Dick Clark's scheme to oust Don Cornelius and replace Soul Train with his own all-black dance show

Some of you think I'm extreme when you see me call them devils. What else sums up Europeans and their intentions to Africans here and abroad?
Devils indeed. All they know how to do is steal. They don't cultivate a goddamn thing. They steal ideas that aren't theirs and subvert and throw grenades at anyone who succeeds who doesn't bend the knee

It's like Black success has to come with their permission
Who here besides the cacs are surprised by this?
I knew nothing about this but now that I have read the article, it follows just how these folks work...conniving, devious, envious...the list knows no end.
I am so sick.
It's disgusting
Dick Clark's attempted Coup d'état of Don Cornelius' "Soul Train" did not occur in a vacuum.

There was a concerted effort among Cac business men in the 1970's to co-opt and take over the entire Black Music Industry.

They felt that the Black Music Industry had too much dominance on the music charts and was stacking too much $$$$$$$$$$ cash that they felt they weren't getting as big a percentage of as they greedily wanted. So, the Cacs conspired to take over the Black Music Industry and put the money $$$$$$$$$$$$ and shot-calling power into their hands.

Motown type of Black owned & controlled entertainment companies WAS NOT to be replicated by any other Blacks.

Fast forward ten years later to the early 1980's when during MTV's beginnings they refused to broadcast Michael Jackson solo videos (Wanna Be Startin' Somethin', Beat It, etc.) until CBS records told them that they would withhold ALL CBS artist videos unless that put Michael on MTV. The MTV business model was to be a WHITE ARTIST ONLY video channel that would revive flagging white rock & roll artists whose album sales had plummeted because of the dominance of Disco music & Black music acts.

In 1972 Cac music executives commissioned a report from Harvard University on how to dominate and take over Black Music


This story begins in 1972, when a few enterprising master's students at the Harvard Business School prepared a study, commissioned by Clive Davis one of Columbia's execs, detailing how the Columbia Records Group could better integrate the then largely independent black music industry into the mix. The now infamous Harvard Report -- officially known as "A Study of the Soul Music Environment" -- has often been referred to as a sinister blueprint aimed at arming a litany of "culture bandits" with the theoretical tools to return black culture to a neo-colonial state. There's no denying that this is exactly the situation we're staring at now, but it has nothing to do with the Harvard Report. What those MBA students articulated was a no-brainer marketing plan, informed by the commercial success of Motown and the cynical (though not mistaken) view that the Civil Rights "revolution" likely had more to do with the realities that black folk had disposable income and white folk consumed a hell of a lot of black popular culture than anything to do with real structural change in American society. In response to those expecting more sinister designs in the Harvard Report, David Sanjek rhetorically chimes, "why did feel the need to document what they should have already known?" (Rhythm and Business, 62). What Sanjek suggests is that eventually somebody in the music industry would have come up with their own version of the Harvard Report -- say, Clive Davis, who incidentally was a president at Columbia at the time that the report was commissioned. The point is, with or without the Harvard Report, the takeover was well underway.
Black music has always had a complicated relationship with big business. That this relationship has typically had little to do with actual music perhaps explains the often unbalanced quality of this thing we've come to call R&B. This complicated relationship also partly explains what exactly R&B is. The term R&B is essentially a shortened version of "Rhythm & Blues", but as a novice might discern, that which is called R&B bears little resemblance to the musical landscape created by Ruth Brown, Louis Jordan, Laverne Baker, Charles Brown and the Coasters. And perhaps that was the point. Musical innovations aside, R&B was essentially a marketing ploy that finally gained a significant foothold during the late 1970s. R&B was born out of competing logics -- record companies tried to negotiate the realities of black culture and identity within the history of race relations in America while trying at the same time to reach a wider audience of black consumers and white record buyers. As black radio needed mainstream advertisers to court the emerging black middle class (as much an ideology as a measurement of economic and social status) and mainstream record labels became fixated on crossing over black artists to white consumers, terms like Soul and Rhythm and Blues quickly became too black. The same terminology turnover occurred during the late 1970s when urban began to stand for radio stations that essentially programmed black music. As Nelson George explains, "Urban was supposedly a multicolored programming style tuned to the rhythms of America's crossfertilized big cities…. But more often, urban was black radio in disguise." (The Death of Rhythm and Blues, 159).
According to the "Harvard Report" black radio was strategically important to record companies because it provided "access to large and growing record buying public, namely, the Black consumer." The report is oblivious to the fact that the very birth of what was called "race music" in the 1930s was premised on selling goods and services to a uniquely defined audience, namely African-Americans constrained by Jim Crow segregation-an audience that might even buy a record or two, in the process of buying furniture, cleaning supplies and an insurance policy. Nevertheless, the report is cognizant of the growth of an emerging black middle class, one that would prove attractive not just to record companies but also advertisers eager to fuel black desires to consume the fetishes of a post-Civil Rights world. In the aftermath of centuries of struggle, exploitation and violence, some members of the black middle class often viewed their ability to consume widely throughout mainstream society as an emblem of the "freedoms" won during the Civil Rights struggle. .......................
READ MORE:
There was no video for Michael Jackson's 'Wanna be starting something' was there? If there is I have never ever seen it. I haven't even seen it on YouTube. What happened to it? Where is it at

