By Request: Black Talking Heads

AS asks: "Why is it twenty times more likely if you see an African-American political strategist on TV that they will be a REPUBLICAN strategists? Do cable news executives and producers get off on cognitive dissonance or something? It's really shocking."

I wonder about this myself. Step one of wisdom on this subject is to recognize that the "strategist" label is handed out in arbitrary ways to people who aren't really strategists. But step two is to recognize that I couldn't prove to you that African-American TV strategists are usually Republican. That's my sense, but I'd want to see a real quantitative analysis of the subject but certainly have no desire to do one myself.

Comments

I actually think that AS' assertion is untrue once you control for cross-eyed-ness.

Posted by MD | July 11, 2008 2:54 PM

Media Matters could doubtless do the quantitative work, but the, um, whitewashing of Michelle Bernard's position as the well-remunerated head of a wingnut welfare organisation is worth a case study in itself.

On a somewhat related note, Chicago reporters are regularly featured in pundit panels; reporters for Arizona papers, not so much.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | July 11, 2008 2:59 PM

http://youtube.com/watch?v=25E0ACkA6uo

Posted by al green | July 11, 2008 3:02 PM

Usually Republicans? I understand your point that the numbers are not representative, but black political strategists on TV are definitely not USUALLY Repuplican. Maybe on Fox, but c'mon, that doesn't count.

Posted by Stacy | July 11, 2008 3:05 PM

I was glad to see a talking head interrupt last night on Dan Abrams to correct him, "I'm an analyst, not a strategist." She was at least trying to differentiate where the shows and their bookers seem oblivious.

Posted by carsick | July 11, 2008 3:27 PM

It's simple: Republicans are keenly aware their party is having a terrifically horrible time attracting non-white party members. Whenever they can round up a non-white GOPer, they parade him/her for all it's worth. I reckon they also think they're nutty proposals will sell better to minority voters if coming from a non-white voice. Of course, in order to believe in this type of reasoning, you have to basically assume all these people are so retarded as to not be able to distinguish message from messenger. I've always loved it that they (the GOP) can seem to figure this out and never seem to get why it never works when they do this.

Posted by Ingvy | July 11, 2008 3:32 PM

Let's just name some of the African-American personalities that are usually on the teevee as pundits (loosely defined):

J.C. Watts - R
Eugene Robinson - D
Thomas Sowell - R
Armstrong Williams - R
Juan Williams - Confused
Jesse Jackson, Jr - D
Harold Ford - D(NC)
Donna Brazile - D
Ward Connnerly - R
Tavis Smiley - D
Larry Elder - Crazy (just kidding - R)
Henry Louis Gates - D

Posted by Mike P | July 11, 2008 3:57 PM

Let's just name some of the African-American personalities that are usually on the teevee as pundits (loosely defined):

J.C. Watts - R
Eugene Robinson - D
Thomas Sowell - R
Armstrong Williams - R
Juan Williams - Confused
Jesse Jackson, Jr - D
Harold Ford - D(NC)
Donna Brazile - D
Ward Connnerly - R
Tavis Smiley - D
Larry Elder - Crazy (just kidding - R)
Henry Louis Gates - D

Posted by Mike P | July 11, 2008 4:00 PM

There is, ironically, no more aggressive affirmative action program than the one inside the Republican party and the conservative DC establishment.

This is impolitic to say but...many of these folks turn out not to be terribly impressive because they don't have to be. Their ticket is written. They will be trotted out and put on display ad infinitum to...argue against affirmative action.

Posted by Trab | July 11, 2008 4:08 PM

Bernie Worrell

Posted by Lemmy Caution | July 11, 2008 4:27 PM

Matt:

But step two is to recognize that I couldn't prove to you that African-American TV strategists are usually Republican. That's my sense, but I'd want to see a real quantitative analysis of the subject but certainly have no desire to do one myself.

This is a totally fair response to the question posed by your reader, but it makes one wonder: then why choose that question in particular to highlight as your featured question from the requests thread? Were there really no other questions that struck your fancy at all, to the point you were reduced to answering a question you had no interest otherwise in researching at all?

Kinda funny, when you think about it. Isn't the point of the requests thread precisely so that you go do the research/leg work for all us lazy slobs who don't get paid to do that stuff?

Posted by Michael | July 11, 2008 4:27 PM

I don't observe this to be true. There may be disproportionately many black Republicans on TV, relative to the number or registered black Republicans, but I'm pretty sure the majority are Democrats.

Posted by right | July 11, 2008 4:59 PM

I'm with everybody else - Black Republicans are probably disproportionately represented on TV, but almost certainly do not form the majority of black commentators on the news networks, much less 95% of them, as the questioner suggested

Posted by John | July 11, 2008 5:49 PM

Why is it twenty times more likely if you see an African-American political strategist on TV that they will be a REPUBLICAN strategists?

Maybe for the same reason that Andrew "GayCatholicTory" Sullivan gets more media attention than all the other LGBT political commentators and pundits put together.

Posted by Uncle Kvetch | July 11, 2008 6:21 PM

"Maybe for the same reason that Andrew "GayCatholicTory" Sullivan gets more media attention than all the other LGBT political commentators and pundits put together.

Posted by Uncle Kvetch | July 11, 2008 6:21 PM"

Good point. It does seem like the MSM is unable to make a strong place for any type of minority that agrees with the vast majority of other members of their minority. Rising star Ta-Nehisi Coates seems to be just about the only black thinker with connections to MSM outlets (the Atlantic) that seems to agree with the majority of African-Americans on issues like the war and welfare (even then, he is more liberal on gay marriage than most African-Americans and also voted for Bloomberg). The same goes for Dav Savage, who is a lot more hawkish on foreign policy than the majority of gay male Americans.

To some extent though, those of us on the left also have to blame ourselves. While the likes of Sowell and Savage aren't in the media just because of some novelty (Sowell can be quite interesting if wrong when he isn't contemplating coups and Savage is often great), considering the fact that most African-Americans, Latinos, gays and lesbians are on the left, why can't we get more voices that are representative of their communities? Of course someone shouldn't just be chosen to represent a community (that should just be a biproduct of hiring a top-rate mind), but why aren't we putting more racial, ethnic, religious and sexual minorities front and center?

Posted by Reality Man | July 11, 2008 8:11 PM

I have long thought that being an African-American Republican is to get on the fast track for TV appearances.

Posted by Rich | July 11, 2008 11:01 PM

>"Why is it twenty times more likely if you see an African-American political strategist on TV that they will be a REPUBLICAN strategists?

I believe Sturgeon's Law applies here.

Posted by bartkid | July 14, 2008 5:21 PM