George Curry (BET), Julianne Malveaux(MIT and everything else), Stephon Marbury (NY Knicks)

 

BOYCE HAS MOVED!  VISIT THE BOYCEBLOG BY CLICKING HERE

 

The Return of the Nappy Headed Hoe - Monday, December 2, 2007

I did an interview this morning on American Urban Radio Networks about Don Imus. They'd heard that we have a petition to keep Imus off the air, and wanted me to talk about it. I agreed to do so, mainly because Bettie Lee, the woman who interviewed me, is a respected friend. I also like AURN because they allow black people to have a voice that is not muffled by the stupidity of mainstream media. When it came to Don Imus, I made these simple points: 1) His return to the air after apologizing signals a fundamental disrespect for people of color and women. Had Tyra Banks referred to Rudi Guiliani as an "oily skinned cracker", she would never be put on the air again. 2) It seems that the networks could have found a woman of color to replace Imus, since they are non-existent from mainstream media. So, while Imus paid a 6 month price for degrading women of color, they have paid with a lifetime ban for doing nothing. 3) Don Imus, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly form the the New KKK in America. Without using the N-word, they engage in the perpetuation of policies and ideologies that have been hurtful to all of America. 4) Our plan for boycotting Imus and his supporters is not a short-term plan. I want, for at least 2 years, for all people of color to do the following: - Boycott the Imus Show and WABC Networks in New York. - Consider boycotting all corporations that sponsor this network (we have a list of current sponsors below this post) - Hold all dignitaries and political candidates who appear on their shows accountable for their actions. It's interesting that Republican Presidential candidates did not appear in the debate on HBCU campuses, but yet they find time to appear on racist conservative talk shows. Here is an episode we did that refers to Don Imus:  

 

Those Judging Sean Taylor Should Spend Time Judging Themselves - November 29, 2007

 

Today I saw an article by a chubby black sports writer in the Midwest.  In his column, he was alluding to the fact that the media’s portrayal of Sean Taylor’s death, in which they’ve continuously made reference to his troubled past, is simply Taylor’s fault.

In the column, the writer stated that the white media’s negative portrayal of the former Washington Redskins safety was clearly created by him for choosing the way he lived.  He argues that Taylor made choices that led to his death.   That is what got my fingers clicking on the keyboard.

Taylor was surely “caught up” in some things that led to him being killed.  I believe that he was murdered, and that someone was coming to get him.  But someone coming to get you doesn’t mean that you are begging to “get got”.

What the chubby writer doesn’t understand is that when one lives in the black male jungle, you are going to sometimes have enemies.  You get challenged when you are the “alpha male” and everyone wants to take you down:  “Awe, that N*gga ain’t sh*t” is what you deal with on a regular basis. Challengers come at you constantly, many of whom have nothing to lose. 

When you are dropped in Vietnam, you are sometimes forced to be a soldier.  There are no angels in this game, but then again, none of us are angels are we?  I know this, because I have dealt with this as a young man.  My best friend was shot in the head, and I was almost shot myself.   Neither of us deserved to be shot, but that’s not how the media would have seen it.

It didn’t matter that I was a straight A student.  It didn’t matter that I was going to be the only African-American in the US to get a PhD in Finance.  Instead, the world would have focused on what Boyce Watkins did in order to get himself killed.  I understand why the chubby sports writer doesn’t get it, since chubby people don’t do well in the jungle.   It’s easier to just sit in your office and run your mouth about it.

I recall being on ESPN with Method Man and I mentioned the death of his close friend, Tupac Shakur.  Meth put Shakur’s behavior in perspective by explaining “When you are on top, people are always constantly coming at you.”  Perhaps that is why Taylor had a gun and a machete under his bed, I’m not sure. 

Was the media wrong for constantly discussing Taylor’s past the way they did? Yes.  Why?  Because there are many things about a person’s life we can choose to focus on.  Taylor was a family man.  He was a great team leader elected by his peers.  He worked like hell to be successful at a very young age.  He led his team in interceptions.  Instead, we choose to focus on an argument that implies that he had his murder coming because he was stupid. 

When Nicole Brown Simpson was killed, did we focus on the fact that she was a crackhead, or a mother of two?

If Marv Albert were to be killed, would we focus on the fact that he was tried for sexual assault or that he was a great sports commentator?

If a soldier in Iraq is killed, do we try to argue that he was silly for choosing to fight an unjust war for a corrupt administration or do we focus on the fact that he was a brave American with a family?

Bottom line:  We would show respect for the dead by focusing on the great things they achieved in life.  I am sure you have things about your past you would hate to have someone mention in your obituary.  The same thing goes for myself.

Although none of us is perfect, it’s ironic that when black males are killed, the media tends to focus on their dark side, but the same is not true with others who have sides that are equally dark.  

Nobody, no matter how much “beef” they are in, deserves to be killed.  Sean Taylor was only 24 years old and surely made mistakes like the rest of us.  Respect this man’s memory and celebrate his achievements.   Those who want to judge him need to start by judging themselves.

What Barry Bonds, OJ Simpson and Michael Vick all have in common: The Most Arrogant Negro Club -November 20, 2007

 

I talked to a guy from a network yesterday about Barry Bonds.  They were going to have me on the show to discuss whether or not his recent indictment for obstruction of justice and perjury has anything to do with race.  Unlike other networks I’ve worked with, NPR is one of those places where the commentator is asked to use more than one brain cell when processing his analysis.  Had it been CNN, I would have given a couple of sound bites.  Had it been Fox, I would have given a one sentence answer, “No thank you”.  
 
I explained that Barry’s situation is highly connected to race, but the connection is so indirect that most Americans won’t ever get it.  This sort of racism is the kind of thing that you only understand if you’ve lived it everyday for at least 35 years.  I also explained that it’s not a coincidence that the most hated athlete in America is almost always black:  Barry Bonds, Michael Vick, OJ Simpson, Ron Artest, Terrell Owens, Randy Moss, Latrell Sprewell, Muhammad Ali, Jack Johnson, the list goes on and on. 
 
The attacks on athletes tend to include some discussion about the individual having poor character, linked to the perceived cultural inferiority of black people.  Of course, this trend has NOTHING to do with the fact that America has spent 400 years prosecuting, persecuting, vilifying and murdering black men who didn’t “know their place”.  People seem to think that it’s all just one big coincidence – the uppity negroes “just happen” to be the ones who always end up getting screwed, while the Happy Negroes get extra cookies.
 
With that said, it’s clear that OJ, Vick and Bonds are in the same category.  They are in the Most Arrogant Negro (MAN) Club.  Membership requirements:  White America judges your character, decides you are a bad person, and then uses whatever resources it can find to bring your arrogant black ass to the ground.  Membership has few privileges and I’m not just the president of the MAN club, I am also a client. I’ve gone through it myself at my own university. 
 
Let’s be clear:  OJ may not go to prison for recent events because he did something wrong (maybe he did, but then again, he WAAAAS stealing back his own stuff….does that count?).  He will go to prison because he pissed off white America.  People have been waiting for this guy to fall since 1994, and finally they have their chance to get him.  Never mind the fact that he and his wife were heavily involved in the drug game and Nicole’s murder easily could have been a contract killing.  It’s much easier to believe that this big black man was enraged over the loss of his precious blonde spouse.   But as an ex-drug dealer friend of mine in LA told me, “It’s normal for washed-up celebs to serve as drug mules to maintain their standard of living.  Do you think OJ got the money for two expensive homes and five top-notch attorneys from his 5 minute roles in Naked Gun films? “
 
Michael Vick learned that, apparently, the only thing worse than hurting a white female is hurting a dog.  So, in spite of the fact that we have hundreds of thousands of people who shoot deer in the head and stuff them on the mantle, Vick has been painted as a monster for engaging in dog fighting.  As a result, he will lose everything, and America sees no problem with taking it from him.  After all, he was in the MAN club. 
 
Barry Bonds’ case is a little more subtle, yet not as complex as we might think.  Let’s be clear:  The government did not spend 3 years and millions in tax payer dollars because they truly believe Bonds’ alleged crime was worse than anyone else – even child molesters don’t get this kind of attention.  They did it because people feel that his record is tainted, that he cheated and that his attitude needed to be adjusted.  I recall watching several executives from the tobacco industry declare under oath that they truly believed smoking was not harmful to your health.  So, there are a lot of people who’ve been equally shifty in their government testimony.   Other questions remain as it pertains to Barry Bonds.
 
Question 1:  Is there any conclusive evidence that Barry Bonds took these drugs in the first place? No.  In my opinion, there is no more evidence in his case than in the case of Lance Armstrong.
 
Question 2: What is a performance enhancing drug, exactly?  The definition is not all that clear, and it changes from one person or official to the next.  Major League Baseball did a Helen Keller imitation all through the 90s when it came to steroid use, mainly because all those homeruns were filling up the stands.  One thing we do know for sure is that Bonds is not the only person in the league to take this stuff.  He just had the misfortune of going to the lab that was raided. 
 
Question 3:  Why were we spending government resources on hearings for a steroid probe anyway?  Aren’t there more important things going on in the world?  I don’t know…maybe that little war across the world where thousands of troops were sent to die because someone lied to the American people, how about that that?  I am continuously amazed that a man could go to prison for lying about steroids, when there is not a single person in the Bush Administration held accountable for lies that led to thousands of deaths and hundreds of billions of dollars in financial loss.  There are at least a hundred other issues that would have been far more worthy of a congressional hearing.
 
At the end of the day, America’s selective morality always comes into play:  Dog fighting makes you a monster, but deer hunting makes you an American.  Bonds lying about steroids is horrific, while lying to kill Americans in Iraq for oil money is just a mistake.  Public lynchings of high profile black athletes occur annually and won’t stop anytime soon – they are as American as apple pie and crappy inner city schools.  The rapper E-40 might have been right when he used these lyrics in a song: “They’ll find a new nigger next year.”  Given that most of these guys were once highly respected, you truly never know who that person is going to be. 

