Sometimes…no check that.
OFTEN times, I’m called a “sell-out” for my critical stances in regards to behavior within the African-American community. Behavior on both the community and civic levels are frequently critiqued in The Mo’Kelly Report. Be it Al Sharpton or the
I'm going tell the truth as I see it, irrespective of how "unpopular" some may find it. Get your hate mail ready now. I'm ready to see this next issue through to its conclusion.
The recent announcement that Troi “Star” Torain of the Star and Bucwild Morning Show will be returning to the New York FM airwaves was neither surprising nor unforeseen.
The caveat is that the offending party must be a “worthwhile” (i.e. valuable) commodity. Money trumps all.
Mel Gibson was still a valuable commodity at the moment he lost his ever-lovin’ mind in an inebriated rage. Don Imus was still a moneymaker at the moment of his “nappy-headed hos” “social commentary; as was true with Dog the Bounty Hunter Duane Chapman and his N-Word monologue.
Michael Richards on the other hand had an entertainment value of zero at the moment of his social transgression…so no amount of apologies imaginable could have resuscitated the corpse known as his career.
No value, no amount of apologies will matter.
With that in mind, it’s not “surprising” that Troi Torian has risen from the ashes and resurrected the Star and Bucwild Morning Show. His popularity is undeniable and thus “marketable.”
What is saddening is the deafening silence of the African-American community in response to the announcement. Maybe I'm just too impatient.
Maybe, maybe not...but I'm not waiting to see what may or may not develop. This must be addressed head-on, right now.
Don Imus staged a world apology tour of Black and mainstream media to offer his “sincerest, heartfelt apologies”…or something like that. Conversely, Troi Torain offered a written statement by way of his lawyer.
Uh…not exactly comparable in nature.
Duane Dog the Bounty Hunter Chapman has lost his show (at least for the time being) for hateful and hurtful remarks uttered in private. His world apology tour has yet yielded a successful result.
In comparison, Troi Torai while ON AIR offered the following in regards to rival, DJ Envy:
"I will come for your kids" and I want to "do an R. Kelly (i.e. urinate during sexual intercourse)...on your seed (i.e. child)". Torain also offered $500 to any listener who could provide information about the rival DJ's daughter's school and used racial slurs when talking about the DJ’s wife. Torain went on to say that he wanted to "put mayonnaise in the ass cheeks" of the rival DJ's young daughter, immediately adding that he also desired to take a bite out of it.
Maybe it’s just me, but that’s just “mildly” more offensive, damaging and demeaning than “nappy-headed hos.” Granted, words are inherently unequal, the breath and depth of racial taunts and insults cut deeper than most others.
But not in this case. Let’s juxtapose the two.
“Nappy-headed hos.”
"I will come for your kids" and I want to "do an R. Kelly (i.e. urinate during sexual intercourse)...on your seed (i.e. child)" Plus, $500.00 bounty for information ostensibly leading to the successful completion of aforementioned act.
I have no problem with the fact that both Imus and Torain were originally fired; no not at all. My complaint lies in the disparity in the lack of outrage hurled at both and the indifference towards Torain returning to radio.
THAT is what perplexes and vexes me.
Much was made of Imus’ impending return, which probably is inversely related to the exorbitant attention paid to pushing Imus out in the first place. Either way, this obvious inequity must be acknowledged. This is not about race or even about being “right.”
It’s about being righteous.
The question must be asked…who exhibited the greater degree of hatred, malice and malfeasance? Subsequently, who then should be less welcome to return to the airwaves?
As Don Imus’ on-air resume speaks for itself…so does Torain’s. We should be exceptionally clear as to the “commercial value” of Troi “Star” Torain. He has not been rehired because he’s reinvented himself. He’s been rehired because he has a following; relative to who he IS and the behavior he’s been routinely suspended and ultimately fired for accordingly. We as African-Americans can either act now, or bitch and moan with no recourse after the line is once again crossed. How many chances does an on-air personality get to repeat anything CLOSE to:
"I will come for your kids" and I want to "do an R. Kelly (i.e. urinate during sexual intercourse)...on your seed (i.e. child)" Plus, $500.00 bounty for information ostensibly leading to the successful completion of aforementioned act.
If THAT isn’t a career-ender, then nothing is. I’ll take “Nappy-headed hos” over the gross iniquity above, every single day of the week.
The moral of the story is the next time Troi Torain jumps far across the line of common sense and decency, be mindful of having any “outrage” to express or disbelief to impart. As I’ve always maintained, Torain has been worthy of forgiveness…but not another radio job. Nobody ever “deserves” a second chance to “avoid” making “mistakes” of this egregious nature.
Forgiveness 'yes,' but 'no' to a job.