**edit** oh, you meant Billie Jean
 
Last edited:
Devils indeed. All they know how to do is steal. They don't cultivate a goddamn thing. They steal ideas that aren't theirs and subvert and throw grenades at anyone who succeeds who doesn't bend the knee

It's like Black success has to come with their permission

It's disgusting

There was no video for Michael Jackson's 'Wanna be starting something' was there? If there is I have never ever seen it. I haven't even seen it on YouTube. What happened to it? Where is it at
the person who wrote the report was a brother
 
This was mentioned in a podcast about Soul Train. "Stuff You Should Know: Soul Train".

Don owned his show and brought it to the networks himself. Which is unheard of even to this day.
 
This was mentioned in a podcast about Soul Train. "Stuff You Should Know: Soul Train".

Don owned his show and brought it to the networks himself. Which is unheard of even to this day.
 
Dick Clark's attempted Coup d'état of Don Cornelius' "Soul Train" did not occur in a vacuum.

There was a concerted effort among Cac business men in the 1970's to co-opt and take over the entire Black Music Industry.

They felt that the Black Music Industry had too much dominance on the music charts and was stacking too much $$$$$$$$$$ cash that they felt they weren't getting as big a percentage of as they greedily wanted. So, the Cacs conspired to take over the Black Music Industry and put the money $$$$$$$$$$$$ and shot-calling power into their hands.

Motown type of Black owned & controlled entertainment companies WAS NOT to be replicated by any other Blacks.

Fast forward ten years later to the early 1980's when during MTV's beginnings they refused to broadcast Michael Jackson solo videos (Wanna Be Startin' Somethin', Beat It, etc.) until CBS records told them that they would withhold ALL CBS artist videos unless that put Michael on MTV. The MTV business model was to be a WHITE ARTIST ONLY video channel that would revive flagging white rock & roll artists whose album sales had plummeted because of the dominance of Disco music & Black music acts.

In 1972 Cac music executives commissioned a report from Harvard University on how to dominate and take over Black Music


This story begins in 1972, when a few enterprising master's students at the Harvard Business School prepared a study, commissioned by Clive Davis one of Columbia's execs, detailing how the Columbia Records Group could better integrate the then largely independent black music industry into the mix. The now infamous Harvard Report -- officially known as "A Study of the Soul Music Environment" -- has often been referred to as a sinister blueprint aimed at arming a litany of "culture bandits" with the theoretical tools to return black culture to a neo-colonial state. There's no denying that this is exactly the situation we're staring at now, but it has nothing to do with the Harvard Report. What those MBA students articulated was a no-brainer marketing plan, informed by the commercial success of Motown and the cynical (though not mistaken) view that the Civil Rights "revolution" likely had more to do with the realities that black folk had disposable income and white folk consumed a hell of a lot of black popular culture than anything to do with real structural change in American society. In response to those expecting more sinister designs in the Harvard Report, David Sanjek rhetorically chimes, "why did feel the need to document what they should have already known?" (Rhythm and Business, 62). What Sanjek suggests is that eventually somebody in the music industry would have come up with their own version of the Harvard Report -- say, Clive Davis, who incidentally was a president at Columbia at the time that the report was commissioned. The point is, with or without the Harvard Report, the takeover was well underway.
Black music has always had a complicated relationship with big business. That this relationship has typically had little to do with actual music perhaps explains the often unbalanced quality of this thing we've come to call R&B. This complicated relationship also partly explains what exactly R&B is. The term R&B is essentially a shortened version of "Rhythm & Blues", but as a novice might discern, that which is called R&B bears little resemblance to the musical landscape created by Ruth Brown, Louis Jordan, Laverne Baker, Charles Brown and the Coasters. And perhaps that was the point. Musical innovations aside, R&B was essentially a marketing ploy that finally gained a significant foothold during the late 1970s. R&B was born out of competing logics -- record companies tried to negotiate the realities of black culture and identity within the history of race relations in America while trying at the same time to reach a wider audience of black consumers and white record buyers. As black radio needed mainstream advertisers to court the emerging black middle class (as much an ideology as a measurement of economic and social status) and mainstream record labels became fixated on crossing over black artists to white consumers, terms like Soul and Rhythm and Blues quickly became too black. The same terminology turnover occurred during the late 1970s when urban began to stand for radio stations that essentially programmed black music. As Nelson George explains, "Urban was supposedly a multicolored programming style tuned to the rhythms of America's crossfertilized big cities…. But more often, urban was black radio in disguise." (The Death of Rhythm and Blues, 159).
According to the "Harvard Report" black radio was strategically important to record companies because it provided "access to large and growing record buying public, namely, the Black consumer." The report is oblivious to the fact that the very birth of what was called "race music" in the 1930s was premised on selling goods and services to a uniquely defined audience, namely African-Americans constrained by Jim Crow segregation-an audience that might even buy a record or two, in the process of buying furniture, cleaning supplies and an insurance policy. Nevertheless, the report is cognizant of the growth of an emerging black middle class, one that would prove attractive not just to record companies but also advertisers eager to fuel black desires to consume the fetishes of a post-Civil Rights world. In the aftermath of centuries of struggle, exploitation and violence, some members of the black middle class often viewed their ability to consume widely throughout mainstream society as an emblem of the "freedoms" won during the Civil Rights struggle. .......................
READ MORE:
Thanks for the knowledge
 