 Boiling Hot with Boyce Watkins - America's War with Black Male Athletes

 

Why I Love NPR - November 16, 2007

This has been a challenging two days for me.  I got my laptop fixed for the first time in a while (which was driving me crazy - I have a lot of computers, but all of them are necessary for me to get things done), so when one of them goes down, so does my productivity.  I am a workaholic, so not having my drug really drives me nutts.  Once my computer was fixed, it blessed me with a virus.....a bad one.  It was the kind that won't let your computer do a damn thing, even reboot.  But I have a philosophy that states that you usually only grow when you are challenged.  So, if you embrace progress, you must also embrace struggle.  I am a firm believer that it is our most challenging times in life that give us the greatest opportunities for personal growth.  I did what I could to embrace the challenge, but even wise words don't keep you from being pissed off.

As a result, I learned alot more about computers, viruses, booting your computer in "safe mode", and all kinds of other things I would not know if my computer had behaved perfectly.  So, I think I am a stronger person now (haha!).

I got two calls from NPR this week: One from NPR Wisconsin and the other for a show called "News and Notes", which is national.  I've taken some time away from doing nearly anything in national media, but I always do the monthly appearance on NPR Wisconsin out of respect for the people who run the network there.  NPR is one of the few media organizations that actually try to give meaningful news and still work to utilize media as a way to keep the public informed, educated and evolving.  In other words, they are the opposite of The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity & Colmes, who work to keep the public ignorant, dumb, racist and prehistoric.

So, I agreed to do both appearances in spite of the fact that I've been turning down nearly everything else.  I am starting to find that having a normal life is fun, and I really enjoy being at home with the ringer off on my phone so that I can think and hang out with the guy called "me".  "Me" time is important for my life, for that is what made me into the wierd person I am.  When you spend time reflecting constantly and questioning everything, you can't help but walk away with a different view on life.  I try to mentally live my life out over and over again, to find out how I want to invest the precious time I have on this earth.  I never wanted to just go through the motions.  As a result, I see a lot of my colleagues who think they are actually doing something important, only to find that when they are 80 years old, they are going to wonder why they let someone persuade them to sit in their offices writing research papers that no one is ever going to read.

Another reason I was happy to agree to the NPR appearance is because they invited me to speak as a Financial Expert.  The racism in "mainstream" media that people don't notice is that every time I am called, it's because there is "black stuff" going on.  When they want a financial person, they call the white guy down the hall.  My university gets peeved that I do so much commentary related to race, and a big part of it is because when you step outside, the world see you as a black man first.  That perception then taints the value of everything else.  But the NPR producer who called me, who happens to be black, saw me as a Finance Professor.  This usually happens when I get calls from BET, Wendy Williams or other black media.  They don't just see me as "the black guy", they see me as so much more.

Today, I also found out that some of my students hate my guts.  I am  a tough teacher, and it's inevitable that some of the students will complain about my exams.  I really don't care, because a person never got anything by being lazy.  I push my kids.  But when you are an outspoken black teacher and almost none of your students have ever experienced a black authority figure, you are surely going to get some people coming after you.  My university has no idea what kind of abuse they subject faculty of color to by putting them in powerless positions in such an abrasive environment. Also, some kids who come from wealth and privilege can be worse than the worst welfare recipient when it comes to feeling that they are entitled to an easy life.  George Bush is one of them.  I also feel bad for the college students who've been taught that coming to college and drinking like a damn fish for 4 years is normal behavior.  Most of my friends who did that during college are now alcoholics.  It's sad.

With all that said, I should say that I love most of my students.  Even the ones who hate me don't really know why.  They only think they hate me because their dad saw my face on some TV show.

On brighter notes, I went to a campus event this week with the Black Graduate Student Association.  That's an awesome feeling, and I wish I could attend more stuff.  The problem is that I am in a constant state of mental and physical exhaustion, so optional stuff just doesn't happen for me.  I saw one guy there who has been a consistent hater on me, but I just shook his hand. I was actually surprised that I was glad to see him.  I just don't have the energy to respond emotionally to the people who want to build themselves up by attacking me.  I can only wish them the best.  In fact, I learned that most of the time, someone who chases you around and is jealous of you or constantly obsessed with everything you do is really fighting some deep inadequacy within themselves.  I figured out that the more time I spend thinking about what someone else is doing, the less time I can spend doing my thing.  That's why I still don't know alot of names in my building, I don't get involved in petty office politics, and I don't waste my time with silly gossip.  Our time on this earth is short, and it should be used productively.  At least I try my best. 

 I did a commentary on the NCAA that is pasted below.  Enjoy!

 

 

Don Imus Set to Return on December 3

Hey everybody,
Not sure if you are aware, but Don Imus is due to return to the airwaves on December 3 on WABC in New York.  I’ve been on the phone with my network contacts to let them know that many people are NOT happy with Imus’ return.  We also felt it imperative to inform our audience that The YourBlackWorld Coalition plans to join the National Association of Black Journalists in their fight to keep Don Imus off the air.   Our petition and open letter is here if you would like to sign:  http://www.yourblackworld.com/imus.html
Here is what I know.  I will be honest about what I’ve seen behind the scenes:
1)      The fight is going to be long and difficult.  Imus was a money-maker, and he will be signing with one of the networks that makes its money by appealing to the racism embedded in neo-conservatives such as Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly.  They EMBRACE the fact that Imus is considered a racist and a sexist.
2)      When I worked with Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton to get Imus off the air the first time, I told them that boycotting the corporate sponsors would be the best line of attack.  That is ultimately what shot him down, since anyone will abandon you if you lose corporate sponsorship (I am a finance professor after all, so I’m always analyzing the money trail).  The truth is that many of the corporations that sponsor WABC (GEICO, Chase.com, AT&T Wireless, McDonalds and Verizon) also make money directly from Y-O-U.  I personally plan to reconsider my business relationships with these corporations.  A list of the corporate sponsors for WABC can be found here:  http://www.yourblackworld.com/news/stories/110607/wabc.htm.
3)      The mainstream media doesn’t give a damn:  they are too myopic in focus, and if they cover this issue, it will only be for a couple of days.  The networks like to wait out the storm and then go back to business as usual.  Also, if you’ll notice, most mainstream media is not very well diversified to begin with (the top news networks don’t have any African-American hosts for their news shows and don’t care to find any).   Like the Jena 6, this is going to have to be a grassroots movement and one in which we focus on being a consistent thorn in the side of those who support this sort of racism and sexism.
4)      Any political figure who appears on Imus’ show should be forced to explain their decision.  This is especially true of the Republican presidential candidates who chose to snub the debate held on an HBCU campus by Tavis Smiley.   I stand with my brother Tavis in his disdain for the individuals who so readily embrace ethnic exclusion, yet have the audacity to think they have the right to lead our country.
The petition is here if you would like to sign:  http://www.yourblackworld.com/imus.html.  I welcome articles from anyone who has something to say about the issue, we will publish them on YourBlackWorld.  Also, anyone who runs an organization that would like to join us in this fight, we would love to hear from you.
Sincerely,
Dr. Boyce Watkins
YourBlackWorld.com  

Reprint from LA Times - 6 Ways You can Tell that the NCAA Might be exploiting its athletes - 11/11/07

Boyce Watkins, a finance professor at Syracuse, is a harsh critic of the NCAA, and not because the Orange were snubbed by the NCAA men's basketball tournament selection committee.
Author of the book, "Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About College," Watkins maintains that the NCAA exploits basketball players by raking in $6 billion in television rights for the tournament on the backs of those athletes.
Watkins recently gave the Atlanta Journal-Constitution five ways to tell when the organization that runs college sports might be exploiting athletes:
"1. When t

he coach flies to games on private jets, but the star player's mother is riding a Greyhound bus.
"2. When the league sells a commercial spot for more money than it costs to educate every single player on the team.
"3. When this nonprofit, tax-exempt, amateur organization has a tournament that earns more money than the Super Bowl and the NBA Finals put together.
"4. When the coach earns $4 million per year, and a player is investigated for receiving a free bologna sandwich.
"5. Can you say, '$6-billion TV rights deal?' "

Transcript of My NPR Conversation with Farai Chideya

August 6, 2007 Monday
SHOW: News & Notes 9:00 AM EST
Race in the Court of Public Opinion

ANCHORS: FARAI CHIDEYA

LENGTH: 1123 words


FARAI CHIDEYA, host:
Being a black man is tough, but try being a high-profile black man who's had run in with the law. The court of public opinion judges you even before the courts. Just ask Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick. He's under investigation for allegedly running a brutal dog-fighting ring.
Now Boyce Watkins runs the popular Web site YourBlackWorld.com. And he conducted a poll for the site and found that 46 percent of African-Americans believe race has something to do with the charges against Vick. Only 14.5 percent of whites believe it. There was a similar result for Giants slugger Barry Bonds.
And Boyce Watkins joins us from his home near Syracuse University where he's a professor of finance. Welcome.
Professor BOYCE WATKINS (Finance, Syracuse University; Creator, YourBlackWorld.com): Thank you for having. Glad to be here.
CHIDEYA: So why and how did you conduct this study?
Prof. WATKINS: Well, I conducted this study out of my own intellectual curiosity. After I'd written "What if George Bush Were a Black Man?," which was one of my first books, I - we get a lot of questions from places, you know, places like CNN and Fox and others that would sort of ask me things like, you know, why is it that all these young black guys are misbehaving? And I said, well, actually most of them aren't. It's just the only ones you tend to put on TV are the ones who are acting up.
And so I sort of felt curious as to whether or not there was some sort of a racial divide in this situation. So I conducted a poll. It wasn't scientific, but I did ask for people to respond when they went to the Web site.
And so out of the young - out of the YourBlackWorld respondents, effectively we found that the divide was pretty much as I predicted it.
Whites tend to be about six times more likely to think that race has nothing to do with the Michael Vick case than African-Americans. But in the Barry Bonds case, what's interesting is that there are a lot more whites who are more sympathetic to the Bonds situation, even though even in that case, whites are overwhelmingly against the notion that race has anything to do with that situation either.
CHIDEYA: There was an article in USA Today and African-American man says about the Vick case, a $100-million black man, they - meaning, white Americans can't stand it - white folks has been grinding on an axe, and that axe ain't got sharp enough for them. What do you say to that kind of point of view?
Prof. WATKINS: Well, I can say this. I find it awfully ironic that, typically, the most hated athlete in America is always a black man. Before Michael Vick, there was Terrell Owens, Barry Bonds, Ron Artest, OJ Simpson. You can keep going down the list.
And I've always kind of felt that the black male, to use a pit bull analogy. We're sort of like the American pit bull. You know, the pit bull is a kind of animal where you can sit back and relish in its strength and beauty, and love the animal if it's lovable back. But the minute it bites you on the leg, you want to go put it to sleep. So the minute that Vick and OJ and others became the least favorite son in America, that's when they were sort of hung you out to dry.
CHIDEYA: What do you think about the language being used about Bonds and about Vick?
Prof. WATKINS: Well, you know, you have to read racial undertone in terms like, you know, monster and thugs and all these other things. And I saw an interview when Nancy Grace even made reference to Michael Vick possibly having herpes or something like that. And I said, what does him having herpes have to do with dog-fighting? You know, did - does she know that he have herpes? Did he give herpes to a dog?
I mean, this has nothing to do with anything and - but the fact is though that, typically, you only see black men on television when they are playing the sport or committing a crime. So that bias in the lens with which the media uses to analyze black male behavior is going to show itself when you look at a situation like a Michael Vick.
CHIDEYA: We had an author on talking about racial protectionism - her phrase. Do you think though that black folks when faced with what may be stereotypes, then go totally hole hog in front of people and, you know, concern of people who may not deserve that concern?
Prof. WATKINS: Well, you mean, hole hog in terms of defending people...
CHIDEYA: Supporting them and defending them.
Prof. WATKINS: Yeah, well, you know, what I've seen is that the people who've been defending Michael Vick like NAACP in Atlanta and others, they're not defending Michael Vick as a person. Most of us don't know Michael Vick as a person. They're just defending his right to a fair trial.
I woke up in this place that I naively call America in which I expect Americans to behave like Americans and allow the evidence to be laid out before we convict this guy. So all these signs saying, you know, neuter Vick, and go kill him, and go get him. That's kind of - it's kind of silly. It's little premature.
I'm not in favor of dog-fighting, but I am in favor of allowing people to have a fair hearing before you attack them. So even with the likes of Reverend Al Sharpton, who I love and respect, a great deal, I found it problematic that certain black leaders who were going after Michael Vick before any evidence have been presented.
CHIDEYA: Finally, if this is a syndrome, what's the cure?
Prof. WATKINS: Well, the cure is communication. It's just like in a marriage or in any family. The American family has a lot of pain in its past that it hasn't really dealt with. And the fact is that we're all afraid to really honestly talk about race. And until we have that conversation, and every time you take a poll like this, whether it's during the Michael Vick case, the OJ Simpson trial, or the Hurricane Katrina situation, you're always going to find the simple and common and normal reality, which is that whites and blacks see the world differently. And that will never go away until we learn to communicate.
CHIDEYA: Well, Professor, thanks so much.
Prof. WATKINS: Thank you for having me.
CHIDEYA: Boyce Watkins is a professor of finance at Syracuse University. He's also author of the book, "What If George Bush Were a Black Man?" and he runs the Web site, YourBlackWorld.com.
(Soundbite of music)
CHIDEYA: That's our show for today and thank you for sharing your time with us. To listen to the show or subscribe to our podcast, visit our Web site, nprnewsandnotes.org. No spaces, just nprnewsandnotes.org. To join the conversation or sign up for our newsletter, visit our blog at nprnewsandviews.org.
NEWS & NOTES was created by NPR News and African-American Public Radio Consortium. Tomorrow, we've got Africa update.
I'm Farai Chideya. This is NEWS & NOTES.

 

What's up with all these blinged out Pastors? - November 8, 2007

My father is a pastor, and I have alot of respect for the church.  Also, as a financial expert, I have alot of respect for money.  But I know enough about money to know that sometimes, money and God just don't mix.  Don't get me wrong.  I'm all for chasing economic empowerment and using money as a tool for positive change in the world.  But I think we've gotten to a strange reality when I can't tell my preacher from a rap star.  I've never thought that a pastor should be a CEO, since many CEOs worship the dollar bill.  That's almost like saying you can be a hooker and a school teacher.  Some combinations are like ketchup and apple sauce....they just don't mix.

It is for that reason that I invite the Senate investigation into some of the megachurches, some of whom seem eager to prey while praying, and invoke the name of God to make themselves into Gods.  I don't hate these men, but I know what lies in the hearts of men.  In the hearts of men, you find ego, lust, and a thirst for power, things that don't seem to fit with the righteous path.

For those pastors who seem to feel that it is critically important for them to have private jets and Rolls Royces, I only ask this question:  What would Jesus do?  Would he drive in a Rolls Royce and live in a mansion while there are people starving in his own community?  I think not.

My video thoughts are below, enjoy!

 

 

Bill Cosby Comes Up on my Screen Once Again - November 6, 2007

Remember this?

 

OK, the black dude second from the left is Joseph C. Phillips.  Joseph is one of my conservative homeboys, a person that I love to disagree with.  He also played Deniece's husband on "The Cosby Show".  Remember Martin, the Navy guy, Olivia's daddy?  Just so you know, the other people in the picture are myself, Paula Zahn (formerly of CNN), Cousin Jeff from BET and a liberal radio show host dude who sounded pretty conservative, I cant' remember his name.  The segment was done after I'd written some research on college athletes and why they should be paid for their work.  It's funny to me that with all the billions earned by college basketball and football players, people seem to think that the coaches are the only ones who deserve to be paid.  I guess the players and their families didn't do anything to earn the money and are only worthy of a scholarship.  I say let them earn what they are worth and pay their own tuition.  But the NCAA puts a lot of anti-competitive practices in place that keep players from being able to negotiate an honest salary.  If these practices were being utilized in any other industry, the captains of that industry would be put in prison.

Anyway, Joseph and I debated Bill Cosby on the radio (you can listen below, there are 3 pieces to it).  He is the only conservative I agreed to debate with on the Cosby topic, mainly because many of the conservatives are not interested in having a productive dialogue.  This is especially true for the buttholes on FOX News.  The last thing I want to do in the world is talk with an idiot like Sean Hannity about something that affects black people.  There is also another guy at the university who has continuously been biting at my ankles to get me to publicly dialogue with him.  I told him that I know a hater when I see one, and I don't waste my time dealing with them.  That's part of the challenge of being public.....as Method Man said about he and Tupac (when we were on ESPN), "You don't go looking for beef, it's just that everybody is always coming at you."  I agree.   Haterologists need not apply, and I told George Kilpatrick (the host of the show) that the only way I would have a public discourse on this topic would be with someone whom I respect.  Joseph has my respect because although we don't see eye to eye, he is a decent brother who really wants to see black people do positive things.

 

With that said, I digress.  I woke up today looking forward to spending the day with my sweetie, since she is off work.  Prosecutors get like zero days off work, so when she has free time, we use it to our advantage.  We were thinking about going to see the new Denzel movie, which I actually saw this weekend.  "American Gangster", while featuring the objectionable behavior of a person who sold poison in the black community, also serves as a source of inspiration for black people.  In the film, the black man found a way to free himself from ownership by someone else. He changed the game by being creative, courageous, disciplined and intelligent.  I can identify with that.  The downside was that he created a great deal of misery for his family, sending over 30 cousins to prison or morgues.  Overall, I recommend the film, it was a good one.

I was also thinking this morning about how blessed I am to have so much amazing support from my people.  Literally every single day, I get to open my email to find scores of messages from people thanking me, congratulating me or encouraging me to continue the fight.  This means a lot, because in spite of what any haterologist might say, I do what I do because I believe in it.  At the same time, each day I walk off to battle, I am prepared to fight alone and die on the battlefield if necessary.  That is where you have to get to mentally in order to fight in this world as a black male.  If you hold onto carrots and seek status in racist institutions, then you will become a victim of your own ambitions.  The easiest way to fight is when you have nothing to lose.  My people have given alot for me to be here, so I must give something back.

 

Anyway, the video with me and Joseph is below.  Enjoy!

 

 

What up Dog?  Is that what you really think about us? - November 4, 2007

I just listened to the recorded phone conversation between Duane Chapman (aka Dog The Bounty Hunter) and his son Tucker.  The conversation was about “that black girl”, also named Monique.  Apparently, Dog was worried about losing everything he has worked for because some “f*cking n*gger” might overhear him using the word “n*gger”. 
 
Dog explained to his son that the reason he could not work for him is because they sometimes use the n-word around the house, and that he didn’t want America to take it the wrong way.
 
So Dog, how are we supposed to take it? 
 
I listened to Dog’s words with an open mind.  I honestly felt bad for the guy, who was just sold out by his own son.   It was clear that Dog was feeling the pressure of someone under a constant spotlight, since the bigger you get, the more haters you have.  He made reference to people threatening to record him and take his words to national magazines to embarrass him. 
 
Too bad for Dog, it turned out his threat was right under his nose, as his son Tucker sold him up the river by recording the very conversation in which he expressed his concern about those trying to get him.  Man, that sucks. I actually feel bad for the guy.  There is also an almost comical irony to it all. 
 
I am not sure where Dog is going or where he belongs.  But from the tone of his conversation, it’s clear that he doesn’t hold black people in very high regard.  He seemed to have a problem with his son dating Monique, and I got a strong indication from his tone that it was her blackness and not much else, that kept her from having an opportunity to become part of the family.  That’s the problem Dog…you rejected her because she was black.  You made that clear in the conversation.
 
Before we all stand on our soap boxes and condemn Dog, we have to realize something.  Dog, in some ways, is nothing more than a Sean Hannity with long hair.  He says, in his own “Dog the Bounty Hunter” way, what a lot of America is thinking or says behind closed doors.  He reflects sentiments that are quite common, as there are plenty of white folks, teachers-doctors-lawyers-professors-scientists-judges in America who would not want their child dating a black person.  What is most ridiculously amazing to me is that these people will then turn around and claim not to be racist.
 
Sorry to tell you this, but if you feel that African-Americans are not good enough to date your children, then you are a pure cut, USDA-approved, Grade-A, good old fashioned, straight off the assembly line racist.  White supremacy is very subtle, and many of us are victimized by it.  You can’t claim to believe in equality while maintaining beliefs that are so blatantly laced with white supremacy.   
 
