EBONY Magazine...Is it superficial?

[nikki25]

There are many, many, many athletes whom have married or dating interacially...do we call them "shines" as well? Or, is it because of Bryant's forthrightness and perhaps lack of class (see Nikki's comment in the 2nd posting)? Just curious to hear what you all think the problem really is.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"What's REALLY goin' on?"

[Discogoddess]

Originally posted by dirtymike1906:
Eclipse, Gumbel is looked at as a shine by many namely because of his preference of women and affiliations largely outside his race.

So, him dating a white woman over the past couple of years eclipses his marriage to a black woman for more than 20 years? True, he is alleged to have crept on her with women of different races, but that doesn't negate the fact that the mother of his children is black (for those of you who use this as a measuring stick of blackness).

Like nikki25, I'm also interested to hear whether those of you who consider his interracial dating an affront to the black community if you feel the same way about the athletes/entertainers who do likewise, but "keep it real" by staying in legal/substance abuse/domestic violence trouble.

I'm no fan of the man (his arrogance/rudeness is legendary AND visible in his professional life), but hasn't he supported scholarships, internships and other programs for young black students for years and years?

It disappoints me that we as a people are so unwilling to accept difference among our own people, yet get our panties in a bunch when others don't accept "us".

And to answer the question, yes Ebony is superficial and ri-durn-diculous! I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that the recycled articles aren't cute--neither is the use of "professional models" to dramatize the domestic violence, finding/keeping a mate and all those other relationship articles that we've all seen since we were 9 years old. And as a public relations professional, I have to say that dealing with Ebony/Jet reporters (and some other black pubs, but that's another post) is trying at BEST.



[This message has been edited by Discogoddess (edited June 15, 2001).]

[BrandNubian]

Originally posted by The Original Ape:
Gumbel is a shine also because of the way he interviews African-American athletics. If they have had ANY KIND OF PROBLEM IN THE PAST, HE'S ALWAYS THE FIRST TO BLAST THE BRUTHA!!!

I have never seen him interview African-American athletes before, so I can't agree or disagree with this statement. But, I do have a hypothetical question: Why shouldn't those athletes be called on their problems/issues?

Just a question.

[IotaNet]

Hmmmmm ...

I have to "beg to differ" on the concept of "Bryant Gumbel as a shine." While I hve been a "Bryant-watcher" for quite a while, someone on another forum covered this quite well ...

SoTrue1920 wrote:

Does it change your mind to know that Bryant Gumbel's yearly celebrity golf tournament is a fund-raiser for the United Negro College Fund, and to date has raised more than seven million dollars?

The Bryant Gumbel people see on CBS every morning is a completely different animal than the Bryant Gumbel people see in interviews. I'm no big fan of the man after how he treated his now ex-wife, but I have a lot of respect for him. If possible, try to get a copy of the Chris Rock Show episode with Bryant, or do a search in your local library on profile pieces he's done with magazines over the last couple of years. He has been a very, very outspoken critic of race and racism in the media, especially in light of how long it took him to convince the Today Show to do a series from Africa.

Here's a piece written by Jill Nelson (author of "Volunteer Slavery) about Gumbel and some of his feelings on race: http://www.usaweekend.com/97_issues/...nt_gumbel.html

Personally, I think we need to avoid getting hoodwinked into a "Blacker-than-thou" debate about Bryant. Regarding the Ebony magazine issue, IMHO, the man spoke the truth. The fact that some folks don't like him doesn't make his statements any less true.

------------------
IotaNet
Iota Phi Theta Fraternity, Inc.
Alpha Eta Chapter, Spring, 1980

Kappa Kappa Psi Honorary Band Fraternity
Zeta Nu Chapter, Spring, 1979

[This message has been edited by IotaNet (edited June 16, 2001).]

[AlphaChiGirl]

I'm always 5 minutes late in regards to posting, but here goes.

I've read Ebony for years (my parents have always subscribed and it's how I taught myself to read). It's only been since I've been away and not read it every month that I realized that nothing's new in Ebony Magazine! Fashion Fair, single fathers, business attire, and Blazer ads. There is a big emphasis on "conspicuous consumption", and repetition of articles (there's ALWAYS a diabetes article in there!).

This past semester, I did a paper on automobile advertisements in the 1970s, and I covered Ebony from 1970-1975. Nothing's changed. For the 5 years I researched, there were 6 articles on suicide--with the same pictures of the same people! Throw in the Newport and Lincoln Continental ads, and you realize things haven't changed. The same tours of the same celebrities' homes, with the same car ads...

Regardless of its shortcomings, Ebony has filled a purpose in its respective community. I just wish there was a viable alternative, because the others in the Ebony mold just don't last too long.

[The Original Ape]

Originally posted by BrandNubian:
I have never seen him interview African-American athletes before, so I can't agree or disagree with this statement. But, I do have a hypothetical question: Why shouldn't those athletes be called on their problems/issues?

Just a question.

It is bad enough having the fact that some bruthas do some of the dumbest things; but why is it that those of us in the broadcasting industry exploit the bruthas' blunders like no other peoples in the world? I mean, black anchorpeople AGGRESSIVELY persue black athletes and keep them under microscopes in hopes of getting a story; and when there is no story, they fabricate them: "Sources tell us that...". Bitchass Bryant always brings up the kind of stuff that is private(and stuff that should remain so)during his interview with black athletes. If you've watched him, you would know he does this intentionally; yet he almost never does it when he interviews a white baseball player, or golfer, tennis player, etc.