Yeah, sure, the Jooz control Hollywood. Of course, they do. So, how many people here are boycotting TV this week to protest the constant barrage of Hanukkah specials?
And, someone please explain to me why, if “the Jews” control/have controlled Hollywood, did it take 15 years for Barbra Streisand to get her film version of Yentl produced? This, during a period in her career, when pretty much anything she touched turned to gold?
[sub]Oy VEY gevalt! This argument gets dumber every time someone brings it up. Drives me to Yiddish; and I’m a Sephardi.[/sub]
Have you not actually read the thread? Because that’s not the problem at all. And you cited something written by generic Internet nobodies who didn’t cite anything at all.
Gay people call themselves “gays,” too, but, if you aren’t already known to be gay-friendly, you’d better not.
As I said earlier, Hollywood IS largely controlled by Jews, and it has been forever. But that doesn’t mean Jewish VIPS in Hollywood are pushing any kind of Jewish agenda. Whether it was Jack Warner in the Forties or Bob Iger today, Hollywood’s Jewish moguls want to make money, and generally aren’t eager to finance stars’ vanity projects, whether those stars are Jewish or goyim.
To say Jews in general are inclined to paint, say, Isreal in a positive light - say, the TV show Homeland - and others in a less favourable light does not require a “conspriracy”. Consciously or sub-consciously it’s a prefectly natural inclination of individuals for whom Israel has been painted their whole life as some kind of spiritual homeleand under constant threat.
Ditto a general slant in news media towards whatever group/s exert control over networks.
As politically incorrect as it may be to say it, I would say yes. Note that Jews are also over-represented as winners of the Nobel Prize in literature (13% of all winners).
The simple fact is that historically this was a people with no physical resources. What they had (being a group that was forced out of one country and another and often the outsider/'other" group) was exposure to a world of ideas. Hence as a culture the people valued ideas as the perfect portable asset more than most, and trading in ideas, importing and exporting them, taking risks creatively recombining them, transforming and translating them, arguing about them*, as the ideal. This in the pre-internet eras before everyone across the world was exposed to everything.
Sure that advantage is muted now that everyone has such a broad exposure to ideas, but that cultural attraction to creative ideas based occupations persists. And let’s face it, the entertainment industry does not reflect Iowa’s population. It is centered in Los Angeles (4.9% Jewish population and in absolute numbers almost as many Jews as in Jerusalem) and in New York (over 9% Jewish and almost three times more Jews there than in Haifa). What’s the chicken and what’s the egg salad? I don’t know.
*You think we Jews are a bit over-represented on these message boards too maybe?
The fact that the talent is, very often, Jewish in Hollywood - in terms of business executives, directors, actors, screenwriters, etc. - has nothing to do with who “owns” or “controls” the business.
That, alas, is down to who controls the cash - who hires the CEOs, the business executives, the directors, actors, and screenwriters. That person ‘controls’ the business - they appoint the directors, who hires the CEOs, screenwriters, etc.
One Hint: the name “Sony”. Not a particularly Jewish name, that. Yet somehow, it is written on the letterhead of the company.
In short, “The Jews Control Hollywood” is akin to the statement “The Blacks Control Football”.
It is an incorrect conclusion (“Control”) from an observed fact (an outsized amount of the ‘talent’ belongs to one ethnicity or skin colour).
It is incorrect because “ownership” and “control” isn’t what results from having an outsized amount of the talent belonging to one ethnicity or skin colour, but from, well, ownership and control.
Like how Sony is “owned” by the Japanese parent company, who is “controlled” by a Global Board of Directors, the “Chairman” of which is a gentleman named Osamu Nagayama (I am assuming here, purely for the purposes of argument, he isn’t Jewish ):
Oh, so Sony Pictures isn’t really Jewish. A studio is only Jewish if the big media corporation it belongs to has a Jewish CEO. Like…
Disney (with CEO Bob Iger)
Dreamworks (Spielberg, Geffen and Katzenberg)…
Viacom (run by Sumner Redstone and Les Moonves)
ComCast (run by Brian Roberts)
Again, it doesn’t bother me in the LEAST that most of the big media corporations in the USA are run by Jews. It just baffles me that so many people are so keen to deny the obvious.