As for Dog, I hope he pays a high price for his mistake.  He has the right to say what he wants at home, but he doesn’t need a show to say it.  Besides that, I am not sure if his network has any black hosts anyway, perhaps it’s time they find one.  

Video- Dr. Boyce Breaking Down "Dog The Bounty Hunter"

 

Dr. Boyce "Bustin Rhymes" About the NCAA - 11/3/07

 

 

Why Universities are fundamentally racist - Tuesday, October 31, 2007
 
 

This was an interesting weekend.  Two things happened that I was involved with that led to a tremendous amount of reflection on my part.  I’ll start from the beginning, as the passion is so strong that my fingers are boiling on the keyboard. They say you shouldn’t try to think or write when you are angry, but I am a man of passion and passion brings out the strongest part of my intellect.
 
First, I went to visit my alma mater (or my “alma-mama” as I call it), The University of Kentucky.  UK is an amazing school, beautiful in some ways, but sick and twisted in others.  I saw our football team win an amazing game a couple of weeks ago, as they beat the #1 ranked team in the country for the first time in 43 years.  I was with them the entire time, cheering and jumping up and down as they scored one touch down after another.  Part of me bleeds blue, which happens to be one our school colors.
 
But it is also my love for my “alma-mamma” that inspired my visit to the school this week.  I gave a speech after being requested by the black students on campus to come in and comment on the series of racially-motivated incidents that took place on campus recently.  In one of the incidents, a black student had the words “Die Nigger” sliced into his door.  The incident was in the media, and I was forwarded the article by one of my cousins.  The reason I got the article:  The student who had the words scratched into his door also happened to be my cousin.
 
Before I could pick up the phone and “raise holy hayell”, I received a call from one of the black administrators, who wanted me to intervene.  The answer was a resounding “yes”.
 
Coming back home was an amazing experience, as I could literally look at every corner, street, building and sidewalk on that campus and have a fond memory of being in that particular spot.  It could be the place where I first kissed my girlfriend, stood fuming over a bad grade in a class, played football with my friends, had a car accident or drank a milkshake.  I consider that university to be my home.
 
The energy in the auditorium was off the chain, as the house was totally packed.  Apparently, the arrival of the “Dangerous Negro” had driven many people to come out, young and old, white and black.  The students came ready for war, and I was ready to guide them down the war path.  I didn’t want them filled with hate.  I just wanted them to have understanding, purpose and direction.  I reminded them that the same things that happened in 2007 were also happening in 1997, 1987 and 1977.   I told them about how the administration had made promises 20 years earlier to substantially increase the presence of black faculty on campus, and that none of these promises were kept or acknowledged.  I reminded them that if they acted firmly and strongly, 2007 would be the year when the shit was going to stop. 
 
I then asked the students how many of them have had more than one black professor.  Almost none of them raised their hands, I don’t think there were more than one or two hands in the air.  The fact that there were hundreds of people in the room, yet only a couple of them have had more than one black professor (after taking a multitude of classes) made my point immediately and clearly.  I told them that they should be ANGRY about the fact that people like them have been systemically cut out of academia and not allowed to stand in front of the classroom.  This is NOT FAIR and highly indicative of the fact that their university does not consider the hiring or tenure of black professors to be a high priority.  The excuses universities use for not hiring or tenuring black professors usually fit into (but are not limited to) a few neat categories:
 
1)      “We can’t find them, they don’t exist” – Bullshit.  They do exist.  I know a lot of them.  They apply for the jobs and are told that they aren’t qualified for the position.  Most of them are not even interviewed, even by universities that have positions that have never been held by a person of color.  I have many friends RIGHT NOW who are highly qualified to teach at the top universities, but they aren’t getting a second look when they send in their applications. 
 
2)      “They are not qualified for hiring or tenure” – There is not a more insulting statement in the world, nor one that is more indicative of the mentality that embraces white supremacy.  The idea that you can have a job that hundreds of people have done, mostly white men, in which THERE IS NOT A PERSON OF COLOR ON EARTH QUALIFIED TO DO THAT JOB implies that you are in serious denial.  Given America’s history of racism and exclusion, it is far more likely that this history of exclusion plays a role in the fact that many people are being systematically shut out of these opportunities.  The environment was built by racists to promote and support the success of one ethnic group over another.  So, even when racism leaves the hearts and minds of the individuals affiliated with that institution, their commitment to the standards created and embraced by the institution (created on an undeniably racist foundation) allow racism to fester and have an impact in the hiring and promotion processes.  This does not even consider the fact that many Americans still embrace racist ideals when it comes to how they evaluate the significance and importance of work being done in black communities.  Being a black scholar who does work in the black community, it is clear that while many people of color deem my work to be important, most of my non-black colleagues do not. 
 
 
This leads to the another important question: “Who is deciding if an applicant is qualified?” If a group/committee created and sustained by an historically racist institution is making decisions on who is qualified and who is not, then their criteria for choosing those who are most qualified is again likely to support the advancement of one group over another. 
For example, in academia, we have the so-called “elite” journals: mostly controlled by white males or those who think like them.  When I have submitted work relevant to the black community to these journals, that work is then rejected.  At which point, I am criticized for not having my work published in the so-called “premiere journals”.  That’s like me forcing Garth Brooks to perform in the Apollo Theatre in Harlem, and saying “From the crowd’s reaction, it’s clear that you’re a shitty singer”.
 
Now, the third standard excuse:
 
3)      “We made offers to them, but they won’t take the job” – Easy racist tactic: offer the minority candidate an embarrassing and lowball salary and then let them walk away.  That’s what the Yankees did to Joe Torre- they made an offer, but the offer was so insulting that they knew he would not take it.  That’s like urinating on your girlfriend’s $3 engagement ring and then saying “B*&^%, will you marry me?”  What’s interesting is that when UK, Syracuse and other universities want to get a top quality basketball coach or player, they will dig deep in their pockets to make it happen.  They don’t do the same when it comes to creating diversity, primarily because it just isn’t on their priority list.  
 
I explained to the U. Kentucky students that their university is a modern day plantation.  Black people have 4 dominant roles:  To dribble basketballs, throw footballs, cook the food and take out the trash.  One does not have to explicitly tell students that they feel that whites are superior to blacks…..they teach it every day with their actions and choices.....actions speak louder than words.   When every person you see at the front of the classroom is white, you are being implicitly told that you are not meant to be in that position.  Also, there are almost no mentors in place who can identify with you.  I once saw two pictures of the law school professionals at U. Kentucky, placed side by side.  One was a picture of the faculty, the other a picture of the janitorial staff.  The first picture was 100% white, the other 100% black.  There’s not much else to say beyond that.
 
I then told the students that my own university and many others are not much different in their racism.  Syracuse University has SCORES of academic departments that have NEVER tenured a person of color.  Rather than considering the possibility that this reality is an artifact and result of institutionalized racism, many allegedly intelligent individuals would rather presume that the disparity is due to the fact that no qualified black people have applied for the job.
 
Again, I must clear my throat and respond with a resounding “Bullshit”.
 
I have seen many qualified black professors come through my university either as applicants or assistant professors attempting to obtain tenure.  In every single case, they were told by individuals at this university that they were not qualified for the job.  These were hard working professors who have gone to the best schools.  Some of them went on to have tremendous success at other universities or at Historically Black Colleges and Universities, where they were not going to be forced to endure this sort of discrimination.  It is shameful, ignorant and absolutely ridiculous.  It is 2007 and you have some departments that have NEVER EVEN HIRED a person of color (even though many have applied for the job).  I find that both sad and pathetic.  The horrific denial is even more embarrassing, and future generations are going to judge our so-called intellectuals as harshly as we judge those in the 1960s who felt that black kids should not attend the same schools as whites, or who spent their time attempting to prove the genetic inferiority of people of color.   
 
I myself have been told consistently, recently by a committee of peers, many of whom don’t have an academic record as strong as my own, that I am a “substandard professor”.  I was told that my work in the black community adds no value to my reputation as a scholar and that I am not good enough to make tenure at this university.  I took the immediate step of letting people know that I UNCONDITIONALLY REJECT this assessment of my academic capability.
 
I have (to my knowledge) more solo authored research publications than any other person on my faculty.
 
I graduated as one of the top students at one of the top 10 finance programs in the world (the acceptance rates for these programs can be as low as 1 out of 100 applicants)
 
I have, through my work on CNN, ESPN, CBS, NBC and other networks, contributed substantially to national debates on issues related to people of color, and to America as a whole. 
 
I probably achieved more by the age of 32 than many of those judging me will achieve in a lifetime. 
 
Yet, I am considered clearly unqualified to make tenure at Syracuse University.   I can't help but laugh.
 
Someone has to fight this, so I guess I am going to have to be that guy.  I am prepared to fight alone, and die alone on the professional battlefield to challenge this kind of injustice, for it is harmful to millions of youth everywhere and the reason that black kids are mis-educated in American systems.  It is the same reason that I was told by high school teachers that I was not qualified for college.  It is the same reason that my sister, who is studying medicine at the Mayo Clinic, was told that she too was not qualified for college.  All the while, idiots like George W. Bush are being funneled to the top of major corporations, Harvard Business School, Yale University and the White House.  The same is true of academia, where individuals wear crowns made of discriminatory entitlement and arrogantly sprinkle scorn on those of color who've been exposed to such clearly flawed assessments.  Not me homeboy, I'm not that brotha.
 
Another one of my outstanding black colleagues, Martin Nunlee, just left the university in a shadow of shame.  He too was told that he was not good enough to be here.  The problem?  Every single one of the many departments of our business school has consistently denied tenure to EVERY SINGLE black man or woman who has applied for the past 120 years.  Rather than analyzing the system, priorities, psychological constructs, procedures and legacies, many would rather say that black people are just not trying hard enough…..bullshit.
 
I saw Harvard University do the same the Cornel West, who will go down in history as one of the great minds of the 20th century.  Countless other black professors have endured the same injustice.  The notion that so-called intellectuals are immune to the disease of racism is incorrect.  Sometimes those with the worst infections are the ones who are most confident that they have been cured.
 