We can either be proactive or reactionary in nature. Either way, the choice is ours. It’s only a matter of whether we in the African-American community are ready to take control and responsibility for these negative influences, sources and media personalities who are irrefutably damaging and counterintuitive to African-American love.
I submit that this is a fight that must be fought and a cause which must be supported. If we can express our collective outrage for Imus, Richards and Chapman…we are bound to be consistent and act accordingly at the impending return of Troi “Star” Torain. To act otherwise, only smacks of irresponsible inconsistency, wrapped in unrighteous behavior. The moral high ground needed for similar issues that inevitably await us in the future is dependent upon moments like these and actions such as this.
As of now, Star is slated to return,
(POLITELY, yet effectively, express your disapproval using the following avenues:)
Alex Shvarts – CEO Mega Media Group
alex.s@megamediagroup.com
Chief Executive Officer
Mega Media Group, Inc.
598 Broadway, 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10012
ph: 718-947-1100
fax:646-417-5109
Reggie Dance – 5W Public Relations (publicity arm for Mega Media Group)
Neil Steinberg – 5W Public Relations
nsteinberg@5wpr.com Mega Media Investor Relations (Skeleton Key Entertainment is sister co.)
Zenep Husenajzenep.h@skeletonkeyent.com Always be polite and professional…which inevitably leads to persuasiveness. The Mo’Kelly Report is in this for the long haul. Let’s go to work.
RELATED: Forgiveness for 'Star'...Yes, But no Job
The Mo'Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse...as well as entertain. The Mo’Kelly Report is syndicated by Newstex. For more Mo’Kelly, http://www.mokellyreport.blogspot.com.
Morris W. O'Kelly can be reached at mokellyreport@sbcglobal.net and he welcomes all commentary.
15 comments:
just make sure that you boycott Miss Jones and Envy as well for threatening to kidnap Star's mother and throw her off of a bridge..
First...this isn't a boycott. Secondly, I'm not an advocate for Miss Jones or DJ Envy.
If that is what they said, then yes, they too should be taken to task.
The real question is, whether given your comment, if you're outraged on EITHER account.
It doesn't sound like you are. Therein lies part of the problem. Is your focus in supporting a "particular" radio personality or eradicating a "particular" form of unacceptable behavior?
Your subsequent answer would likely say a lot.
I think boycotting the sponsors is more effective than a nice letter saying Gee, I can not believe you are putting Mr Creepy Child Molester back on the air. By the way, people say a lot of stuff, but when you come out like that, it's cause you already did that to some little girl somewhere. I always thought that that was a really strange comment. Child molesters are often confident like that too.
Weird, how could they even listen to his voice after that?
If money and value is what it;s all about, we have to make an impact on his value. Let's see if NY is asleep at the wheel.
Dr. Wright...I think both are necessary. You boycott the sponsors but you also show your strength in numbers to the station...applying pressure in multiple points.
This will probably take shape closer to or when Torain goes back on the air. At that point we'll know specifically who bought ad time during the morning show and go from there.
But you give the station the "chance" and the "option" to do the right thing.
And if...I mean when they don't...you lower the boom on the sponsors. It's not an either/or...but a both/and proposition.
Like we did with Hot Ghetto Mess...applied pressure directly to BET and its sponsors.
Mo....im not going to lie....i used to listen to the Star & Bucwild
show....not regularly because most of the time I was listening to
sports talk WIP or WPEN in Philly in the morning....all that being
said, it wasnt cool for Star to say what he said but at the same time,
I understand why he did it....i dont really want to go into why he did
it because i know how that conversation will turn out......im not
outraged at Star coming back....im not even outraged that Imus is
back....why?....because if I dont like what they're saying, I can just
turn it off....just like that...i have the power to choose not
to listen to them...as far as eradicating a "particular" form of
unacceptable behavior goes....you cant legislate morality....do you
think that taking these guys money away is going to make them change
who they are on the inside?...
I appreciate your comments...as it forces this to become a meaningful conversation. It begs the question...what is the goal here and why?
My thinking is beyond "me" or "choice" in general. I agree you can't legislate morality but this isn't about morality when it really comes down to it.
Society is full of examples of points of no return. You commit the right crime, you will go to jail for the rest of your life or you will never be able to hold a job in your chosen profession ever again. That has nothing to do with whether the person changes or not on the inside.
If it were about whether the inside had changed, this would be a "wait and see" how he acts stance.
It's not...I believe and have maintained that he should be done, for good.
As for changing the channel...the main difference between radio and other industries is that radio is a free non-age-related enterprise. You and I are adults and have that understanding, but not young people. You can't legislate "morality" but you can exhibit "responsibility."
It would be highly irresponsible given Star's undeniable history for him to get another chance. He has a LONG HISTORY of this. If he were kicked off the air when he should have been...the Envy event wouldn't have happened.