Does it bother YOU that the media business is so heavily Jewish?
Huh? You are not reading what I am writing. Nor do you understand how corporations work.
A CEO isn’t the person who “owns” or “controls” a corporation. He or she is merely the person who runs its daily business.
The “owner” of a corporation is the shareholders, and the persons who “control” a corporation are its Board of Directors.
The CEO is merely their employee. Part of the “talent”, like directors, actors and screenwriters. If they fail to make money, they can be fired.
Now, no-one denies that much of the talent in Hollywood is Jewish. But that doesn’t put them in “control” or “ownership”.
This is particularly obvious when the thread starts with “Sony”. This is very clearly a company whose Board of Directors is not “Jewish” and whose shareholders are not, as far as I know, majority “Jewish”.
Sony is a Japanese company who has hired, as many other companies have, local talent, both on the business-management side and on the artistic side - much of which is Jewish.
Now, I don’t care in the least if it “bothers” you, one way or another: the fact is that you are flat-out, provably wrong about your premises - that having the “talent”, whether it be on the business management side, or on the artistic side, of Sony be disproportionate-to-the-population “Jewish” simply doesn’t mean that they “own” or “control” the business. It just doesn’t. Why you would want it to, I have no idea.
Is anyone making a big deal about “OMG THE JEWS CONTROL BASKETBALL?” Does anything flow from such “ownership”?
No doubt if you segment US businesses with sufficient discrimination, you can find clusters of disproportionate-to-the-population ethnic ownership all over the place.
Again, I didn’t complain about Jewish ownership in the NBA. If a man works hard, amasses a fortune, and wants to buy a basketball team, it’s fine by me.
Similarly, it doesn’t hurt my feelings a bit that a large number of Jews have worked their way up to high positions in the media business. I don’t begrudge Bob Iger or Les Moonves a dime he earns.
But let someone point out that the movie business is pretty much controlled by Jews, and many well meaning folks will race to assure us that it isn’t true! Someone right here on this board has tried to argue that, since Sony Pictures is a subdivision of a Japanese corproation, then their numerous Jewish bosses don’t really count. I find that silly and a bit disingenuous.
It’s also been suggested that “Jews control Hollywood” is as foolish as “Blacks control the NFL.”
Ohhhh… so, ownership = control. Gotcha. Well then, most of the NBA’s owners are Jewish. Does that mean Jews control basketball?
In short, you don’t know how corporations work, and you don’t care to learn - if doing so may challege a deeply-held bit of “knowledge” on your part. Right.
Yes …
No, ownership and control remain seperate issues. Also, “control” has different meanings in different circumstances.
In a corporation, the corporation is “owned” by its shareholders, and it is “controlled” by its Board of Directors (not, as you appear to think, its CEO or other “bossses”).
Basketball teams, as far as I know, are not corporations and so are “owned” directly by “owners” - in their case, ownership and control is vested in the same person.
From what I understand, slightly less than half of all Basketball teams are “owned” by Jewish “owners”. Those teams are no doubt also “controlled” by their owners.
The sport itself is not “controlled” as a whole by Jews, though - only a large number of teams. There is no evidence that these team owners collude to advance Jew-related Basketball interests as a whole (whatever those may be).
In short, they do not “control basketball” any more that the undoubted fact of Japanese (not Jewish) control of the Sony Corporation means that the Japanese “control Hollywood”. You are conflating “control of a business entity” with “control of an industry” - and, in the case of Hollywood, failing to even make the case that the “busness entity” that is the subject of this thread - SONY Corporation – is, in point of fact, “controlled” by Jews.
In summary: having a lot of “Jewish Bosses” (let alone other Jewish talent) does not equal either “ownership” or “control” of a corporation like Sony; having a lot of Jewish business owners (who undoubtedly both own and control their individual businesses) does not equal either “ownership” or “control” of an overall industry such as the sport of Basketball, absent some sort of evidence that said owners collude among themselves to the detriment and exclusion of non-Jewish business owners in Basketball.
):