So, if you’ve ever gone to college and wondered why none of your professors are black….it is not, as many will have you believe, because we are dumb, lazy or unqualified.  It is because even when we work our butts off and give 110%, we are still told that we are not cut out for the job…. “black boy you don’t belong here” is the message sent to me on a regular basis – it became especially true once I spoke openly about racism in America in national media (leading the university to officially disassociate itself from my words, something that has not been done to any other faculty member in recent memory).  I have some colleagues who don’t even speak to me, they just look at me as if I am a common criminal…..just a big, dumb nigger.  That is what it means to have an institution built on a racist foundation.  So, while I might have been hard on The University of Kentucky for their racism, the brand of racism at Syracuse is not much different.  Racial inequality took 400 years to build, but for some reason, people are asinine enough to think that it was gone in 20. 

Bill Cosby – The Ultimate conundrum- 10/23/07
 
Bill Cosby is NOT a Happy Negro.  I make this clear distinction so that the world realizes that I don’t put him in the same category as Juan Williams.  Juan is a person who shows all the signs of a sell-out, given the fact that he has destroyed a distinguished journalistic career in order to make himself into the “Intellectual Flavor Flave” of Fox News.  How do you spell Flavor’s name anyway?
 
I put up a video on Cosby this week that got a lot of response.  Apparently, some people don’t agree with my assessments.  But again, I stick by them.  I personally feel that a black man going on a tour of predominantly white television shows in order to bash black people is not doing anything productive.  That would be like someone doing a tour of Iran to talk about how pathetic American citizens are.  Doing that same tour on American soil would have a very different interpretation, because you could argue that you are doing your work out of love for America.  But doing the same tour in Iran or Venezuela would imply that you are empowering those who already feel that America is a terrible place with terrible people.
 
I did get an email from my buddy Joseph C. Phillips.  He was actually on the Cosby Show years ago, playing Martin, Denice’s husband…you remember, the guy in the Navy.  Well, anyway, Joseph and I were on CNN together a while back and I have been dialoguing with him on and off since then.  I don’t agree with him, but I respect him. 
 
Out of respect for his privacy, I can’t share what he emailed to me. But I can share my response.  Essentially, he agreed with Cosby and seemed to feel that my response to Cosby was inappropriate.  I also get the sense that Joseph felt that I was misinterpreting Bill’s actions.  I hope he is right because right now, I’m confused.  The problem, however, is that Cosby does not feel equipped to respond to and dialogue with anyone who disagrees with him, especially scholars.  But then again, who wouldn’t get nervous when they saw me coming?  I can be pretty strong and abrasive at times, I admit that.  I think it comes from the fact that when I am truly offended, I don’t hide it behind diplomacy.  I have to tell the truth and be honest about how I feel.  Cosby has offended me and the community that I come from.  For that reason, I feel that he must be challenged.
 
Without further ado, my response to Joseph: 
 
 
Hey Joseph,
 
good to hear from you man.  Very quick points:
 
1) I wonder how many times Bill has talked to Bob Johnson at BET for his role in the creation of millions of wannabe thugs?  This makes it more than a racial thing, it's a question of whether or not he has the courage to confront everyone responsible for the problem.
 
2) Speaking to white audiences about the perceived cultural inferiority of the black underclass is nothing new.  People have been doing it for 400 years and it happens around the world:  India does it to the "untouchables", Australia does it to the aborigines.  It happens all the time because the image of those with less media access is controlled by those who control media.
 
3) We are not any more flawed than anyone else.  A white man doing a tour of black America discussing everything that is wrong with white people would be perceived as a pathetic whiner.  I am not sure why the perception should change when a black man does a tour of white America complaining about black people.
 
4) Black people are powerful and strong, we've overcome a lot.  The lighting used in the lens to tell the story of a people has a great deal to do with which aspects of the story receive the most attention.  Don't fall for the hype my man....many black people are doing amazing things.  We're better off educationally, economically and otherwise than we've ever been.  I love our people and encourage us to improve, I don't enjoy discussing us from a point of negativity.
 

 

Randy Moss And T.O. -- Judging The Character Of These Characters - October 16, 2007


I recall hearing a lot of self-righteous individuals dogging, dissing and dismissing the two most controversial receivers in the NFL, Terrell Owens and Randy Moss. "We would never play with these guys", stated many a self-righteous owner, fan, player, or whatever.    Everyone seemed to want to cite this and that about their character, how they are not good human beings, that they are cancers to their teams and a lot of other stuff that didn't make any sense. Well, cancers don't make your team one of the best in the league, and that is exactly what these guys have done.     When evaluating the character of Owens and Moss, I see three things: they both work hard, they are winners, and they are also two of the best receivers in NFL history. You don't get that good by being the lazy bums they've been depicted to be.    I applaud Jerry Jones and Bill Belichick for seeing past the silliness.  Obviously they are able to separate the studs from the duds and see through the mob mentality that many fans have when it comes to black athletes who behave too "brother-like" for their collective taste.  Not that every black man behaves the same way, but as a brother myself, I understood T.O. a lot more than most middle age, Caucasian sports writers.    The same way the public convinced us that dogfighting is the worst crime in the history of the world (although many of Vick's critics have no problem shooting and stuffing innocent animals over the fireplace), there were individuals convincing us that Terrell Owens should be treated like a convicted sex offender. The truth was that Owens has not done anything worthy of the hatred he received two years ago. He was just being himself, which apparently isn't good enough for some people.   The fact is that angering mainstream America has become a crime. It's not a coincidence that the most hated athlete in America is almost always a black man. When they step out of certain pre-defined cultural boundaries and expectations, they are punished like field slaves. Michael Vick is the latest athlete to be made into an example, as he is surely going to lose everything. Owens and Moss also received their share of public disdain.   Smart owners, fans and coaches want winners. That's what should matter most on the football field, unless you're talking about serious criminals.   Owens and Moss are not criminals, they are just weird.    Self-righteous snobs find their teams sitting at home, as the Jets did when they passed up on Warren Sapp (caught smoking marijuana in college), and instead chose the allegedly "clean cut" tight end from Penn State (what's his name again? Oh, it doesn't matter anyway).     The teams who arrogantly claimed they would never consider acquiring Terrell Owens will be sitting at home when the Cowboys are advancing in the playoffs. The teams who passed up on Randy Moss in the draft soon found him catching touchdown passes over the heads of their defensive backs.   I am happy for these guys, and I stand by them. They are flamboyant, a little nutts and sometimes even spoiled.  But dammit, they know how to win, their character is reflected in their work ethic, and there is no replacing their talent.  The haters and judgers can talk all they want, but these guys are getting it done.   

 

The inside Scoop on my Feud with Bill O’Reilly - Saturday October 13, 2007

 
In case you didn’t hear, I’ve had an interesting month.  Some would say that I was under fire, since Bill O’Reilly (Host of “The O’Reilly Factor”) chose to spend his entire week explaining why Syracuse University should fire me for using a “racial slur” in describing his conservative sidekick, Juan Williams.  With my face plastered up like OJ Simpson, O’Reilly went on and on to the audience drones at Fox News about how my comment was “racist” and that I am a bad person (Imagine Bill O’Reilly, the David Duke of the new millennium, calling someone racist.  That’s like Britney Spears calling someone a bad mother).  I think he even called me a moron, which is ironic, since I have more education in my big toe than he has in his entire family.  He didn’t rail on the issue for 5 or 10 minutes…..he went on for an ENTIRE SHOW AND FOR THE ENTIRE WEEK.  Not since my days at my racist alma mater, The University of Kentucky (where someone scratched “Die N---- Die” on my cousin’s door last week), have I seen racists get so bent out of shape.  
 
In a Bat Man and Robin kind of way, Juan Williams, O’Reilly’s loyal side kick, followed suit on the assault by writing some pretty nasty words about me in Time Magazine.  I guess if I were Austin Powers, O’Reilly would be Dr. Evil, so that would make Juan Williams “Mini-me”.  I responded with an article of my own, but I sent it to black publications, since this was a conversation I wanted to have with my people.  I could care less what Fox News viewers think, since that network has done a huge disservice to American journalism.
 
I was flattered that Dr. Evil and Mini-me would spend so much time expressing their love for me.  As my old friend in the south used to say “The hit dog always hollers”.  In other words, I struck a chord with Juan Williams, primarily because millions of people around the country have been thinking what I’d simply chosen to say…..that he has made himself into Bill O’Reilly’s “Happy little negro”.  I don’t back away from my comments one bit, since it is a long tradition for racists to validate their attempts toward black oppression by finding an African-American willing to go along with the program. 
 
In case you’re wondering, none of this hoopla and media stuff bothered me a bit, I’m used to it.  I learned long ago from my mother that the world is not trained to love any black man who speaks strongly in support of his people.  I don’t say things to be popular, I say them to tell the TRUTH.  The 2000 emails didn’t bother me, since they go into a file I am saving for my grand kids.  Seeing my face on national TV only makes me wonder if I am wearing my favorite suit.  I actually slept through some of the episodes that O’Reilly spent talking about me.  When you’re well educated, honest, without fear and trying to do the right thing, then you can sleep well at night.  I’ve been snoring as loud as ever.
 
My university was also forced to get into the game, as the poor chancellor was getting slammed with tons of emails from ridiculous Fox News viewers, who demanded that I be fired for verbally assaulting their precious hosts.  The university then did something I’ve never seen it do in response to the words of a faculty member:  it issued a statement making it clear that my words do not reflect the views of the university.
 
Not that the statement bothered me (it didn’t at first), but one of the reporters got me thinking when she asked “Why do they feel it so important for them to detach themselves from you, do they do that to anyone else?” I wasn’t quite sure, since I’d just assumed that most people are afraid of black men, especially educated ones.  All I know is that for the longest time, it has been made very clear to me that the university is not happy with my role as a black public scholar.  I was told long ago that anything I do in public that is not directly involved with finance would not be recognized by my business school.  So, while they celebrate the public contributions of other faculty, most of my appearances on CNN, ESPN or anywhere else were virtually ignored, mainly because I was discussing black people.  Even when I’ve spoken on Financial issues, if the topic connected to African-American males, it was deemed controversial by definition, and usually not mentioned at all on the business school website.  However, if other faculty even received a peep of attention for their words, it was plastered all over the place.
 
