View the h-pcaaca Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in h-pcaaca's July 1994 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in h-pcaaca's July 1994 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the h-pcaaca home page.
Samuel Random Smith does not see racial bias in B&B. Steven G. Kellman > In response to my suggestion that the mix of musical selections on Beavis and > Butthead might be racially significant, Samuel Smith writes: "I'm really uneas y > suggesting that a general preference for the music of one's own culture implie s > some sort of covert racism." > Perhaps I didn't make the distinction clear, but I was not discussing > the musical preferences of Beavis and Butthead (who are, let us remember, > fictional creations) so much as the distribution of attention structured by > their creator. Judge (and, of course, the producers of MTV who are very attun ed > to demographics) have selected a vehicle that--to my eyes (and I may be wrong > here) gives much more time and more favorable responses to white groups over > black groups (even though MTV does play a lot of rap, but only in a carefully > contained environment). I'm finding, as noted here, that B&B does show more white acts than black, but as noted in another post I'm not able to support the contention that black artists are treated less favorably. Actually, if the results so far hold for a larger sample, I will wind up finding just the opposite. I'm interested in the idea that black acts are "carefully contained." My impression is quite the opposite. It seems to me that urban performers like Janet Jackson, Salt-n-Pepa, Prince, and Michael "The King of Pop" Jackson have a very simple route into MTV's mainstream rotation. They do have Yo' MTV Raps, of course, but like Headbangers Ball and Alternative Nation/120 Minutes this show is largely devoted to artists that fall outside the normal bounds of CHR programming. Compare your local hit station, for example, with your local urban contemporary outlet - there's some crossover, and you will hear lots of black artists on a UC station about three weeks before they hit the CHR charts. Again, it would take some content analysis to be sure, but I'm guessing that MTV's non-specialized shows play more urban acts than alternative, and I KNOW they play more urban than metal. The reason is simple enough - mainstream R&B has traditionally been standard radio fare. Sam Cooke, Motown, Philly, urban inroads into disco, etc. - radio has for years turned to talents like these for its hits. And MTV's regular rotation sounds a good deal like tried-and-true Contemporary Hit Radio. > We are all familar with arguments that, historically, have been made > about the racial content of TV programming in the past (the absence of black > characters--then the absence of positive black role-models etc.). Such > arguments are founded upon the assuption that the content of programming is > significant of biases and that the disproportion of favorable black > 'characters' and responses to these characters is equally indicative of > bias--what I would call institutionalized racism. This is not a particularly > original idea. But it seems an effective response to the assertion that the > show "Beavis and Butthead" is free of racial bias. > Similarly, the selection of a predominately white suburban high school > (nor, for that matter, of two white characters) is not--cannot be--neutral. I t > carries meaning, because these selections eliminate other alternatives that we re > not chosen (for pretty obvious demographic reasons). > In conclusion, it is my perception that "Beavis and Butthead" carries a > degree of institutionalized racism that serves its creators and sponsors very > effectively. The most interesting questions--to my mind--involve the > hypothesized responses of the "target audience." What is gained from this kin d > of presentation? How does this particular vehicle serve the financial interes t > of its sponsors? (To provide the rudiments of a provisional answer: racism an d > sexism 'sell.') > Finally, it seems naive to me to discuss the alt the biases of America n > society. Boy, here's where I get off the bandwagon. What is essentially being argued is that any media production which centers its story on a predominantly white culture/environment is inherently racist at an institutional level. By this reasoning pretty much everything is racist if it accurately portrays a predominantly white place. I can now never write a novel or produce a movie based on my high school days, because I lived in one of the whitest areas of the South. My school (and no, this isn't a privileged white enclave - we were pretty much all poor white trash - there just weren't any blacks who lived in our end of the county) had only 5 blacks in a student body of 900 (.5%). Of course, I could doctor the racial composition in this hypothetical novel/movie, but then I'm really engaging in revisionism that serves neither the racial majority, the racial minority, nor the truth. There is no doubt institutional racism in environments where systematic discrimination exists, but I'm unwilling to accept the simple absence of racial minorities in a particular locale as prima facia evidence of racism. One final note: in my albeit small sample, the percentage of videos featuring black performers was 11%, which is only marginally below the percentage of blacks in the society as a whole (and these numbers are certainly not significantly different statistically). If my continuing tab of B&B videos shows this number shifting dramatically I'll let you know, but as of now I really don't think I can find support for the allegation of racism, institutional or otherwise. ================================================================== Samuel Random Smith Center for Mass Media Research 303-938-1845 (voice) University of Colorado smithsr@ucsu.colorado.edu ==================================================================
|