Hi Mary Anne,

I wanted to apologize for targeting you a bit (and I confess to palying the devils advocate to get your goat) but many of the issues are still valid nonetheless.

Even your link is a British Link - where I notice they demonize the Arabs, the French and the Americans while keeping a very PC journal of the horrors of slavery.

While it appears comprehensive, it omits certain key issues. Cannibals and various types of savagery to the first european explorers in some of these regions by the natives is entirely omitted - and yet this is one of the reasons these cultures were targeted and more importantly how the governments then justified their capture and usage as slaves in the first place!

It is these little things that make it seem all so one-sided and try to play upon the guilt of the modern westerner - to follow their agenda, give up their money, and more importantly - forever get him/her to hold their tongue and not speak freely about these affairs, so as to exploit the modern man/woman as much as did the slave trade exploit the African continent.

The BBC and all the media conglomerates know that their audiences are changing - that the caucasoid-lock on the technological broadcasting industry is dissipating fast as Philo T. Farnsworth's television technology has made it across the world and into these third world sectors.

Do you think Aladdin is an accident or Pochahontas, The Lion King or now Lilo and Stitch? Of course not. The Cinderella era is over.

If they want market $hare - they have to start producing content that appeals to folks who used to be outside the media "circle of life" (LMAO here ;-)

Yes the global market is no longer wanting to see a blond-haired, european upturned nose beauty with blue eyes, seeking marriage and home(land?;-) security.

Demographics baby - dem demographics!

Nothing is wrong with providing content for more than one ethno-type. Perhaps the suggestion that content can be tailored to genetics should already be insulting. But it is being done constantly nevertheless.

A great example is Cadillac advertisements - which until 1970 or so always showed caucasions. A demographer said, "Hey! Wake up! Cadillacs are now purchased by many folks of African-American heritage," (This descriptive term didn't exist then but what the heck) "in fact it is their car of choice - put them in the ads!" So it used to be a single couple youngish - but the man always older - "The Christmas They'll never forget!" or some other cliched slogan would adorn the image of automotive rapture.

Now television is starting the same demographics marketing, subtle to some, no so subtle to others.

Must we have gaudy colorful, flashy gameshows with over-made-up, bikini-clad girls to secure Mexican viewers?

Must we kill in-depth news content and replace it with "reality television" set in jungles and with lots of "real" yet theatrical primitive barbarism?

Is this what the ethnodemographers have decided is what "entertains" the natives?

I think we can see that the move for money and market $hare has taken historically already poor media content - and thrust it into a new dark ages.

So it's no surprise that talk-radio and internet have replaced network television as a source of content or even entertainment for the former loyal viewers of ABC, CBS and NBC.

Like a neighborhood which goes to seed -once the snowball starts rollin' the neighbors move away faster and are replaced with less than savory citizens, because property values have decreased.

The same is true with the mainstream media - they have pandered to broader markets and lost their core market in the process. So now they have to go even further astream in their pandering to make up for the loss of their old core!

The link you provided is part of this pandering process, albeit a much higher form of pandering - on the educational level - but pandering nonetheless.

Lee may not have the diplomacy needed to escape the stigma of apparent racism - but the bottom line everyone wants to run away from is that humanity is not equal. We must accept that not everyone has the same capacity for learning. Europe discovered this long ago - and set up apprenticeships into various labor-based positions as early as Jr. High - a system which is still used very successfully today. It is not racist - it accepts the diversity of human potential.

Diversity in learning capacity should be no more stigmatized than diversity in any other area. But to deny this diversity is to handicap folks and make them unfairly compete in arenas which they are not suited for.

If I gathered EVERYONE in the world and passed out a standardized test in their native tongues, even with history sections tailored to their own cultures - the bottom line is that if I divided the test results by location, nation or race - there would be clear high scores and low scores.

It's horrible to even contemplate such a thing I know! (Shudder!) But therein lies the problem to all too many regions development and apparent stagnation. They are competing and losing in a society which has not taken into account this diversity of human potential.

Best wishes,

SDAI-Tech1

Note: image links will be unstable.