It's time to step away and see what happens...the DNC Blog thing
I believe I've made my last comment on Francis L. Holland's Blog. Saying anything more seems pointless.
The first paragraph refers to a table he created showing what states have a high minority concentration but do not have minority representation among the blogs.
The first paragraph refers to a table he created showing what states have a high minority concentration but do not have minority representation among the blogs.
So...if it does turn out (as is quite possible) that a number of the "red states" highlighted in the table did NOT have any black blogs apply, how did the DNC specifically create that problem?
How is the DNC responsible for the lack of Internet access to those who are less affluent or perhaps live in rural areas that aren't "wired?" How is the DNC responsible for the segregation in the blogosphere? How is the DNC responsible for those bloggers who choose not to reveal their ethnicity? How is the DNC responsible for whether or not black blogs are state or nationally focused?
Yes, the DNC is responsible for not taking the diversity issue into account during the State Blogger criteria...it was an example of how many have to change their thinking.
But it's been pointed out that there are a number of women and minorities represented in the hierarchy of the DNC as well as the hierarchy of the state Democratic delegations. An alternate to the "they did this on purpose" theory may be that many of those "red states" really DID NOT have minority blogs as applicants. Therefore, significantly changing the racial make-up of the State Bloggers may not be possible with their present pool of applicants.
I'll never agree that this was all done purposely because, for the reasons stated above, it's not a logical explanation. Francis, unlike your claim to Zimbel, you continue to assign 100% blame to the DNC and insist that it was purposeful. Repeatedly furthering that argument is a segregating move on your part and an attempt to fan the flames for more media coverage. Having fought many civil rights fights over race, gender and sexual orientation, I know that your outrage definitely has its place, especially in the beginning stages of uncovering a problem. However, at this time you are no more able to "work well with others" towards a long-term solution than a fire cracker is able to stop itself from exploding once it's lit. Someday, I hope it's different.
I have taken this whole discussion very seriously and I'm using all of my writing venues to encourage greater participation by POC writers. My hope is that many in the Afrosphere would be open to working together towards promoting integration and diversity in the blogosphere.
posted by CelticDiva at 11:39 PM
View blog reactions
5 Comments:
Diva, I agree that your continuing to comment is pointless, because you always say the same vapid things.
What difference does it make whether the lack of Black bloggers was "intentional" or not? It's like saying that the failure to place voting urns in Black neighborhoods was not intentional. The outcome is that Black people will not be able to vote, and that will, in turn, effect the outcome of the election.
If more Black bloggers are in Denver, this will lead to more mobilization of Black voters and will increase Black voter turnout up and down the Democratic tickets. So, the goal is not to assign blame but to fix the problem.
As my graph shows, significant Black populations are being ignored, excluded, from outreach through community specific blogs.
It is hard to understand why you believe that outreach through white blogs will help the process, but outreach through Black blogs is unnecessary and can be forgotten three months before the Convention on the theory that the failure to conduct this outreach was "unintentional".
This is like saying that the failure to send literature to an entire precinct during an election is acceptable because it is unintentional. Or the failure to identify supportive voters and conduct "get-out-the-vote" efforts in an entire Congressional district is acceptable because it is unintentional.
The reason that I have stopped reading and responding to your comments is that you are more concerned with defending a mistake than with fixing it.
Outreach to Black voters through blogs is likely to be far more useful for the same amount of effort than outreach to whites, because Black voters vote for Democrats 90% of the time while whites are going to give the majority of their votes to McCain, if history is any guide. So, the most important vote to get out is the Black vote. The more the Black vote is maximized, the more likelihood there is that Democratic candidates will win in the fall.
So, the failure to invite blogs from the states with the highest Black populations has to be be either a sign of incompetence or of intentional color-aroused exclusion. Either way, it makes sense to fix this problem before the Convention, doesn't it.
And all talk of intentional vs. unintentional is irrelevant to the effect of failing to reach out to enormous Black populations in a number of states.
Either blog outreach helps or it doesn't. If it's worth reaching out to whites through blogs, it is worth doing the same with Blacks particularly when Black voters are DEMANDING to be included.
And yet, only 7.2% of the credentialed blogs are Black, with at least one Black blog rejected for credentialing, BlackPerspective.Net leaving the entire state of Tennessee (25% Black in its Democratic Primaries) utterly without a Black blog representative in Denver.
It's not too late to fix this problem, to credential this blog that applied for credentials, and the failure to fix the problem even when it has been brought to the attention of the DNC leads me to believe that this is a matter of policy rather than inadvertence.
In any case, intentionality is irrelevant. The failure to feed and water a horse will make it impossible for him to plow the fields, whether the failure was intentional or inadvertent.
I feel insulted when you say that you are working to encourage "greater participation by POC writers". This is mere subterfuge, in my opinion.
A "POC", BlackPerspective.Net , writer applied to represent his state in Denver and was rejected. If you want to encourage his participation, you will encourage the DNC to accept his application to blog from Denver for the Black voters of Tennessee.
We operate a group of 150 blogs and have prepared a list of additional blogs that have committed to participate in Denver if the opportunity is offered to them, including one blog that was rejected. We don't need your condescending encouragement to participate in blogging. We need the doors opened so that we can blog from the Democratic National Convention.
The fact that you continually refuse, as a state blogger, to raise your voice in favor of additional Black blogs being credentialed shows that you are no friend of Black bloggers. You are an ardent defender of the white privileged system that searches for a white blogger from Alaska while denying the application of a Black blogger from Tennessee.
The fact that you continually refuse, as a state blogger, to raise your voice in favor of additional Black blogs being credentialed shows that you are no friend of Black bloggers.
You have absolutely no idea who I've talked to and what emails I've sent because I don't broadcast those discussions. It defeats the purpose of negotiation...one of the reasons why, at this point, everything you are posting on your blog is hurting your case not helping it.
I have stated from the beginning that I know POC bloggers are underrepresented in the State Blogger roles. You, on the other hand, are only advocating for "black blogs." It's clear you aren't really looking for overall diversity. It also shows the flaws in your approach...if the DNC must "meet your demands" with black blogs, they must do the same with every other ethnicity that makes those demands. It's not possible.
Even now you refuse to take into account all of the large state blogs that have women and POC contributors because that doesn't bolster your argument. You just count them as "white blogs" and dismiss the POC writers who work within the blogosphere.
So, people of color have to participate YOUR WAY or it doesn't count.
What difference does it make whether the lack of Black bloggers was "intentional" or not?
Oh please, you are the one who keeps making that claim...it's all over your latest post on the subject. If it didn't matter, you wouldn't keep making the claim.
It is hard to understand why you believe that outreach through white blogs will help the process.
You can't see that it's not "outreach through white blogs" it's ALL blogs working together...it's all blogs encouraging POC writers to go ahead and jump into the blogosphere either as contributors or starting their own blogs. Everyone working together is the only way any of this is going to work. I don't understand how you can reject some of the most basic beliefs of the presidential candidate you claim to support. Have you even read his books?
A "POC", BlackPerspective.Net , writer applied to represent his state in Denver and was rejected.
If one of the slicker, more popular Alaska blogs run by REAL politicos had applied, I never would have made the state blogger pool. I am also under no illusions...I could never have been chosen in the General Pool considering the amazing competition. I know Yobachi is your friend, but I suspect that there may have been a number of reasons why another blog was chosen for Tennesee and the competition for the General Pool...well...
You're giving this Francis fool too much slack. What makes a blog black or white? If I start a blog and have a black person (who may or may not be me) in my profile pic, does that make it a black blog? If I lived in near north Minneapolis and blog about black issues, does that make me a black blog? This racial hoopla distracts from the more relevant issue, which is that ALL constituencies with more people who don't have the time, money, or skills to blog are going to be underrepresented in the blogger pool. Who represents folks who have to work for a living, can't afford to blog, or don't know how? Not Attorney Holland, Esq - that's for damn sure.
A part of the discussion is that, while there is a racial aspect to all of this obviously, there is a powerful economic aspect as well. Fighting for diversity in the blogosphere includes fighting for Internet availability at all socio-economic levels.
As an aside...Mr. Holland is also an ex-pat living in Brazil - and has mentioned more than once how much better he likes it than the U.S..
Diane, this crap about the "powerful economic aspect" is, frankly, BULL. Every Black person who has applied to be a state blogger has a computer and a broadband connection, so that has absolutely nothing to do do with the virtually all-whiteness of the state blogger pool, or of 96% white DailyKos or 98% white MyDD.
In fact, Celtic Diva Suffers White Myopia. I wish there were a nicer way to say it, but you know what? Slavery was slavery and there was nothing positive to be gained by calling it by some other name that white people would find less offensive. The same was true of Jim Crow, South African Apartheid, Color-Aroused Disorder and the Jim Crow State blogger corps of the DNC.
Post a Comment
<< Home