everyone was quick to try to jump to the conclusion that the white cast was growing. The frenzy ignored two facts: 1) one of the women is Iranian, and her resemblence to white women is only visible to people who only notice brown skin as non-white, and 2) two other white women got the chop and were removed from the cast at the same time. So, there was this giant brainfart about SNL and casting and the net result was the same number of women in the cast, plus the addition of a minority cast member at the same time. So what was served by harping about and jumping to conclusions about SNL's casting? ZERO.
It should matter what's funny more, and who wrote it less. THAT is a colorblind society. Everything else is just bleeding-heart overly-political-correctness.
I'd still watch anything these "liberals" come up with over any "reality" show ever !!
Choire is writes of race like he is straight out of 1997. Not totally irrelevant, but not really in touch. His writings are all straight out of my entry level literary criticism class from years ago.
It's weird. I know I basically agree with the author, but I just can't help looking at this like a bad sophomoric blog.
"A lot of white people, a bunch of oddly nervous Kanye West jokes-and a lot of people eyeing Tracy Morgan suspiciously. "
I can't deny the first. However the second one is totally justified. Have you ever seen that man in an interview? He's kind of insane...I'd eye him suspiciously as well, and race has nothing to do with that.
Originally I was under the impression that Mr Sicha was a contemporary writer. But the only explanation that makes sense now is Mr Sicha is a pseudonym for articles pulled from someone's thirty year old slush pile and tarted up with a few pop references.
GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK THEY ARE MOSTLY JEWS
not that there is anything wrong with that amirite?
LOL. Nope, they're mostly white. Yes, there is a disproportionate amount of Jews there, but the majority are goyim.
Dude, you are like the angriest, most paranoid, NOT Black man of which I have ever heard! You're OBSESSED and way off base, and it's not the first time! (Semenya???) I don't know if you've broken down the demographics, but Black people make up 13% of the population. I should know, I AM Black and keep up with these things. Do you expect a 13% population share to get a 50% share in televised depictions? Your concern does US no good! If anything, you are only reinforcing the tedious self-awareness some Blacks feel in social situations that they are viewed as outsiders. There are many successful entertainment fields in which Black are disproportionately represented in a positive way such as basketball, popular music, track & field, stand-up comedy, etc. We don't need your pity. There is no advantage to experiencing generalized feelings of oppression, especially over something as ridiculously frivolous as the Emmys.
While the story is about the Emmys, I dont think the author is limiting this issue to just one award show. He's alluding to corporate America, which as we all know...well, at least I know, operates nothing like "basketball, pop music, track and field(?) and stand up comedy." In each of the aformentioned venues, talent supersersedes all. And in those fields talent is viewed and rewarded objectively. Not so much in the corporate sector, don't you think?
I mean, if you're a big, dark skinned black man who is perceived as "scary" by an office of white folks, then any or all of your other credentials may be easily disregarded-- and you will never be a part of the "club." Some of us, by nature of academic accomplishment, physical carriage, and innate pride, just arent so "non-threatening" to surprisingly sheltered white folks.
My point is, we can't all be Al Roker, can we?
This user is no longer registered.
wow i don't know if too many white people is the problem although more diversity would be nice. and if your talking about uneven demographics in comedy writing, then the Daily Show is a prime suspect as you say. But not only are most all the writers white, but Jewish. But that doesn't bother me at all. Who cares? If the best writers to write for that show happen to be Jewish, than so be it.
The real problem for networks is that they play everything way too safe. They are petrified of doing anything risque and that makes for bland television. It is not so much the lack in racial diversity of writers and actors that is the problem, but the lack of diversity in what shows are green-lighted.
Choire, we gave them BET - isn't that enough? Seperate but equal is a viable business model, no?
not so much
This article - not so much. Was waiting for some meat, tuna even?
Choire, thank you for this. You touched a nerve and upset many who in their defensive responses unwittingly recognize that there is a problem and don't (or refuse) to see it. It comes from a place of privilege and frustration that the privilege is being exposed even in the most awesomely written and well-intentioned shows.
As a kid who grew up (like many others) devouring TV and rarely seeing anyone with their skin tone reflected back at them, it's comforting to know that someone out there recognizes that such little progress has been made, even if he gets inundated with super wordy boos. "It just so happens that they are____" or "Who cares as long as it's good?" can only go so far.
Again this may be hard for people to hear, especially those who think exclusion of certain racial groups in television (and film!), just kind of 'happens' and is totally unconscious. Either way, it's problematic.
The saddest part about it is that when people in the U.S. and beyond see American television, some think it's a true reflection of the United States. What's worse? It is. As inaccurate and frustrating it is for some of us, it just is.
I'm just hoping that media consumers of the future have don't have to settle for less like I did. That maybe JUST maybe we have more than one woman of color on SNL at a time or as a Daily Show correspondent for the first time...ever.
In the larger scheme of things, there are bigger and better things to get upset about, but fight the symptoms and start killing the illness.
Now let's get back to arguing about healthcare and how we can all blame Kanye for all of its problems.