If I were to think on it, I might actually be insulted.  I was the first black finance professor to be hired in the ENTIRE HISTORY of Syracuse University.  I was the only African-American in the United States to get a PhD in Finance during the year I graduated.  So, to not recognize the fact that my contributions AS A BLACK MAN are not critical to my community is like NASCAR telling Danica Patrick that she shouldn’t give a damn about women’s rights.  That, my friends, is a classic example of how institutionalized racism infects many of our nation’s universities.   
 
I am not angry at anyone over this.  But I only hope that this gives people a chance to see what institutionalized racism is all about.  It’s not about hanging nooses or calling someone the n-word in the hall….it’s about creating an institutional fabric and social infrastructure built with policies, sociologies, and procedures that benefit one race over another.  The simple fact that my contributions as a black scholar are heavily valued in the black community, yet ignored and virtually disrespected by my predominantly white university is directly connected to the fact that many departments on this campus (mine included) have NEVER, to my knowledge, tenured a single black person in over 100 years of existence.  Black faculty are typically fired or never hired because they are consistently deemed less qualified than their white counterparts.  Are black students made to be more successful when they can go through an entire 4 years of college without ever having a black teacher?  I feel the need to address these issues, not for my own career, but for the careers of those who come in behind me. 
 
Well, that’s the thick and thin of it.  I am actually going to take a break from national TV stuff for a while and focus on other issues, like my next book.  I’ve done about 70 interviews this month and I am honestly tired of it.  I also have a TV deal in the works, but I’ll let you know more about that when it’s done.
 
To my friends who have worried about me and sent me letters of support, God bless you and I appreciate the love.  I happen to be a second cousin to my greatest hero, Muhammad Ali.  I’ve always felt that if he could deal with the hate he received in the 60s, then damnit, I can deal with that dumb ass Bill O’Reilly.  In fact, O’Reilly’s not smart enough to be a real challenge.
 
 

 

Headed to get some Sun!!!!! Yeah!!! – Friday, October 12, 2007
 
 
I am really tired today.  Really tired.  Sometimes I get this way when everything gets out of control.  Not that this week has been more than I can handle, since I can handle a lot.  The key is knowing how to not take things too seriously.
 
I did make some decisions recently:  I am not going to do any national media for a while, at least not with mainstream networks.  I am honestly tired of CNN and FOX, and I find myself getting weary of the fact that people deem a debate to be more important just because it’s on national tv.  I would rather spend my time focusing on things of substance, like our initiative to keep Don Imus off the air, and also my next book.  My literary agent seems excited about it, and I decided that it would provide some guidance on leadership in the 21st century.  Well, at least my two cents worth.
 
Second, I am really really really excited about the speeches I am giving over the next few weeks, which are in the south.  I like the south because it’s warm.  The north is really cold, and I hate cold weather.
 
I did an interview today on Wisconsin Public radio, one of the few networks I have a tremendous amount of respect for.  I am also willing to do things with American Urban Radio Networks and a limited number of friends I have with XM Satellite.  I feel that those conversations are more productive than the ones I’ve had on FOX.  Being on FOX is like having really bad sex….where you walk away saying “Did I just do it so that I could say I did?”  Kinda makes you think.
 
Here is a video my management put together on this feud with Bill O’Reilly, yet another man I have very little respect for.  What people don’t realize is that he is actually worse than Don Imus.  Imus is a racist, but O’Reilly is another David Duke.

 

 

 

Why Don Imus Should Not Be Allowed Back on the Air - October 11, 2007
  

 
For some reason, the representatives of Don Imus feel they can insult the intelligence of fair-minded people in America.  Just a few months after his reference to innocent, young black women as a group of “nappy headed hoes”, there are efforts and negotiations to get him back on national radio.  It appears that those who represent Imus simply told him to “wait a few months and the angry black people will go away.”
 
While some might think that protests by the black community have a limited shelf life, this could not be further from the truth.  The reality is that movements of the 21st century exist within a different paradigm.  The Jena 6 case showed clearly that with the power of the Internet and related ability to circumvent mainstream media (which has not properly served the interests of black people), there is a fresh ability for people to engage in the truest freedoms of America reflected in our power to protest.
 
We at YourBlackWorld want to use this power to challenge the likes of Don Imus, Bill O’Reilly and others who have felt that the power of the airwaves has justified their continued abuse of people of color.  Their remarks, hatred, and bullying has done nothing more than perpetuate the racist foundations of our country.  America cannot move forward if these individuals are continuously given platforms that allow them to spew such rhetoric.
 
Don Imus’ individual right to freedom of speech is respected, but his right to use hate speech via the support of a corporation funded with consumer dollars is not.  Similar to the fact that Americans would not have chosen to support Nike had they chosen to sponsor Michael Vick, fair-minded Americans should choose not to support any network or corporation that decides to sponsor Don Imus.
 
We are calling for the following:
 
1)      Any organization considering putting Don Imus on the air is warned in advance that signing him will lead to prolonged, relentless protest and potential boycotts of your network.  Your network will be clearly defined as an enemy to people of color and to fair-minded Americans everywhere.
2)      Corporate sponsors who sign deals to have their products on the air of such a show will be held accountable for their desire to profit from an individual who has made a reputation for hate.
3)      Dignitaries, politicians and other respected individuals will have their credibility questioned should they choose to be guests on such a show.  For example, Republican presidential candidates who chose to pass the presidential debate sponsored by African-Americans, but then choose to come onto Imus’ show, will be subject to question and scrutiny.  
 
Individuals who would like to sign the petition to keep Imus off the air are encouraged to do so.  We support the National Association of Black Journalists and other organizations in our initiative.  The fight will never stop.
 
 
Sincerely,
 
Dr. Boyce Watkins
YourBlackWorld.com

 

OK, I'm done.  O'Reilly REALLY DOES have a Secret Obsession with me  - Sunday 10/7/07

I saw something this week I've never seen before:  Bill O'Reilly and his goons for an audience spent 5 STRAIGHT DAYS talking about how much he hates me and wants me to be fired.  If only girls in high school had given me so much attention.

I won't waste your time with more of my thoughts on the situation, I am actually bored with O'Reilly.  I can only say that I will be talking about this whole situation in my next book, and we are close to having a done deal.  I am excited.  Here is something I saw on Mediamatters.org that shows just how Fox News, Juan Williams, and The O'Reilly Factor are losing their credibility one day at a time.  I once considered going onto O'Reilly's show to respond to him, but now I realize that I've hit a wounded duck.  Actually, I feel sorry for both he and Juan, for all indications say that neither of them will be around in 5 years.

Here is something I saw in a great blog post on mediamattes.org:  It appears that Williams has sacrificed so much of his journalistic integrity that I bet NPR will fire him in the near future.  I feel sorry for any black man who has put himself into such a sad, pathetic, situation.