Bandstand Didn't Originally Allow Black Dancers !!!!

The famed Philly TV show is often touted as a standard of racially integrated programming, but a new book says just the opposite.

BY TIM WHITAKER | MARCH 1, 2012 AT 7:25 AM

COMMENT ON THIS POST

Dick Clark’s a fraud.

On the face of it, a harsh charge, particularly given that Clark, now 82, once omnipresent on our TV screens, is now seen only fleetingly (and maybe not fleetingly enough) only on New Year’s Eve, due to a massive stroke seven years ago.

Harsh though it may be, a new book, by California professor Matt Delmont—The Nicest Kids in Town: American Bandstand, Rock ‘n’ Roll, and the Struggle for Civil Rights in 1950’s Philadelphia—calls out Clark for being just that.

The book asserts that Clark, a multimillionaire, has continuously promoted Bandstand as racially pioneering, and himself as an early civil rights trailblazer, when in fact he was the host of a show that banned Philadelphia black kids from appearing on TV.



Clark was the host of American Bandstand in the late ‘50s through the mid-‘60s. A daily dance show, Bandstand was the first national TV program directed at teenagers and starring teenagers. Because it emanated from here (the studios were at 46th and Market), the show put Philadelphia at the epicenter of national youth culture.

But like most things in the ‘50s, Bandstand’s gussied up happy days persona didn’t extend to people of color.



Delmont, a professor of Americans Studies at Scripps College, sorted through old interviews and clips, census data and looked at countless Bandstand photographs. He learned of Bandstand’s surroundings by conducting extensive research into the volatile and not very welcoming housing and civic policies of the West Philadelphia neighborhood where the TV show aired. He read what the Bandstand host had said over the years about the show in biographies and interviews. In the end he concluded that Clark had created an unchallenged myth that the show had promoted integration, when in fact it had done just the opposite.

For years, black teens had been reporting to the Philadelphia Tribune that Bandstand staffers were turning them away from the studio. “The show’s producers denied that they had a white-only policy, but the black teenagers who tried to get into the studio were always excluded for some reason,” Delmont writes. “Some were told that they lacked a membership card, others that they did not meet the dress code, and others that the studio was full.”

The evidence piles up. Thousands of pictures turned up only two photos of black kids. Delmont reports that between 1958 and 1963, the Philadelphia Tribune had published seven editorials or letters to the editor regarding Bandstand’s exclusion of black teens—including a December 1958 column that sent Christmas greetings to Dick Clark, wishing him a “new attitude toward Negro children which will permit them to be welcomed to his show.”

Delmont says Clark’s initial reference to the show’s “integration” came in 1976, when Bandstand was competing with Soul Train for performers, viewers and advertisers. Recalling Bandstand’s integration underscored the show’s support for black music and culture. Clark, he says, would also always present Bandstand within the context of the national civil rights movement, which evades the specific local history surrounding Bandstand’s years in Philadelphia—“as well as the anti-black racism in Philadelphia and nationally” that motivated the show’s discrimination.

“American Bandstand is part of the civil rights story,” concludes Delmont, “but not in the way Clark suggests.


http://www.phillymag.com/news/2012/03/01/american-bandstand-didnt-allow-blacks/
well. life paid dick clark back in the form of a stroke. Can't deny the impact of blacks on society. :yes:
 
There was no video for Michael Jackson's 'Wanna be starting something' was there? If there is I have never ever seen it. I haven't even seen it on YouTube. What happened to it? Where is it at

No there wasn't. He did three from off the wall. Don't Stop 'Till You Get Enough, Rock with You and She's Out of My Life" it was Billie Jean that was the one that caused CBS to threaten to boycott the network if it didn't get played.

