Lessons from Fox and Bill O’Reilly

African American women are also less likely to be believed than White women are, at least partly because of the way the world views Black women.  So, right on, to the sister who called the Fox Hot Line to report her harassment.  She, and many of the other Black women who have protested the culture of sexism at Fox, need to have champions that are as vocal as the champions Megyn Kelly and Gretchen Carlson had.  Indeed, one might look at the fact that Megyn Kelley pushed Tamron Hall off her perch as the only Black woman anchor at the Today show as evidence of how much more highly valued White women are than Black women.
What do we learn from this, though?  We learn, especially, that advertisers are controversy-averse.  They don’t want to be associated with an accused sexual harasser, especially when the accusations are persistent and are backed up with numerous settlements to women who have experienced harassment.  Advertisers saw their brand tarnished, and their consumer base angered, by O’Reilly’s behavior.  Too many of the companies that abandoned the O’Reilly show have increasing numbers of women in senior management, in advertising, and on their boards.  While Roger Ailes, now himself dismissed from Fox for his harassing behavior, excused O’Reilly’s antics with “Bill will be Bill”, increasing numbers of women (and some men) in charge find Bill’s behavior not only odious but also illegal.   Increased sensitivity to issues of sexual harassment helped make it clear that O’Reilly’s behavior was simply unacceptable.
What would it take for advertisers to draw the line on racial discrimination and/or discrimination against African American women?  Racial discrimination does not cause the same repugnance that sex discrimination does. Indeed, companies that engage in widespread race discrimination might even get high fives from consumers who might like to practice racism themselves.  The only way that African Americans could spark an advertiser exodus would be to either work with partners who would put their feet down strongly, or boycotting the goods and services that a discriminating company provided. But there are few African Americans who would emulate those who boycotted busses for 381 days in Montgomery during 1955 and 1956.  It seems unlikely that a critical mass of African Americans would inconvenience themselves to punish a discriminator.
African American leaders would do well to study the O’Reilly case and to ask what it would take for us to send as strong a signal about race discrimination as the O’Reilly dismissal did about sexual harassment.  Many thought O’Reilly was invincible, but he wasn’t.  Race discrimination isn’t invincible, either.  We just have to decide what we want to do about it!
(Julianne Malveaux is an economist, author, and Founder of Economic Education.)
 
Like us at https://www.facebook.com/pages/New-Pittsburgh-Courier/143866755628836?ref=hl
Follow @NewPghCourier on Twitter  https://twitter.com/NewPghCourier

About Post Author

Comments

From the Web

Skip to content