Juan Williams, Fox News and the NPR conundrum
by Eric Boehlert

For years, journalist Juan Williams has straddled the divide between two unique media worlds; the thoughtful and erudite journalism of National Public Radio (NPR), where Williams serves as an analyst, and the rowdy hothouse at Fox News, where Williams works as a contributor. Most of the time, the two worlds don't collide. But recently they did, and NPR has the bruises to show for it.
That's because last week Williams wasn't commenting about the news, he was in the middle of it. First, he became entangled in the controversy that swirled around Bill O'Reilly's puzzling comments about visiting Harlem, which were seen by many as being racially insensitive. Williams, a prominent African-American journalist, strenuously defended O'Reilly on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor and accused his critics of launching a smear campaign.
Then later in the week, Williams made news when he complained that NPR had turned down the White House's offer to have him interview President Bush and discuss race relations. Officials at NPR were uncomfortable having the White House handpick the interviewer, so they passed. Fox News though, quickly accepted the invitation, complete with restrictions, and Williams conducted the interview for the all-news cable channel.
With his often over-excited and misleading defense of O'Reilly, as well as his need to publicly side with Fox News and badmouth NPR's decision regarding the Bush interview, it seems Williams no longer straddles that peculiar media divide. Instead, he's deliberately marched over into the Fox News camp and in the process has stripped away some layers of his journalistic integrity.
Worse, real damage is being done to NPR by having its name, via Williams, associated with Fox News' most opinionated talker. In fact, Williams' recent appearance on The O'Reilly Factor almost certainly violated NPR's employee standards, which prohibit staffers from appearing on programs that "encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis" and are "harmful to the reputation of NPR."
Content-wise, The O'Reilly Factor is a complete train wreck. As O'Reilly biographer Marvin Kitman recently noted, "Frankly, I can't listen to him anymore. As much as I praised the early O'Reilly, I think he's gone nuts. ... He just seems to go berserk more often now."
That's no secret, and my guess is that senior executives at NPR understand that about O'Reilly. And yet NPR let Williams appear on The O'Reilly Factor in his effort to bail out the host from a brewing race-based media scandal. The fact that Williams repeatedly misled viewers while recounting O'Reilly's comments last week also did not help NPR's cause.
Evidence suggests that, behind the scenes, NPR is not happy about Williams' relationship with Fox News. If so, now is the time for the network to address the growing problem.
Complaints about Williams' alliance with Fox News are not new. For years he has drawn criticism from liberals who protest his weekly appearances on the more grown-up Fox News Sunday, arguing there are better advocates for genuinely liberal positions than Williams, who, for instance, was a supporter of Clarence Thomas' Supreme Court nomination. Over the years though, I've found Williams to be among the most consistently focused and aggressive of the so-called Fox News Democrats, often (though not always) pushing back against the particularly egregious Republican talking points that swamp the Fox News Sunday telecast.
If Williams wants to serve as a well-paid prop, a self-described "foil," brought in to manufacture entertaining conflict in front of the Fox News cameras for un-persuadable viewers who vote overwhelmingly Republican, that's his choice.
What changed last week was that Williams inserted himself into the news and cast himself as the great Fox News defender, and did it on The O'Reilly Factor, a program no serious NPR journalist should ever appear on.
Williams played a starring role in O'Reilly's saga surrounding Sylvia's restaurant in Harlem, because it was on that same broadcast that the host interviewed Williams and the two men talked about race in America, including damaging stereotypes that exist. (Williams was busy promoting his book, now out in paperback.) So when more and more news outlets began asking questions about why O'Reilly was surprised a black restaurant in Harlem was like a white restaurant in midtown Manhattan, Williams was quickly invited onto The O'Reilly Factor to help explain away the story.
Clamoring about how news organizations were guilty of "rank dishonesty" in covering the O'Reilly controversy (they're trying to "shut you up"), Williams conveniently sidestepped the host's most inflammatory remarks from the telecast. Williams had nothing to say about O'Reilly's condescending suggestion that "black Americans are starting to think more and more for themselves." Again and again, Williams took to the airwaves to defend O'Reilly, including on Fox News host John Gibson's radio program, and again and again Williams simply flushed that quote down the memory hole and pretended it never happened. I assume that's because the quote did not fit into Williams' defense of O'Reilly being the victim of a smear campaign, or simply being misunderstood.
Meanwhile, appearing on The O'Reilly Factor, Williams wouldn't touch O'Reilly's Quote of The Week:
And I couldn't get over the fact that there was no difference between Sylvia's restaurant and any other restaurant in New York City. I mean, it was exactly the same, even though it's run by blacks, primarily black patronship.
Days later, on September 30, Williams appeared on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, and a caller very specifically asked him to address that quote. Williams though, ripped it out of context and told viewers that O'Reilly made that comment as a way to compare the peaceful scene at Sylvia's to the ugly stereotype of black America that's portrayed through gangsta rap videos. But that's simply not true. The discussion O'Reilly and Williams had about rap video images came well after O'Reilly made his initial comments about Sylvia's. It's simply not accurate to suggest O'Reilly told the "no difference" story about Sylvia's amidst a larger discussion about gangsta rap. But Williams, playing defense for the Fox News host, did his best to re-tell the story in an O'Reilly-friendly way.
Writing an essay for Time magazine, Williams made an absurdly shallow (and dishonest) attempt at explaining the details of the controversy. According to Williams' thin spin, O'Reilly was unfairly "slammed" simply "for saying he went to a restaurant in Harlem and had a good time." That's like saying Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) got slammed for simply not flushing the toilet at the Minneapolis airport. Williams could not even bring himself to reprint O'Reilly's quote about being surprised that Sylvia's was just like any other restaurant "even though it's run by blacks."
Of all his media appearances last week, it was Williams' stint on The O'Reilly Factor that was most noteworthy, simply because Williams provided O'Reilly with crucial political cover by rushing to his defense. I understand why O'Reilly was desperate for Williams to appear on The O'Reilly Factor. I cannot understand, however, why NPR allowed it.
Public broadcasting guidelines clearly state that when appearing on outside programs "journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist." They should not appear on programs that are "harmful to the reputation of NPR." And, "They should not participate in shows, electronic forums, or blogs that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis."
Let's take them one at a time. First, when he appeared on The O'Reilly Factor last week to announce that there was a media conspiracy in motion to try to shut Bill O'Reilly up, was Williams expressing views that he would not air on NPR? My hunch is yes. And FYI, according to a Nexis search of the transcripts, Williams did not discuss O'Reilly on NPR last week. Second, is The O'Reilly Factor a program that is harmful to NPR's reputation? Of course. And third, is it a program that encourages (wild) speculation? It is.
Additionally, the NPR Code of Ethics forbids all NPR journalists from participating in appearances that "may appear to endorse the agenda of a group or organization." Fox News, as an organization, has an open political agenda, and by defending O'Reilly on The O'Reilly Factor, NPR's Williams was endorsing that organization's agenda, which was to attack and smear anyone who raised questions about the host's incendiary comments.
Clearly Williams' appearances on The O'Reilly Factor ran counter to NPR's established guidelines. Or can you name a single other "news" program that, based on public broadcasting standards, would be more inappropriate for an NPR employee to appear on and pontificate?
And last week wasn't the first time Williams sprinted to O'Reilly's side during an embarrassing media moment. Back in January when O'Reilly appeared on CBS' Late Show with David Letterman, the host, during some entertaining banter, zinged his guest by claiming 60 percent of what O'Reilly says is "crap." O'Reilly was widely seen as the loser in the televised tête-à-tête.
Once again, Williams rushed onto The O'Reilly Factor to help his glass-jawed pal get back on his feet. Williams, acting like he'd never seen two grown men argue on television before, decried Letterman's "antagonism" towards O'Reilly and all the "horrible things that he said to you." Williams compared Letterman to a serial killer and expressed amazement that O'Reilly didn't have a "black eye." After all, he'd been in a "knife fight" on the Letterman show.
The fact that O'Reilly doles out far nastier insults to his Fox News guests on a nightly basis went unmentioned by Williams.
Juan Williams sides with Fox News over NPR
If Williams was appreciative of NPR for bending the rules to allow him to flack for O'Reilly on Fox News, Williams had a strange way of showing it. The day after his September 25 ill-advised visit to The O'Reilly Factor, Williams was featured in a Washington Post article about the fact that NPR passed on an interview that Williams was offered with Bush to discuss race relations, as well as the brewing controversy in Jena, Louisiana, over charges of excessive prosecution for six black teens there.
Ellen Weiss, NPR's vice president for news, told the Post she "felt strongly" that "the White House shouldn't be selecting the person" for the interview. Williams lamented how he was "stunned by [NPR's] decision to turn their backs on [Bush] and to turn their backs on me."
I think NPR execs might have been too polite to express it publicly, but based on the tenor and response to Williams' much-hyped interview with Bush last January, back when the president was out selling his surge strategy for Iraq, it's possible NPR brass simply didn't think Williams was up to the task of going one-on-one with Bush.
As firedoglake blogger TRex noted, the January sit-down Williams conducted with Bush, "was a travesty." The problem? "Williams was in full, Fawning Fox News Toady-mode, pitching softball after softball at the president and offering no follow-up questions. It left the line between journalism and PR way behind and crossed into the territory of worship."
Indeed, one memorable moment came when Williams assured Bush that Americans were praying for him. At the time, NPR listeners took notice and they were not impressed.
So why would NPR send Williams, armed with the same lapdog approach, back to White House to interview a president who, since January, has managed to become even less popular?
Plus, there's a backstory. In his seven years in office, Bush has basically stiffed one of the nation's most prestigious government-funded news organizations and granted NPR just a single interview; the Williams puff session in January. To this day, Bush has refused to allow an NPR anchor or new correspondent to interview him on a range of topics, the way ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and Fox have all been allowed to do. What exactly is Bush afraid of? (Williams is an analyst, not an anchor or news correspondent.)
Then again, the antagonism should not be surprising since the administration's contempt for public broadcasting is well documented. (Question: Do NPR bosses allow Williams to maintain a high profile at Fox News as a way to defend public broadcasting against relentless right-wing critics who claim NPR has a liberal bias?)
So I'm not surprised NPR balked. And I'm not surprised Williams ran to the media to tell his sad tale of woe.
But the story doesn't end there. Because after NPR passed on the interview, Williams went ahead and did it in his role as a Fox News contributor. Fox then made a big deal about how NPR had turned Bush down, complete with issuing a name-calling press release about how "appalling" NPR's treatment of Williams had been.
In truth, Fox News' treatment of Williams, and his Bush interview, was even more insulting. Because what did Fox News actually do with Williams' interview? Fox News basically ignored the contents. As best I can tell, Fox News last week aired less than two minutes from the interview in which Bush discussed race. In fact, Fox News spent more time talking about how NPR punted on the interview than it did broadcasting that portion of the interview. (During the interview, Williams also asked Bush about the 2008 campaign and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad; Fox News aired more of that.)
There was a telling moment when Williams appeared on The O'Reilly Factor to hype the Bush interview. O'Reilly, a public broadcasting hater, went on and on about how NPR turned down the White House interview offer. Turning to the interview, O'Reilly announced, "[W]e'll run a clip of it because it has to do with Ahmadinejad." [Emphasis added.] As for race or the Jena 6? O'Reilly couldn't care less.
Same with John Gibson's The Big Show; the host asked Williams about Bush's comments regarding the 2008 campaign, as well as Ahmadinejad. Zero interest, though, in Bush's comments about race or the Jena 6 demonstrators, whom Gibson had already mocked on the air for allegedly inventing claims of racism in America.
But that's what Fox News does; Fox attacks black America.
Note that while making the rounds on his spin control tour last week, Williams appeared on Gibson's radio show, where he mentioned that they're both employed by Fox News.
"They don't much like that at NPR, do they, Juan?" asked Gibson with a chuckle.
"Oh boy. Ugh," came Williams' response.
If NPR is unhappy with Williams' increasingly high-profile and controversial appearances on Fox News, then now is the time to tell him that he has to choose between the two media outlets. Although from the looks of things, with Williams providing cover for O'Reilly and then trashing NPR for not obediently accepting the White House guidelines for a Bush interview the way Fox News did, it looks as if Williams has already made his choice.

