What Happened to Black Media?

I, like many Americans, was preparing to watch the 2016 Democrat Primary Debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. This debate was being aired on TV One, a network that features content primarily for an African American audience. This debate was of particular consequence for the intended black audience, as it represented the first Democratic debate on the heels of President Obama's term expiration.

Most progressives were interested in seeing Bernie Sanders push Hillary Clinton to the left on most issues, while moderates wanted her to coast through the town hall without any gaffs.

The event was co-hosted by Roland Martin; at the time, Martin was an employee of TV One and had a daily show on the network. Mr. Martin also frequently appeared on The Tom Joyner show in a limited capacity, mainly dealing with gossip and the news. Joyner was on the air for 25 years and a trusted resource for African American infotainment.

However, the debate was marred in controversy from the beginning, when Mr. Martin and Democratic strategist Donna Brazille were accused of sharing debate questions ahead of time with Hillary Clinton's campaign. The intent was to formulate a canned response on a topic that Brazille stated "concerned her about Clinton." Their actions were revealed in the Wikileaks dump and hack of campaign manager John Podesta.

I am not here to judge Martin or Brazille guilty; however, it seems likely they passed the questions along to Clinton. Therein lies the heart of the issue, the question that Ms. Clinton was sent concerned the death penalty, a problem primarily crucial for black people in the age of mass incarceration. We plan to lay out a few reasons why this is problematic and damaging.

Since its inception, the black media has been a powerful tool that many African Americans believe represents the interests and outlook of black people.

The first black newspaper was Freedom's Journal, established in 1827 by John Russworm, a free black man. Moreover, we didn't see another paper for African Americans emerge until Frederick Douglass published the North Star some 20 years later; this was followed by one of the most consequential newspapers for African Americans, the Chicago Defender. The Defender had over 100,000 circulations by 1922, was the go-to newspaper for African Americans not only for news but help for blacks seeking to escape the south for a better life.

This is what made Roland Martin and Donna Brazille's act so egregious; they understood the weight of a network that catered to black people and the trust involved. They were making a conscious decision to tilt the debate towards the candidate they supported, in effect, to skew the voter's image of Clinton, specifically on the question of the death penalty. As evidenced by information from the Death Penalty Information Center, blacks represent 41.9% of death row inmates within state, federal, and military correctional institutions. Furthermore, census data for 2020 states that African Americans represent 12.4% of the population, whereas whites account for 72%.The capital punishment formula is exponentially imbalanced and fueled by mass incarceration, poverty, and systemic racism. As cliche and redundant as this argument sounds, it is a solvable issue regardless of whom ears are receiving the information.

So when Ms. Clinton delivers her answer to the death penalty question, the ability to actually change outcomes of African Americans condemned to die carries weight and is fundamental to correcting the scales of Lady Justice. The harm lies in our belief, and thus a vote could be committed based on political expediency. To add to this conundrum, Ms. Clinton infamously stated that black men were super-predators, needing to come to heel. I do understand this was loudly amplified during her campaign, and honestly, it should have. Yes, it was said over 20 years ago; however, we must ask ourselves, what had Clinton brought back to the black community in terms of resources to atone for this? In fact, she hadn't done anything specifically aimed at African Americans; thus, her comments transcended into her husband's presidency and policy, mainly the 1994 crime bill. The piece of legislation that contained the infamous three strikes law, which most states adopted almost immediately.

So what's the harm? Black media, in the example of Roland Martin and TV One, let the African American voter down in several ways. First, TV One adulterated their responsibility to the black voter by not maintaining their fidelity in journalism - in effect, they took sides. Moreover, Martin and TV One leveraged the audience of black people for access to the political elite for interviews, and other media events, which in turn could help the channel by driving ratings during said events. This benefits the network; however, what of the voter?

Unsurprisingly this pattern of politicians using black media and leaders to insert themselves into the consciences and ultimately on the voting ballot of African Americans isn't new. That begs the question; if the black media is not the vanguard of political truthfulness when reflected towards black people, what purpose do they serve?

We place an enormous responsibility on the 4th estate to deliver news concerning politics and to report hard facts; however, they should not serve as a mouthpiece for either party. This is what separates black voices from Fox News and other propaganda/state media sites. Black media owes its African American audience an honest and unbiased platform that allows the plight of their circumstances heard, regardless of party affiliation. The concentration of Democratic leaders, pundits, and the like, parading on and off black media platforms advertising a platter of talking points, yet, seldom delivered.

Ritchie Torres, US Rep (NY) claimed on MSNBC that Biden was the most progressive president in US history. As silly and unfounded a claim can be, this ranks very right on the propaganda scale. Biden is 1.5 years into a 4-year term, and House reps that represent NY are cheerleading a president who thus far has fallen short on his campaign promises, specifically the progressive ones. Biden, who promised $2,000 dollar checks, delivered only $1,400 of that promise. Moreover, the George Floyd bill failed to gain any traction and no federal policies around policing. When representatives such as Torres are invited on MSNBC or other platforms, we would assume that this would be questioned or challenged at best; of course, it's not. Instead, the networks regurgitate statistics void of humanity or human impact to further demagnify the issues they encompass. A story highlighting the impact of Covid-19 financially on a family, will land differently if it is couched around not receiving additional stimulus or other governmental assistance promised by our president.

This is the problem with black media; we trade the objectionability of reporting on politicians for access. The miscalculation here is that the people who consume the black press are beginning to discern the flat-footedness of their elected officials; thus, black people are turning off network media. This change has fueled Youtube and other platforms as the de facto places for African Americans to consume media, political or otherwise. This shift democratizes media and takes the power of specific advertising partners away. This is good, although the issues of fake news or misinformation arise. So in a sense, the mainstream media created this conundrum with their deeply partisan reporting. Time will tell if this will maintain or if another form of media will prevail.