Black in America -- Take 2

[admin]

CNN is getting ready to roll out "Black in America 2," the continuation of a special report series that first hit airwaves last summer.

The first series focused on three main topics: "The Black Woman and Family," "The Black Man," and "The King Assassination." Soledad O'Brien was the face and voice of the series and served as correspondent. The people behind the scenes -- including producers, photojournalists, editors, production staffers, interns, you name it -- numbered more than one hundred. This represents a major commitment of time and resources, even for a behemouth like CNN.

Not surprisingly there were a number of different reactions to the series. It could hardly be otherwise in a country that still grapples with a legacy of racial prejudice, mistrust, and stereotyping. Here are a few remarks I found on Racewire.org

"Maybe I'm too close to the Black Experience; however I just did not see anything ground breaking or enlightning about the series. If I truly had to depend on this series to get an understanding of the African-American condition, I would come away thinking, "Oh well, they made their bed so let them lay in it." The series did not do enough to explain why (in many cases) our plight is what it is." -- Rosalind

"CNN, thank you for viewing black community problems. The question that I would like to have answered is: Why America can send 12 billion dollars a month overseas to fund a losing war and can't fund school books for a poor black community school and teachers." -- Taza

"I thought the documentary was awful. It was simply stereotypes on parade, no matter how accurate the data or the bald facts. There was no context and absolutely no attempt to challenge any images we've long seen but never questioned. There was no challenge in this piece at all. All in all, it was an irresponsible piece of journalism." -- JB

"As a white woman, married for almost 40 years to black man and having a black son and daughter, we were very interested in viewing your show. Interesting but too many negative images - the images are true but the 'bad' images were way too numerous compared to the positive images." -- Diane B.

"As a senior white of the virtuous left, I saw most of this program and was deeply impressed with how truly incompetent, superficial and totally self-serving it was. This was about CNN ratings and Soledad." -- Richard Mason

Many people praised CNN for the series, if only for trying to tackle the thorny issue that is America's oldest problem. It will be interesting to see how the continuation plays out, but early indications are of a much different approach to the subject matter.

Here's a little blurb from CNN.com about the sequel:

"Coming in July 2009, Soledad O'Brien reports on the innovative and unexpected ways people are transforming the black experience by confronting the most difficult issues facing their community."

As part of this endeavor, O'Brien will travel to Africa with thirty "Global Ambassadors," schoolchildren from Brooklyn. There's a portal to blogs on this journey on the "CNN Presents" page.

Another element of "Black in America 2," arguably more of a marketing strategy than anything, is a Campus iReport contest asking college students to show "innovative and unexpected ways that you or someone else are confronting issues and challenges facing the black community." Viewing these iReports from around the country gives one a great sense of what young adults are saying and thinking about race these days. I hope CNN will glean some kernels of wisdoms from the contest submissions for real examination.

Still, I can't help but think that the very best television piece I've seen on race in America was "Meeting David Wilson," a documentary that aired last spring on MSNBC. It was totally absorbing, moving, and revealing. As a companion piece, MSNBC aired a live 90-minute discussion featuring Brian Williams and large audience at Howard University.

Here's ghow Rachel Sklar of The Huffington Post described it:

"...(A)bout a young black man, David A. Wilson, whose search for identity led him back through his family tree to a plantation in North Carolina where his ancestors had been slaves — and David B. Wilson, a descendant of the slaveowners who'd owned them. It was an extraordinary and moving documentary, tracing David A's journey to David B's doorstep and the frank, if sometimes uncomfortable exchanges that followed (i.e. "Do you think you should pay me reparations?"). It's thoughtful and moving and works because both David Wilsons are decent, genuine people who seem not only to really want to move the state of race relations ahead in this country...."

I think one of the reasons it worked so well was because of the ordinariness of the two David Wilsons and their manifest and genuine good intentions, feelings of wanting to bridge a divide that neither created but both live with. David A, especially, seemed to exemplify the very best of America and in its promise.


More...