# Responses to a straight, white male complaining on these message boards. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 3, 2014, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754 "2014-03-03T15:01:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/141 "2014-03-05T20:01:03Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There are black people on mainstream television, though perhaps not enough. How many is enough? How is this metric determined? By show, network, cable platform, etc.? 12.6% of the US population is black. Is the % on mainstream television, less than that %? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/142 "2014-03-05T20:15:29Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > The crux is this: advocating against minority-specific content like BET or Logo is (unintentionally, generally) asking that all content be aimed at white, straight, middle class people, because that’s what the mainstream audience in the U.S. is going to be for the forseeable future. Nope, because I can advocate for minority-specific content on NBC or other “white” networks. (Much like I can advocate for desegregating schools instead of having special ones for blacks.) ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/143 "2014-03-05T20:17:52Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Sure, you can pass a law to force a certain amount of minority content on television (if it passes Constitutional muster)…but should you? No. I’m not advocating a law, but why shouldn’t I? > [@](#): > > No. BET and other specialty networks do more than simply features actors and characters of a certain group, they are able to speak directly to issues affecting their group that mainstream networks are not, as well as exploring aspects of group culture that won’t make it into mainstream-network content, precisely because they need to appeal to a broad base. I agree, but that’s not the scope of the discussion. > [@](#): > > This isn’t unique to race, either…do we really need ESPN? The Big Four shows sports already, after all. While that’s true, they don’t show rodeo, or cheerleading, or Ohio Valley Conference basketball. The networks show only the highest levels of the most popular sports. But they don’t show only whites doing those sports. > [@](#): > > We very much accept that argument, which is why the Civil Rights Act was passed. So should we apply it to TV? > [@](#): > > We cross that bridge when we come to it. As that is not the world we’re currently living in, it’s no strike against BET existing. No, I reject the argument that it’s too early for racial justice or whatever. That’s what they said in opposition to Brown v. Board. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/144 "2014-03-05T20:18:55Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > How many is enough? How is this metric determined? By show, network, cable platform, etc.? > > 12.6% of the US population is black. Is the % on mainstream television, less than that %? Good question, and I don’t know the answer (or even whether there are not enough for sure, though I suspect there are not). Perhaps it’s worthy of another thread. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/145 "2014-03-05T20:19:58Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > But they don’t show only whites doing those sports. Are you under the impression that BET only shows black people on TV? Because if you are, then that’s easy to correct – there are people of all backgrounds in various programming on BET. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/146 "2014-03-05T20:20:25Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Nope, because I can advocate for minority-specific content on NBC or other “white” networks. The four broadcast networks are always going to aim for middle-of-the-road mainstream audiences, because of the structure of the television model (they only get revenue from getting eyeballs on ads, not the fees that allow cable to offer more specialized content). They’ll have minority elements, sure (characters here and there), but they are going to appeal to mainstream audiences, and in America, that’s a straight, white, middle-class (and these days, old) audience. You could do it on cable, which is where you do find minority-specific programming. > [@lance strongarm](#): > > (Much like I can advocate for desegregating schools instead of having special ones for blacks.) Apples and oranges. Minority-oriented programming takes away airtime that could have been used for mainstream fare; there’s only so many shows you can fit on a schedule. There’s no constraint like that on schools. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/147 "2014-03-05T20:28:07Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > I’m not advocating a law, but why shouldn’t I? Because there’s no reasonable argument for compelling media providers to put out a certain type of media. > [@](#): > > I agree, but that’s not the scope of the discussion. Isn’t it? The question of _why_ such networks exist, even in an era when there’s minority characters on mainstream TV shows, is certainly relevant to whether they _should_ exist. > [@](#): > > But they don’t show only whites doing those sports. It’s an analogy: if you remove outlets for specialty content, speciality content will cease to be available. Mainstream content is what it is for a reason. ETA: If we were ever to go back to a 1950s-era level of representation on TV, that’s how it would happen: go back to three networks, and no other outlets. > [@](#): > > So should we apply it to TV? I don’t know how you envision it being done, so that’s hard to argue either way. I’d need to hear an actual proposal. > [@](#): > > No, I reject the argument that it’s too early for racial justice or whatever. That’s what they said in opposition to Brown v. Board. That wasn’t my argument; my argument was that the existence of BET isn’t going to stop a producer with a black-oriented pitch from getting his show on NBC (if NBC thinks it’s a money-earner), which is a point you used for why the existence of BET was a problem. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/148 "2014-03-05T20:35:12Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Are you under the impression that BET only shows black people on TV? Because if you are, then that’s easy to correct – there are people of all backgrounds in various programming on BET. I didn’t say it had only blacks. But is it just like a “white” station? It’s name is meaningless? No, I doubt that. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/149 "2014-03-05T20:40:44Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Because there’s no reasonable argument for compelling media providers to put out a certain type of media. So if American media companies were all white-owned, and used the publicly-owned airwaves to completely shut out black voices or actors, you still wouldn’t think so? > [@](#): > > Isn’t it? The question of _why_ such networks exist, even in an era when there’s minority characters on mainstream TV shows, is certainly relevant to whether they _should_ exist. It is, and like I said, I don’t oppose BET. I’m just exploring this for the sake of argument. > [@](#): > > It’s an analogy: if you remove outlets for specialty content, speciality content will cease to be available. Mainstream content is what it is for a reason. Not if you simply put specialty content on the mainstream networks. > [@](#): > > ETA: If we were ever to go back to a 1950s-era level of representation on TV, that’s how it would happen: go back to three networks, and no other outlets. Yes, ultimately, that’s how the problem was solved. > [@](#): > > I don’t know how you envision it being done, so that’s hard to argue either way. I’d need to hear an actual proposal. Say, require a certain number of hours with black-oriented programming or whatever. AA for TV. > [@](#): > > That wasn’t my argument; my argument was that the existence of BET isn’t going to stop a producer with a black-oriented pitch from getting his show on NBC (if NBC thinks it’s a money-earner), which is a point you used for why the existence of BET was a problem. If NBC didn’t want to air a black show because of racism (or fear of racism by viewers), it might still want to reject a money-earner. And it could use BET as an excuse to do that by saying “go to BET, that’s where black shows go.” (Not that this is a likely scenario in this day and age, of course - it’s all for argument). ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/150 "2014-03-05T20:43:18Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > The four broadcast networks are always going to aim for middle-of-the-road mainstream audiences, because of the structure of the television model (they only get revenue from getting eyeballs on ads, not the fees that allow cable to offer more specialized content). They’ll have minority elements, sure (characters here and there), but they are going to appeal to mainstream audiences, and in America, that’s a straight, white, middle-class (and these days, old) audience. That’s funny, you sound like an exec defending the lack of diversity on TV. > [@](#): > > Apples and oranges. Minority-oriented programming takes away airtime that could have been used for mainstream fare; there’s only so many shows you can fit on a schedule. There’s no constraint like that on schools. So? Why should black programming suffer because white programming needs room? And there is a similar constraint with schools - they don’t have unlimited budgets. A desegregating school system that is half black half white simply moved kids around so that each school was roughly half and half, it didn’t build any new ones, nor did it need to. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/151 "2014-03-05T20:53:38Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So if American media companies were all white-owned, and used the publicly-owned airwaves to completely shut out black voices or actors, you still wouldn’t think so? Doubtful, considering the First Amendment, but since this isn’t happening and shows no signs of ever happening, I’m not too worried about it. > [@](#): > > It is, and like I said, I don’t oppose BET. I’m just exploring this for the sake of argument. I assumed that was the case. > [@](#): > > Not if you simply put specialty content on the mainstream networks. By force? Why? No one wins. Networks get lower ratings and less money, people who would have watched BET or Logo or a Hispanic/Spanish-language oriented station go from an entire network to plus whatever other networks did, to a few government-mandated (always sure to create quality creative work!) shows here and there, people that like mainstream fare get shows they won’t watch. It’s lose-lose-lose. > [@](#): > > Yes, ultimately, that’s how the problem was solved. And the proliferation of media outlets shows no signs of abating. > [@](#): > > Say, require a certain number of hours with black-oriented programming or whatever. AA for TV. Ugh. So now there’s a bureaucrat in charge of deciding what’s black-oriented and what’s not, and the network has every possible incentive to make their mandated program as white-friendly as possible (to still draw that audience), defeating the goal of having programming that truly speaks to the issues and cultures of minorities. Hmm…_The Will Smith Variety Hour_? > [@](#): > > If NBC didn’t want to air a black show because of racism (or fear of racism by viewers), it might still want to reject a money-earner. And it could use BET as an excuse to do that by saying “go to BET, that’s where black shows go.” > > (Not that this is a likely scenario in this day and age, of course - it’s all for argument). In that case, with money to be made, wouldn’t NBC be wise to start their own black-oriented network? It wouldn’t reflect on them in the eyes of these hypothetical racist viewers (how many people know that CBS owns Showtime, or that NBCUniversal owns the Syfy Channel?), and they’d make more money. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/152 "2014-03-05T21:04:24Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > That’s funny, you sound like an exec defending the lack of diversity on TV. Again, there’s a reason things are the way they are, and it’s not due to evil. This isn’t strictly a racial thing, either…how many shows speak to the incredibly wealthy? The desperately poor? Muslims? Scrapbookers? Anyone with interests outside the mainstream, be it due to race, politics (how many Communist-oriented shows? Even _The Americans_, where the leads are Soviet operatives, mentioned the concept exactly once in the 14 episodes that’ve aired), socioeconomics, or any other reason, will be poorly served by the mainstream outlets. The answer is more outlets, not trying to cram all of those into the limited slots available on four networks. > [@](#): > > So? Why should black programming suffer because white programming needs room? As noted in the previous post, I don’t think your proposal would actually result in black-oriented programming, but rather tokenism. That aside, though, people should be able to broadcast what they want to, and watch what they want to. The television market isn’t like gas stations or hotels, where there’s a constraint of availability that justifies something like the CRA. > [@](#): > > And there is a similar constraint with schools - they don’t have unlimited budgets. A desegregating school system that is half black half white simply moved kids around so that each school was roughly half and half, it didn’t build any new ones, nor did it need to. How is that similiar? Each student costs the same to educate, regardless of race. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/153 "2014-03-05T21:20:17Z")
Would people who have problems with BET still complain if the channel’s name made it less obvious that it targets black viewers? Like ONE and Centric? Spike TV caters to men the same way BET caters to black folks. No, the channel isn’t named Men Entertainment Television, but the channel [doesn’t hide the fact](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spike_(TV_network))that its intended demographic is young men. I really do have to wonder why BET is so frequently the go-to example of media discrimination on these boards and elsewhere. Telemundo isn’t mainstream entertainment simply translated into Spanish; it’s TV that predominately features Latinos and Latino culture. Lifetime appeals to a certain subset of female viewers the same way. Singling out BET as though is it any different than all the other niche stations out there really. makes. no. sense. Personally, whenever I see this kind of black fixation (it’s the same thing with Affirmative Action…the conversation 99.9% of the time revolves around all the undeserving incompetent blacks hogging all the positions rather than the demographic groups that actually benefit from AA the most not just because of their numerical importance but also their racial membership) it makes it exceedingly difficult for me to take the “white straight men have valid gripes, too” side seriously. And I wish that wasn’t the case, but it is. The arguments on that side often are often dismissed because they are readily dismissible. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/154 "2014-03-05T21:27:58Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Would people who have problems with BET still complain if the channel’s name made it less obvious that it targets black viewers? Like ONE and Centric? > > Spike TV caters to men the same way BET caters to black folks. No, the channel isn’t named Men Entertainment Television, but the channel [doesn’t hide the fact](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spike_(TV_network))that its intended demographic is young men. > > I really do have to wonder why BET is so frequently the go-to example of media discrimination on these boards and elsewhere. Telemundo isn’t mainstream entertainment simply translated into Spanish; it’s TV that predominately features Latinos and Latino culture. Lifetime appeals to a certain subset of female viewers the same way. Singling out BET as though is it any different than all the other niche stations out there really. makes. no. sense. > > Personally, whenever I see this kind of black fixation (it’s the same thing with Affirmative Action…the conversation 99.9% of the time revolves around all the undeserving incompetent blacks hogging all the positions rather than the demographic groups that actually benefit from AA the most not just because of their numerical importance but also their racial membership) it makes it exceedingly difficult for me to take the “white straight men have valid gripes, too” side seriously. And I wish that wasn’t the case, but it is. > > The arguments on that side often are often dismissed because they are readily dismissible. Agreed, and the gripe that people would protest a network called White Entertainment Television is pretty meaningless, when, as it stands, probably 90% of networks offer white entertainment. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/155 "2014-03-05T21:49:35Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > I didn’t say it had only blacks. But is it just like a “white” station? It’s name is meaningless? > > No, I doubt that. It’s a station that, from what I understand, strives to offer programming that appeals to urban minority communities (which are largely black) in the USA, which, they would probably argue, is an underserved community as far as TV programming. In that sense, it’s just like any other TV station – it’s trying to carve out a niche and make money. So it probably has lots in common with many other networks. So yes, it’s just like “white” stations (if by “white” you mean “most other TV stations”). Its name is as meaningless or meaningful as other network names, I suppose, and is mostly about marketing. I imagine they would change their name if they thought it would make more money for them. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/156 "2014-03-05T23:47:05Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Again, there’s a reason things are the way they are, and it’s not due to evil. This isn’t strictly a racial thing, either…how many shows speak to the incredibly wealthy? The desperately poor? Muslims? Scrapbookers? Anyone with interests outside the mainstream, be it due to race, politics (how many Communist-oriented shows? Even _The Americans_, where the leads are Soviet operatives, mentioned the concept exactly once in the 14 episodes that’ve aired), socioeconomics, or any other reason, will be poorly served by the mainstream outlets. The answer is more outlets, not trying to cram all of those into the limited slots available on four networks. I agree. > [@](#): > > As noted in the previous post, I don’t think your proposal would actually result in black-oriented programming, but rather tokenism. I’d say that’s true of many AA or similar efforts. > [@](#): > > That aside, though, people should be able to broadcast what they want to, and watch what they want to. The television market isn’t like gas stations or hotels, where there’s a constraint of availability that justifies something like the CRA. So you’d have no problem with WET. > [@](#): > > How is that similiar? Each student costs the same to educate, regardless of race. And each program costs the same to broadcast, regardless of race. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/157 "2014-03-05T23:48:09Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It’s a station that, from what I understand, strives to offer programming that appeals to urban minority communities (which are largely black) in the USA, which, they would probably argue, is an underserved community as far as TV programming. > > In that sense, it’s just like any other TV station – it’s trying to carve out a niche and make money. So it probably has lots in common with many other networks. > > So yes, it’s just like “white” stations (if by “white” you mean “most other TV stations”). Its name is as meaningless or meaningful as other network names, I suppose, and is mostly about marketing. I imagine they would change their name if they thought it would make more money for them. I understand that and have no problem with it. I’m just using it as a bouncing off point for a larger discussion that I find interesting. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/158 "2014-03-05T23:52:30Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I really do have to wonder why BET is so frequently the go-to example of media discrimination on these boards and elsewhere. Probably because the race is actually part of its name. > [@](#): > > Personally, whenever I see this kind of black fixation (it’s the same thing with Affirmative Action…the conversation 99.9% of the time revolves around all the undeserving incompetent blacks hogging all the positions rather than the demographic groups that actually benefit from AA the most not just because of their numerical importance but also their racial membership) I disagree strongly with that characterization of the conversation. And I don’t think you frame it fairly either. > [@](#): > > it makes it exceedingly difficult for me to take the “white straight men have valid gripes, too” side seriously. And I wish that wasn’t the case, but it is. Still, white straight men DO have valid gripes. Anyone who is discriminated against by race or judged by race, or sex, or sexual orientation, has a valid gripe. Don’t you agree? > [@](#): > > The arguments on that side often are often dismissed because they are readily dismissible. Well, that’s a nice observation about your past discussions, but it’s not much use to us here. If you want a discussion now, with me, let me know. ---
**Author:** ![MyFootsZZZ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/myfootszzz/32/12580_2.png) [@MyFootsZZZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MyFootsZZZ)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/159 "2014-03-06T02:04:44Z")
FTR, The only problem I have with BET is it’s name. I wouldn’t want a WET, not only because I think it would be racist, but I would hate the notion that a TV station’s trying to represent me as a white person. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/160 "2014-03-06T02:16:29Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > I’d say that’s true of many AA or similar efforts. Doubtless, and the business of television would be especially prone to it. Whether a room is rented or a meal sold is a fairly cut-and-dried matter, the extent to which a television program is oriented around minority interests is not. It’d be a nightmare to regulate, and the incentives are all against the outcome you want. > [@](#): > > So you’d have no problem with WET. Other than noting that almost every channel is already WET, no. > [@](#): > > And each program costs the same to broadcast, regardless of race. Not on a net basis, no, some bring in more revenue than others, and the size of the audience (and their demographics) is a major factor in that. There’s no parallel to a school, where teaching black kids and white kids has the same effect on the bottom line (which isn’t for-profit anyway). So, there’s no rationale for building new schools instead of integrating the extant ones; there _is_ a rationale for broadcast networks only airing material with a broad appeal. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754.md?page=9)