Mind you, I've NEVER said he can't go to satellite radio, that's a subscription service and built upon different expectations and constraints. But in terms of terrestrial radio...he should be done.
We're not granted an inalienable right to have a radio show. And in terms of Star's terrestrial radio career, he's done enough to deserve the professional death penalty. It's not about rehabilitation or whether he changes on the inside.
It's not about him, it's about us and our children and our willingness to take responsibility for the things we can control.
Enough is enough in regards to this anything goes society.
There's nothing wrong with having standards. We used to have them and we were much better off. And if we approach this from the standpoint of "standards," conscience demands that we should be opposed to his return to the terrestrial airwaves.
Thank you for continuing in the discussion.
I heard about the original incident and his subsequent firing shortly after it occured. I thought he was surely gone for good.
As a SURVIVOR of child molestation this is a slap in the face to all survivors! The black community historically turns a blind eye to crap like this and it breaks my heart more than you know. (e.g. remeber RKelly?)
The man may not of "done" any of the things in his statement but the statement alone speaks volumes about his character. No one with an ounce of human decency would make such a statement about children. NO ONE!
Forgiveness is one thing but there is no way he should be given a platform to possibly do more harm. Disgusting!
Where is Al Sharpton? Jesse Jackson? The numerous other people who jumped the bandwagon to get Imus off the air?
I will stand with you MoKelly to do all I can to voice my displeasure with this.
Hi Mo'Kelly,
It was great talking to you on the Black Women's Roundtable tonight.
I went to NYU grad school, and definitely remember hearing about those hideous comments, and the rage that I felt. I am completely in agreement with your thoughts on this matter!
Thanks for speaking out. I'll be sure to use the contact information for the radio stations that you've put on your blog.
Keep up the good work.
Hello,
In the present context of criticism being levied against Rap music and Black pop-culture as a whole; don't you believe its making personal accountability secondary to that of media influence?
Jefferson,
I'm not sure I understand your question. If you're saying that Star is a "product" of the Hip-Hop culture, meaning that "anything goes" I would say yes.
But under no circumstances is he absolved of his personal responsibility. This is not a matter of "personal tastes" this is a matter of common decency.
Yes, I would say that the present media environment has "allowed" for a Star to even come about...but there's nothing saying that we have to continue to be complicit in his existence.
My point was that in the first half of the 20th Century, the majority of images of Blacks in Mainstream media was that of sambo, minstrels and mammy.
Despite the pervasive nature of this imagery and with very little positive depictions to counter it; Blacks of that era never degenerated to the point of mimicing that behavior.
When there were instances of adverse behavior, the blame was placed squarely upon the individual and not media.
At present, where there is a myriad of positive images of Black people; it seems disingenious to place the blame for pathology in our communities on Black pop-culture.
I may not like some of the things Stars says, but I certainly wont support a black guy who’s banner depicts him in an afro wig and holding money in his hands.. Talk about a minstrel coon!
By the way, I clearly recall Jay-Z saying he ejaculated next to the baby seat in a hit song, Biggie Smalls saying he’ll shoot your daughter in the leg and even worse, 50 cent saying to shoot kids at the end of a Minister Mase song in 2005.
I think blacks should clean up rap music first!!
Katlyn_Styles...
Thanks for the compliment...but obviously you don't read this column and know that I poke fun at myself regularly...and also that the picture is the exact antithesis of who I am.
But thanks again nonetheless. You tried your best.
Your Jay-Z and Biggie analogies are off base because they are in music you have to purchase, as opposed to being broadcast over the airwaves which are regulated by the FCC. That's why hip-hop can say whatever they want in terms of their actual CDs, but the radio versions are toned down.
Hope to see you come back Katlyn! Another satisfied reader!
I don't see what the big deal is, its not like he actually did it, he just wanted to say some off the wall stuff to get under DJ Envy's skin, after he mad some threats to his family. Look at rap music, most of the rappers brag about shooting and killing, but most of these braggers never been arrested for a crime
Not that you'll ever likely see this...but I'll write it anyway.
_____________
You can say what you want on a record because you have to BUY the record, and rappers can't say what they want on the "radio" versions of the record.
That's point #1.
#2, you don't have to actually "sodomize" a child for it to be a crime. You can't threaten kill someone either. To vaguely say it is one thing. To identify the person by name specifically is not a "veiled" threat. It's a crime.
And just because you "Elle" don't think it's a big deal, is irrelevant. The law doesn't work under the premise of "what Elle thinks is a big deal." Some people don't think shooting someone is a big deal. Some people don't think yelling fire in a crowded theatre is a big deal.
Both are crimes. Please read up on the law.
Post a Comment