 

SU prof in middle of O'Reilly uproar (The Syracuse Post Standard)

Friday, October 05, 2007 By Pam Lundborg Staff writer

A Syracuse University professor has received death threats and hundreds of nasty e-mails after he entered a controversy over remarks made by talk show host Bill O'Reilly.
Boyce Watkins, a black SU business professor, last week on CNN called National Public Radio senior editor Juan Williams a "happy Negro" after Williams defended O'Reilly.
The racial debate began when O'Reilly, on his radio show, said black people were well behaved at a Harlem restaurant that he visited and that no one yelled, "m-fer, I want more iced tea." Many listeners called O'Reilly a racist.
Williams, a black journalist, defended O'Reilly on the O'Reilly Factor TV show, saying the talk show host's comments were not racist and that O'Reilly was "trying to deflate stereotypes."
Watkins spoke to CNN several times, saying Williams is, "the eternal happy Negro." Williams' defense of O'Reilly is "like a stripper telling Hugh Hefner he's not a sexist," he said.
O'Reilly, Williams and Watkins have been debating the issue since, appearing on national television several times this week to defend their perspectives. The controversy is also festering at SU, where Watkins says the university administration is distancing itself from him and his comments.
Watkins, who is in the Martin J. Whitman School of Management, said he met Wednesday with his dean, Melvin Stith, who told Watkins that he appreciates his freedom of speech but wants the professor to make it clear that he is speaking as a public scholar and not as a university representative. The university released a statement Thursday echoing that sentiment:
"Syracuse University acknowledges the right of Dr. Watkins, outside of his employment with the University, to express his personal views on issues of interest to him. However, when faculty do so, they are not reflecting the opinion or mission of Syracuse University or any of its schools or colleges."
Stith echoed the statement Thursday night, saying "my position is that of course we all have a right to speak as citizens of this country, but he does not speak on behalf of Whitman or SU." He would not comment on the content of Watkins' comments.
Watkins said he doesn't feel the university likes that he stirs up controversy.
"I feel that (Chancellor Nancy) Cantor's camp doesn't like what I do," he said. "I'm the stepchild that's been swept under the rug . . . Syracuse is ashamed of me. The university has not embraced anything I've done."
Watkins said he stands by his statements to CNN. O'Reilly has "made an enemy of the black community," he said. Williams, he said, "validates the racist."
"(Williams) does not challenge white America to take responsibility for creating institutions that perpetuate racial inequality," Watkins said. "His job is to sit with borderline Klansmen and say the world is screwed up because black people are screwed up."
Williams, reached by telephone Thursday, said Watkins' "happy Negro" comments were cheap insults that lack substance. The men have never met or spoken, he said.
"It's just kind of low-ball, almost what you'd describe as schoolyard language in what was intended to be a serious discussion about race in America," Williams said. "This guy calling me a happy Negro suggests I'm some Uncle Tom and that I'm making excuses for racism. . .How outrageous is it to attack someone who promotes healthy race relations in this country."
Watkins and Williams both say they have been flooded with response. Both say members of the black community have been supportive.
Watkins, who said he has received more than 600 e-mails, said several Fox viewers have sent death threats.
"I'm getting hundreds and hundreds of e-mails telling me I'm a bad guy," Watkins said. "I'm not talking polite disagreement."

 

Bill O’Reilly’s Secret Obsession and Why Lawyers are so smart -10/5/07
 
I woke up this morning to the voice of an attorney.  Not one from Fox News though, but one from the conference at which I was speaking.  She asked me if I was the guy she saw on Fox the night before, with his face splashed on the screen like OJ Simpson.  I figured that denying it wouldn’t work, so I told her that I was the guy.  She then expressed concern that Fox News was sending a camera crew to cover the event at which I was speaking, and I think it made her nervous.

Why O'Reilly and his goons are so obsessed with me, I have no idea.  In light of the fact that so many conservatives are in the closet, I just hope that it's not some kind of weird mandingo fantasy or something.  The guy is just wierd.
 
No problem.  I told the Fox people to go away.  I guess attorneys are supposed to worry about stuff like that, and I sometimes forget what it’s like for black people who are afraid to lose their jobs.  Being associated with someone like me might actually reveal to your corporation that you are indeed, a black person. 
 
Part of this is what makes me feel sorry for us.  We hide in the same way we did during slavery….saying and being one thing in public and being something else in private.  We wear the corporate suits and speak the lingo during the day, only to have “dinner table revolts” every night.  This is the reason why I knew, long ago, that I would never be a good corporate negro.
 
This is not to berate the women at this conference (it was a conference for female attorneys of color). They were awesome, and I loved the energy.  I talked a lot about my sweetie, who also happens to be an attorney, and they got a kick out of that. I figured that telling them about my sweetie from the beginning would fend off any women from either thinking that I am hitting on them or that they should hit on me.  I don’t expect that any woman in her right mind would want a guy with a face like mine, but sometimes I am surprised.
 
I also found out from my sweetie that I was on the front page of the Syracuse Post Standard.  I haven’t read the article, but I plan to.  Part of me can’t wait to see how this plays out.  But one thing that Bill O’Reilly should know is that I have a VERY LONG memory and my reach is farther than he might think.  He gets caught slipping again, he might find himself crying on TV like Juan Williams. 
 
Both of these guys are enemies of America, and the worst thing in the world is to go to war with a guy who is prepared to put it all on the line.  I don’t hate Bill O’Reilly, I feel sorry for him.  I feel especially sorry for anyone who tries to get in my way.
 
OK, I have to get on a plane.  Bye!
 

 

O’Reilly does ANOTHER Show about me? – October 4, 2007
 
I can always tell what’s going on in the world by the “pulse” in my emails.  When I start getting a barrage of positive emails, it means that some black publication has written something about me or my feud with Bill O’Reilly.  When I get a slew of negative and nasty emails, I know that Fox did something.  Fox tends to have an “interesting” crowd viewing its shows, and you would be amazed at the kinds of things that people say.
 
Today,  I started getting a ton of really crazy emails.  I knew it could only be due to one thing:  O’Reilly again.  I then asked my friend, who actually watches this kind of stuff, if she’d heard anything.  She confirmed it:  Bill was talking about me again.
 
This time, he was asking my University President to defend my remarks.  That’s incredibly silly because my university hates me.  I have NEVER IN MY LIFE had one single conversation with our university president.  So, I feel bad for the central administrators who have to defend the negro across campus that they don’t even like. 
 
Of course, I don’t expect Bill to ever confront me himself.  He’s not smart enough to manage what I would have to say.  People like him fear intelligent black men.  Let’s keep it that way.  In fact, the more I think about it, the more I realize that he is probably not smart enough to know how much smarter than him I am.  Either way,  I don’t exactly jump with excitement over the idea of going head to head with the King Redneck in front of a bunch of people who already have biased viewpoints.  I would rather share my thoughts with predominantly black audiences, as I’ve done for most of this week.  I deliberately avoided mainstream media and went after outlets I respect, like Black America Web, where there is an audience that respects and cares for the advancement of black people.  Most of the people who read Black America Web have little or no respect for Juan Williams, so my comments were welcome.  Fox News is the opposite, since a black man willing to agree with a proven racist is always a precious commodity. 
 
I am in NYC giving a speech at a conference for black female attorneys.  I am excited, since these are an intelligent, conscientious group of leaders.  Amazing women.  At the same time, speaking for lawyers can be tough, since they tend to ask really detailed questions.  But given that my fiancé is an attorney, I kinda know what to expect.
 
Outside of that, it’s life as usual.  Well, except for the fallout with all the Fox stuff.  But for the most part, this was actually the first relatively normal day I've had in a while.

 

Why I called Juan Williams a “Happy Negro” on CNN – And why He and Bill O’Reilly Are Not Happy About it

By Dr. Boyce D. Watkins

www.boycewatkins.com

A friend (Valencia Roner) called me one night to ask if I watch “The O’Reilly Factor”. I said “No, I don’t watch silly, racist television programs.” She then informed me that I might want to watch this particular episode.

Why? Because I was the topic of conversation….for the entire show. I set the DVR and went to sleep. I woke up the next morning to watch what had been recorded. Valencia was right. They were showing images of my CNN appearances, and playing my comments repeatedly, like Sports Center Highlights. I’ve never seen so many guests asked to comment about someone else’s comments.

The kicker was watching Juan Williams and Bill O’Reilly congratulate each other like brothers for allegedly winning the “smear campaign” placed upon them by CNN. I listened to O’Reilly tell the world that CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, Mediamatters.org and other news organizations were all corrupt, but not him. Williams even wrote a piece about me in Time Magazine, in addition to making several radio and TV appearances to complain about my words. During the show, I honestly thought Williams was going to cry. This brought back memories, since I remember making a lot of conservatives cry in college. My mother said I shouldn’t make grown men cry, and I felt bad.

I was asked on CNN (and other shows) about Bill O’Reilly’s racist remarks about Sylvia’s, a black restaurant in Harlem. In his comments, O’Reilly said that he could not get over the fact that the people were civil and well-behaved. He commended black people for finally learning to “think for themselves” and was relieved that there was no one in the restaurant saying “mf-er I want more ice tea.” (Good thing no one was really thirsty!).

O’Reilly tried to argue that his comments were meant to compliment the black community. He said that they were meant to defy stereotypes. As humbly and naive as a school girl, he argued that he was only intending to shed light on how racial stereotypes are bad for our society.  Like the movie “Transformers”, “America’s Educated Redneck”, Bill O'Reilly had morphed himself into Martin Luther King Jr.

On CNN, I essentially explained that anyone who thought Bill O’Reilly was suddenly a reformed racist who’d seen the light has been getting high with Bobby and Whitney too long. I’ve been on this man’s show before, and he has consistently demeaned, degraded and devalued everything about black culture he could get his hands on (remember when he said that the Katrina victims would not have been stranded on rooftops if they’d chosen to get an education?) I also mentioned that I was unimpressed with Juan Williams’ agreement and defense of O’Reilly. Seeing Williams sitting there congratulating O’Reilly for his bigotry reminded me of the Negro in the white suit defending “massa” at all costs. His attitudes were consistent with his latest and most terrible book, which does nothing but blast black culture and black people, as if we are the sole causes of socioeconomic inequality.

Therefore, I could only use terms I felt appropriate. I defined Williams as “The Happy Negro”. On CNN, I compared O’Reilly’s use of Williams to Hugh Hefner hiring a stripper to tell him that he’s not a sexist. Williams was irate after hearing my words.  In other words, “The Happy Negro” was no longer happy. 

I am not sure how smart or dumb Williams is (I have 3 times more education than him, but I guess he is of at least average intelligence). I hope he has enough sense to know that he is being used by a man who has consistently and reliably shown himself to be an enemy of black people.

I have, through my books “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about College” and “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” consistently attacked problems in the black community. I have spoken to millions of African-Americans about the value of getting an education and managing their money. I support the black family and even proposed to my future spouse in front of millions of people, in order to give black men the courage to express love for our beautiful black women. I wish I could tell you how many times I argued with CNN producers to cover the Jena 6 story long before it was popular to do so. So, everything that Juan Williams might say about advancing the community has been consistently on my radar screen.

But here is where we differ.

I am very hard on the black community about improving our plight. But I am also man enough to challenge the white community, the