McSwain: agreed, let's all get back to substantive arguments. However, it drives me crazy when people, as you did, seem to think that a perspective contrary to Choire's is synonymous with racism. Just because you disagree with someone about race, or of a different race does not automatically imply that you got at my deep-seated, latent core. That's a tired, worn out way to discuss things, and it seems as if you haven't done the intellectual work to really verbalize what you mean. Irritating.
Spearsoll:
Per discussions of race its not so much disagreeing with a different perspective, it's flippantly dismissing that perspective. So often white folks immediately play "devils advocate" on issues of race. This is fine, someone has to do it.
But when you shout over my voice, fail to consider my experience, and refuse to engage me in meaningful discourse, then you cease to be mere advocate: you got horns, tail, and a pitchfork. Its been my experience that the white folks are quick to assume this role are usually those who have no friends who aren't white. Now, this in and of itself is no crime and it certainly doesn't make you a racist. But anyone looking to boost his credibility whilst shooting down claims of racism, racial bias, or racial ignorance, should perhaps expand his social circle. Or at the very least conduct a few interviews.
McSwain,
Thanks for going a little bit further, for my sake. After reading your newest post, we are now in total agreement and i appreciate your response.
McSwain,
Actually, i just reread what you wrote and have a question for you: if grounds for racism are simply being dismissive, than isnt everyone who is of a different race who dismisses me racist? And if everyone is racist, then is anyone? I suppose you could say that it really only counts for those in power, (currently white people). I live and work in North Philadelphia, and i cant believe that every black person who dismisses me or shouts names to me is doing it out of true racist motivations. Rather, in 2009, arent they just going for my most obvious weak spot? I'm not trying to weave some verbal trap for you; i really am curious to hear what you have to say. Ultimately, it seems that if meaningful discussions of race are going to take place in 2009, we need a more updated vocabulary and i think that is why i didnt really like most of Choire's article. But, as a young, white guy, it's tough to say, 'we're on the same page, but i totally disagree with you' and not seem like i've never had a conversation with someone other than a bunch of hillbillies.
Spearsoll:
Its Noontime here, not McSawin
You hit it right on the head: this is about power. While black folks can be, and in many cases, are racist, what does it matter? We don't have power. Barack Obama has power, and perhaps because of that, many black folks feel empowered. But you're right, the pervading corporate power structure in this country is still basically white.
And what if black folks are racist? We do what? Call you "honkey," or "cracker," refuse to help you with your groceries? So what? Now if I'm interviewing people for a job and decide that, based on the fact white folks make me "uncomfortable," I won't hire any, then my racism is a viable issue.
I completely agree with your assessment, though. We do need a new vocabulary. For instance, now that the "N" word has been eliminated from our collective society, there are some, perhaps many people who think the sentiment that goes along with that word, will also disappear. But all thinking people know this isn't true. If you hate someone and you cant slur them, then you need more effective means of lashing out against them. That said, institutional racism-a brand of subtle discrimination is in full affect. White folks who are forced to hire non white folks are doing so through, what I call "neo affirmative action." This consists of hiring not the most qualified "minority," but the least qualified. You hire the black folks who aren't that bright, dynamic, or ambitious, and who are just happy to have a job. That way, you don't have to promote them and if/when the company is faced with some sort of racial discrimination issue, the company can always count on those black folks to come to the company's defense as an "equal opportunity employer."
Today, the Uncle Tom Negro, or Token Negro position is especially en vogue and quite lucrative. In some ways, that's what Michael Steele does for the Republican Party. As party chairman, when there are claims that conservatives are racist, they can just point to him. (Never mind that Steele ran for chairman in several other occasions, but wasn't deemed good enough for the position until the country elected a black man as president. Surely this is just coincidence, right???)
It seems to me that Choire's role at the Daily Beast (by virtue of this story and his defense of Kanye West) is to play the "angry black man." That means he discusses elements of racism-both subtle and overt. And the fact that he's white is meant to give his ( mostly accurate) observations a certain credibility that would be lost on a white audience had they been uttered by a black man. I know, from experience, that any thoughtful black man who makes such observations about corporate America runs the risk of not only alienating his audience, but offending the very folks who pay his salary. But a white guy who does the same thing is less threatening.
But I'm glad you see right through this. You refer to yourself as a "young, white guy." Well, I'm a "youngish" black guy who works with mostly young white guys. And honestly, you're the only group with whom I can really communicate. See, it's the older, white guys who are threatened, almost paralyzed with fear by anyone who doesn't look like them, speak like they do, and who dares to challenge them. Not to sound corny, but you guys-young, educated white guys who don't live in fear of difference, are as much the "hope and change" as the President.
Where I live, half of all cable shows are black and latino.
Somebody must be: writing, producing, marketing, acting in, and all around in general making money on that "non-white" programming.
Ego stroke awards? Who cares? The travesty is all the money wasted on condescending brain dead crap served as entertainment by an increasingly marginalized desperate industry.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.