But yeah, it's well known that up until this point MTV was strictly a 'Rock' channel. What isn't very well known is that it, Beat it, Say Say Say and Thriller are the videos that made the channel profitable. While the channel was expected to lose money the first couple of years they were losing it much faster than they originally expected and was likely a year from being shut down. Thriller basically made the channel desirable.
 
Dick Clark's attempted Coup d'état of Don Cornelius' "Soul Train" did not occur in a vacuum.

There was a concerted effort among Cac business men in the 1970's to co-opt and take over the entire Black Music Industry.

They felt that the Black Music Industry had too much dominance on the music charts and was stacking too much $$$$$$$$$$ cash that they felt they weren't getting as big a percentage of as they greedily wanted. So, the Cacs conspired to take over the Black Music Industry and put the money $$$$$$$$$$$$ and shot-calling power into their hands.

Motown type of Black owned & controlled entertainment companies WAS NOT to be replicated by any other Blacks.

Fast forward ten years later to the early 1980's when during MTV's beginnings they refused to broadcast Michael Jackson solo videos (Wanna Be Startin' Somethin', Beat It, etc.) until CBS records told them that they would withhold ALL CBS artist videos unless that put Michael on MTV. The MTV business model was to be a WHITE ARTIST ONLY video channel that would revive flagging white rock & roll artists whose album sales had plummeted because of the dominance of Disco music & Black music acts.

In 1972 Cac music executives commissioned a report from Harvard University on how to dominate and take over Black Music


This story begins in 1972, when a few enterprising master's students at the Harvard Business School prepared a study, commissioned by Clive Davis one of Columbia's execs, detailing how the Columbia Records Group could better integrate the then largely independent black music industry into the mix. The now infamous Harvard Report -- officially known as "A Study of the Soul Music Environment" -- has often been referred to as a sinister blueprint aimed at arming a litany of "culture bandits" with the theoretical tools to return black culture to a neo-colonial state. There's no denying that this is exactly the situation we're staring at now, but it has nothing to do with the Harvard Report. What those MBA students articulated was a no-brainer marketing plan, informed by the commercial success of Motown and the cynical (though not mistaken) view that the Civil Rights "revolution" likely had more to do with the realities that black folk had disposable income and white folk consumed a hell of a lot of black popular culture than anything to do with real structural change in American society. In response to those expecting more sinister designs in the Harvard Report, David Sanjek rhetorically chimes, "why did feel the need to document what they should have already known?" (Rhythm and Business, 62). What Sanjek suggests is that eventually somebody in the music industry would have come up with their own version of the Harvard Report -- say, Clive Davis, who incidentally was a president at Columbia at the time that the report was commissioned. The point is, with or without the Harvard Report, the takeover was well underway.
Black music has always had a complicated relationship with big business. That this relationship has typically had little to do with actual music perhaps explains the often unbalanced quality of this thing we've come to call R&B. This complicated relationship also partly explains what exactly R&B is. The term R&B is essentially a shortened version of "Rhythm & Blues", but as a novice might discern, that which is called R&B bears little resemblance to the musical landscape created by Ruth Brown, Louis Jordan, Laverne Baker, Charles Brown and the Coasters. And perhaps that was the point. Musical innovations aside, R&B was essentially a marketing ploy that finally gained a significant foothold during the late 1970s. R&B was born out of competing logics -- record companies tried to negotiate the realities of black culture and identity within the history of race relations in America while trying at the same time to reach a wider audience of black consumers and white record buyers. As black radio needed mainstream advertisers to court the emerging black middle class (as much an ideology as a measurement of economic and social status) and mainstream record labels became fixated on crossing over black artists to white consumers, terms like Soul and Rhythm and Blues quickly became too black. The same terminology turnover occurred during the late 1970s when urban began to stand for radio stations that essentially programmed black music. As Nelson George explains, "Urban was supposedly a multicolored programming style tuned to the rhythms of America's crossfertilized big cities…. But more often, urban was black radio in disguise." (The Death of Rhythm and Blues, 159).
According to the "Harvard Report" black radio was strategically important to record companies because it provided "access to large and growing record buying public, namely, the Black consumer." The report is oblivious to the fact that the very birth of what was called "race music" in the 1930s was premised on selling goods and services to a uniquely defined audience, namely African-Americans constrained by Jim Crow segregation-an audience that might even buy a record or two, in the process of buying furniture, cleaning supplies and an insurance policy. Nevertheless, the report is cognizant of the growth of an emerging black middle class, one that would prove attractive not just to record companies but also advertisers eager to fuel black desires to consume the fetishes of a post-Civil Rights world. In the aftermath of centuries of struggle, exploitation and violence, some members of the black middle class often viewed their ability to consume widely throughout mainstream society as an emblem of the "freedoms" won during the Civil Rights struggle. .......................
READ MORE:

Had to bump this.
 
Back
Top