Step 5: Diversify Your News Consumption

Good morning! Today’s bullet is relatively short, which is good because I have limited time today, but I wanted to add some clarifying thoughts on yesterday’s post (Step 4) on Cancel Culture. While I stand carefully by the seven steps I shared for “challenging” those in an unwanted racially-charged spotlight, I want to highlight when I think it is best to “challenge” and when the more urgent “cancel” is truly appropriate.

First off, I had initially promised to dive into my concerns over reflexive behavior, as it relates to individuals and companies, and gave some examples of people and organizations over the years who’ve been cancelled by fans or larger society.

Let’s hop in the time machine and go back to 2013 - let’s talk about Paula Deen.

Do you remember why she was cancelled? Most people will say it’s because she used the N-word. In my effort to continue to de-weaponize words on race, we have to stop our attachment to getting rid of people over the use of slurs like that. This is controversial I know, but use of an offensive word is a overly-simple and reflexive reason to remove or cancel someone in power. With Paula, investigation showed a history of discriminatory and disturbing racially- charged behavior. A black employee reported she was asked to dress in an “Aunt Jemima-style outfit and have her ring a bell when food was ready.” That - my friends- is more than enough reason to cancel someone.

Instead of vilifying over the surface language, we should view one’s relationship to their power and the decisions they've made in hiring, firing, or other areas where their discrimination could have real impact or influence, then we should decide on that account. My fear is that when we “cancel” in these reflexive ways, the underlying behavior is not identified, subjected to public scrutiny, and is allowed to continue behind the shadows.

So how do we do this? I think in an effort to right the wrongs of the last several hundred years, we utilize some of the exact same tactics utilized by those with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and holding down black skin. Remember ‘broken windows’ policing? Where those who committed small crimes were presumed to be on an inescapable path to destruction and bigger crime? That disproportionately resulted in negative lasting outcomes for black and brown skin? Let’s use that tactic! Let’s launch a federal or third-party bureau that observes public language of an organization and the smaller complaints and concerns of BIPOC employees or customers. Remember “Three Strikes” laws? Let’s use those too. Three strikes to your company for grievances against customers and employees of color, for corporate misdeeds around hiring or salaries or promotions, and you’re done. Fines, disbanding, a federal mark of disapproval that alerts potential customers to your conscious discrimination, anything. But you’re done. And my favorite - stop and frisk? Love it, let’s do that one too. Let’s bring in random adjudication of your corporate practices and if they don’t jive, then goodbye!

With practices like this, rather than using concerning language or behavior as an excuse to “cancel” (which in the case of a Starbucks will only last as long as we remember, which, is not very long, especially when caffeine deprivation is involved) we use it as a reason to investigate -- just like how police often use traffic stops. It tunes us in to that fact that something may be off, and creates an opportunity to audit and investigate the culture around the person and their organizations.

It allows us to stop waiting for extreme evidence of racial bias to take meaningful action. Remember when liberal media was soooo excited when they thought there might be audio of Trump using the "N-word" like that was going to the "final straw" that brought people awareness of his racist intentions and behavior? That type of wishing (and that simplistic of a crystalized definition of racist intent) makes all of us lazy reactionaries. Without revising this perspective we’re doomed to continue our culture with a high pain-tolerance for inequality. The amount of discriminatory and horrible behavior we tolerate from people who don't use the words we find on the surface to be offensive earns a badge of hypocrisy for almost all of us.

Secondly, I want to talk about when we should skip the protocol, and use the powers invested in us to cancel people or companies. It is my view, that we should unequivocally take swift action to remove those in direct positions of gatekeeping (as discussed in Step 3 )

Let me say this as straight-forward as possible: In the event that clear, willful and conscious, racially-biased behavior and views are identified in a gatekeeper, that person should be removed from their position swiftly and without apology.

Not a personal anecdote, but a timely and local one: There is current uproar in Brewster NY over a school board member who has been accused of racism. She (allegedly - I’m no lawyer but you know..the law) posted conspiracy theories on her social media pages on George Floyd’s murder being staged, and extreme criticism of protestors. While I don’t know if the protester conflict is grounds for termination, the George Floyd remarks, in my opinion are. In my efforts to bring awareness to and consider ways to bring as many people to the table for change as possible, I have no patience or tolerance for conscious bias in a gatekeeper. While not a parent myself, I am horrified by the idea of young, beautiful, black minds being in anyway shaped by people who’ve consciously and unapologetically prescribed to a culture that views their life and their potential as “less than.” Get. Them. Out.

 So here we go:

Step 5: Diversify Your News Consumption

This one is simple. Whether you prescribe to the belief that you should keep your friends close and your enemies closer, or you just want to know what the other side is thinking, at least once a week, I highly suggest you dip your toe in the media of the “enemy camp.” No matter how much you hate it, Fox News and MSNBC are highly watched and highly consumed. They are shaped by the thinking of a large group of citizens, but on a deeper level, I think they shape the thinking of those demographics. So, if you “can’t understand why on earth” someone voted for Trump - you’re doing it wrong. Stop by, and look to see what is being reported and what’s not being reported. You may learn something, you will probably be angry for a minute, but we’re not moving forward to fix anything if we don’t at least get why someone is entrenched in their stance. Regardless of the underlying racial biases baked into the cake of this nation, I am a believer we’re all fundamentally seeking what we think is in the best interest of our family, friends, and neighbors. Grasping onto this shared humanity is what will be needed as an important ingredient in our work together on the greatest humanitarian struggle this nation has ever faced and is finally positioned to grapple with.