Bookmark Vlog Blog
Aug
20
Racism, Politics, and Controversy in the Vlogging World
Filed Under Video Sharing Sites, Vloggers & Vlogs
Well, it seems there’s a lot of controversy swirling around in the vlog world these days. In one of the more prominent stories, race and politics take center stage.
The controversy centers around a vlog made by Loren Feldman at 1938media. Titled “Where are the Black Tech Bloggers?”, it presents a satirical (and many say racist and offensive) take on what a “Black Scoble” or “Black TechCrunch” would look like.
(Scoble is Robert Scoble, an influential tech blogger. TechCrunch is a blog tracking the happenings of companies in the tech world).
While there may be a lot of people out there making such vlogs, Feldman gained attention because of his association with PodTech - a leading video network of shows covering the technology field.
After Feldman published his “Black Tech Bloggers” vlog, many took offense and there was a big dust-up. In the end, PodTech decided to sever its ties with Feldman. But that end wasn’t the end.
Feldman then decided to host his vlogs with blip.tv. As soon as he did, someone wrote to Blip asking them if they really wanted to be associated with him. Blip replied that they would not “censor” Feldman, that they would stand up for freedom of expression, the constitution and all that.
And then in an odd and, one could only guess, unconscious move, Blip seemed to intimate that maybe their decision wasn’t exactly “pure,” but politically motivated. Completely out of the blue, they give as a line of reasoning for hosting Feldman’s videos that if they didn’t, they might be partly to blame for a Democratic Party election loss in 2008:
Drudge could easily pick this story up, and Loren would be invited to do the rounds on right-wing talk radio, as a hero and martyr to the PC police. The case would be held up as a foreshadowing of the Reign of Terror predicted after a Democrat victory in 2008.
While the above quotation could be parsed and reconstituted into a relatively innocuous stand for free speech, it seems obviously intent on giving no quarter to “right-wing talk radio” or those who would like to see a Democratic defeat in 2008. They have, for whatever reason, chosen to open this political can of worms.
And now that the can of worms is open, it begs a whole host of other questions.
Although Blip seems to be sensitive to criticism often leveled at the Left for being overly PC, they seem not to be so sensitive to the criticism that the Left often manipulates and uses minorities (especially African-Americans) for political gain. Do they not find the Feldman video “Content that is or may be deemed to be grossly offensive to the online community, including but not limited to, blatant expressions of bigotry, prejudice, racism, hatred and profanity“? (The quoted text is from their own terms of service.)
Blip has said that they find the video “distasteful.” Members of the community have obviously found it offensive and racist. But these lines are not cut and dried, of course. What is offensive and racist to some is not to others. When to pull a video and when to let it stay is not always an easy decision. If one person finds it offensive, that obviously doesn’t automatically qualify it for removal. Even if a large segment of your community finds it offensive, that doesn’t necessarily qualify it for removal.
To make such decisions, one needs to rely on a set of pre-defined principles for guidance.
The question then becomes: Exactly what are the principles Blip is relying on?
Blip claims one minute that it is the principle of free speech they are relying on, and yet the very next minute they are lamenting a possible Democratic defeat if the video were axed. This is what gives rise to the question: Does Blip indeed find the video racist, and yet feels it’s necessary to continue hosting it so that “Drudge” and “right-wing talk radio” don’t gain some type of political leverage?
Quite simply put: Is Blip throwing African-Americans under the bus in the name of political partisanship?
And, well, this is the problem with being “political.” If they had said they were acting on, and in fact were acting on the sole principle of allowing for free speech, then all these questions would not have likely come to the fore.
But they couldn’t just say that. They couldn’t just let it go. They had to bring partisan politics into it. That, as it turns out, is actually a good thing.
If partisan politics is what Blip is using as its motivating principle, then it’s better we know that. Whether they really want us to know that or not, it’s better we do — not for them, perhaps, but surely for us. Many will be happy to hear Blip is politically motivated in such a way. Many will not.
When a video community site such as Blip throws partisan politics into the mix, they open themselves up to be questioned at every turn. If they choose not to axe the Feldman video for what some might construe as partisan politics, then when they do actually axe a tasteless or racist or hateful video, why would they not be subjected to the same political suspicions? When a video that truly offends gets posted on their site, and for one reason or another doesn’t get flagged and taken down before a flurry of public controversy erupts, how can they not expect a negative backlash of politically motivated attacks?
So the big question that keeps springing to mind is: Why does Blip feel it needs to be politically partisan at all?
Of course they have every right to be so, but then they get themselves into these quandaries, and instead of being a platform for video communication and open expression, they become just another site that likes to present itself as neutral and apolitical when in fact it isn’t. I would not be surprised in the least if Blip liked to claim itself to be “fair and balanced.” My now jaundiced eye would have no choice but to look on such claims with suspicion.
The back and forth on this controversy is published on the Blip blog, and as some comments have pointed out, Blip may be playing up their role in all this in order to gain media attention. And while they’re getting it here obviously, and the tone of their defense to publish Feldman’s vlog is quite high and mighty, Blip is, ultimately, scarcely even a blip on the world’s cultural radar. So, in terms of any real practical fallout, there may in the end be, well, absolutely none.
The decision on whether to host a vlog like Feldman’s is understandably a difficult one. And the truth is, a good case can be made for either side. If the decision is based on pure, pre-defined principles that seek to achieve a civilized and open community of expression, then many from both sides could probably live with either result. When the decision seems based on partisan politics and an attempt to influence an election (no matter how puny your influence), quite frankly, it’s much harder to swallow.
LINKS:
The original video from Feldman at 1938Media - Where are the Black Tech Bloggers
The blog post at Blip about the controversy.
Other Related Links: