Agent complains: Minorities are 'putting talented white performers out of work ... and it stinks'

[BWWMatt]

ScottyDoesn'tKnow2 said: "That's quite an interesting response, especially your use of the term "echo chamber". I think what is considered a personal attack and what is not needs to be defined more because the way it's being enforced seems selective and/or arbitrary and the term itself is vague since there are so many posts that are up that can be construed as a "personal attack"."

Yes, you are right, clearly there is a level of subjectivity to all of this. Generally the "personal" attack-- in its basest sense-- refers to attacking another person, whether that person is on this board or not. If we feel that a post rises to that level, it will be deleted. However, disagreeing with someone (even vehemently so) does not rise to a personal attack. Nor does, in my opinion, attacking what someone says. While these types of things can obviously feel like personal attacks when you are dealing with deeply held beliefs, it is more in the frame of how the discussion is handled.

While we would prefer that nothing on the board rises to the level of an "attack," even if it is on someone's words, actions, etc., we realize that in some situations, that's warranted. But in those cases, if they are handled in a way that focuses on the words, actions, etc., and not the person, then there is some wiggle room.

Now, to what I think is more at the heart of your question. What constitutes an attack on multiple people? Obviously something that is overtly racist would certainly be considered a personal attack on many people, and removed as such. However, the threshold for that determination is likely much higher than it is for posts directed at one specific person.

Dave28282 (and the numerous people of multiple self-identified races that agree with him in this thread) clearly has some opinions that others find to be racist. However one might feel about that, there is a big difference between what he is proposing and him saying that people of color are not talented enough to work in the arts. If that (or anything like it) was said, that would be considered worthy of deletion from the board.

While you might disagree with his thinking, he seems to believe that what he is saying is the logical way to achieve equality. If someone disagrees, we welcome that good-faith discussion. We will not be deleting posts or threads for the sole reason that we disagree with the social/political stance that they take. While I 100% sympathize with how frustrating that can be, we want as many voices from as many perspectives as possible to populate the board. You don't have to agree with them, but if they are conscientious and comport themselves with a certain level of respect, we believe that they bring value to the board.

Now, that brings us Kad's very valid point. There is certainly a very fine line between a "troll" and a provocateur. If someone's goal is to start a discussion that they know will cause disagreement, because it will lead to a fun and interesting conversation, we welcome that. However, if a person's track-record shows that they are starting, or hijacking, threads simply to provoke and anger others, then that is something that we will take more seriously. And, if I'm being honest, that is where we likely will need your help.

Those of you that interact more often on the boards are far more capable of remembering the types of things that others post than we are simply observing. So, if it looks like someone is repeatedly looking to cause a fight, please let us know. We can then go back and look at their history and make a determination. In fairness, this will probably have a fairly high bar to cross, as we want to ensure that people of all perspectives are being allowed to voice their opinions. But, if it seems excessive or problematic, we will take action.

I know that some of you do not believe us when we say this, but we really do want this board to be a place for constructive dialogue, and we are willing to make changes in how it is moderated to help ensure that. The knowledge and perspective of you posters is tremendous, so, we genuinely want your feedback and suggestions. After all, if we are asking you to participate in good-faith conversations, the least that we can do is do the same.

[ErikJ972]

"What about posts that really are blatant attacks on POC and targeting black people specifically? Those posts have been left up in numerous threads."

Apparently that is fine.

The poor moderation here has made BWW an unpleasant place to visit. And I'm saying that as someone who has been visiting and posting on this site practically since it started.

It was fun while it lasted. 

[Dave28282]

AlfredDrakeII said: "I'm a Black performer. The agent is correct. I disagree with Dave's assertion that quotas should be enforced by any means. But his broader point is one worth debating: how does one quantify "diversity", and what does it mean precisely, other than "fewer white people"? How do we know we've reached our "diversity" goals? IS there a chart or an equation??

At any rate I do have many hard-working and skilled white friends that are in some cases being supplanted by people I personally know to be of lower caliber, all for the sake of "diversity". Furthermore I find it insulting that Progressive Racists still believe I need a helping hand, as if I'm a child, despite my high-level training and years of experience.

I don't need any favors. Not all of us are victims, though it's funny to watch the Progressive Racists on this board act as though we are.
"

Thank you Alfred. You don't know how important it is to me that someone like you, a black performer truly understands the situation. Those are some very good questions you ask. Thanks for pointing out my broader point too. Of course "enforcing quotas" is by no means the best solution in my book, but I mentioned that because progressive ??????<> seem to miss the understanding of what "fair" means, I'm holding a mirror in front of them, but unfortunately they still don't get the casting process and seem to demand some kind of measuring point that is already achieved and exceeded in many cases. This agent's vision also clearly rises above that, but these progressive ???????<>  are not ready for equality yet.

It is always an insult if someone gets or doesn't get a role based on race. That goes for both the negative and positive intentions, It's always bad. It's really worrying that higher calibre actors must make way for lower calibre actors like you describe and that that seems allowed in a very unhealthy way.

I agree with you, it is indeed belittling and insulting how you are being treated by these progressive ???????<>  and the difficult part is that they think they are doing good, not realizing the harm it causes. But people like you, me and that casting director must be strong and team up, because the future of equality lies in leaving this ???????<>  1 way street behind.

[Dave28282]

Also big thumbs up to moderator Matt, for understanding the situation on the board and explaining it well.

[Elegance101]

Although Dave28282's post make me wildly angry and I feel it's absurd that someone actually feels the way he does, I respect his right to post. One specific person is not being targeted and I think Matt is actually right. We have to be able to talk to each other and explain our viewpoints, especially to people we disagree with. If we want to change people's minds and allow progress to be made, we should be talking to people we disagree with in order to hopefully gain compassion and understand what we can do better for our fellow humans.

That being said, Dave28282 is a brick wall and we probably won't move him to understand the racism boiling under his statements, but I respect free speech, even though what he uses it for makes me upset.

[Dave28282]

ScottyDoesn'tKnow2 said: "even if I ended up agreeing with her conclusion that BAME casting seems off. However, her rationale and mine seem absolutely different and that is what matters."

The thing is that she is against BAME casting because it it will entrench forever the idea that people deserve to be treated differently due to their colour. You are against BAME casting, but tolerate it because you fear that not having BAME casting costs BAME people opportunities. The difference is that her vision is the way to equality and yours is not. You might not feel comfortable with agreeing with her yet, but there will be no equality until you get to that point. You have the right to feel "you are not there yet", but don't blame this casting director when she expresses she is. We should applaud her.

[BWAY Baby2]

I think it is natural for people to have different opinions and reactions to the diversity issue- depending on where they are coming from- race, class, even religion. Bu, I do not see any real hate speech- no one is saying they hate white people because...or they hate Asians....or whoever. Very interesting to read different POV. David is not a troll- he feels strongly- as do many of us- about this issue which is currently spotlighted in our culture on so many levels. I think labeling people- on whatever side of the issue they espouse- racist because you disagree with their opinions- not good. 

[Kad]

qolbinau said: "How would you distinguish between inflammatory and viewpoints that you don't agree with?"

Continuously hammering one viewpoint at every opportunity, knowing full well it derails conversation, and then not actually responding or engaging, or only very selectively so, and only repeating your point is very different than expressing and debating a viewpoint I disagree with.

 

 

 

[Dave28282]

No offense Kad, but when was the last time I've seen you creating a post that is actually about the subject matter with good arguments? All you seem to write are personal messages to others, distracted from the thread. Without actually engaging, or only very selectively so. 


I haven't seen you expressing or debating a viewpoint in the first place.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

BWAY Baby2 said: "I think it is natural for people to have different opinions and reactions to the diversity issue- depending on where they are coming from- race, class, even religion. Bu, I do not see any real hate speech- no one is saying they hate white people because...or they hate Asians....or whoever. Very interesting to read different POV. David is not a troll- he feels strongly- as do many of us- about this issue which is currently spotlighted in our culture on so many levels. I think labeling people- on whatever side of the issue they espouse- racist because you disagree with their opinions- not good."

I'd argue there have been numerous posts in which a disdain for black people has been expressed. At first it's hidden behind what some could pass off as logical arguments, but then after numerous posts on the subject it becomes quite clear. Some times, it slips out.

[seaweedjstubbs]

I'm just confused, Dave. Why is it so hard for you to believe that the actors of color who are "taking jobs away from white performers" actually are the best performers for the job? Why does it bother you SO much to see a few more actors of color than you're used to in shows where race isn't an issue? You act as if all-white casts or predominantly white casts are a thing of the past. Remember BRIGHT STAR just two years ago? No melanin to be found on that stage. But hey, according to your logic, if a show has an all-white cast, they MUST have been the absolute best people for the job, because white performers are clearly superior to actors of color, right? There's just no way these actors of color who are taking over Broadway could possibly be talented enough on their own, right? That's what I'm gathering from your posts.

And don't go patting yourself on the back just because one black performer agreed with you. I'm a black performer in a national tour. You don't think I know that there are people like you who believe I was only cast because of my race? Trust me, I do. I heard it all throughout college from friends who claimed they were joking - they weren't. "Oh you only got that role because you're black." I began to believe it, too. But trust me, there are PLENTY of actors of color out of work. Not all of us are perfect for HAMILTON, believe it or not. I'm very fortunate to have the job I do, and I feel confident that I got it because of my talent, not the color of my skin.

[bk]

ScottyDoesn't Know: I think what the moderator is saying is perfectly clear.  You don't want to hear it is the problem.  People are presenting points of view - all well and good.  Others are absolutely attacking posters with whom they disagree in a personal way - those are the posts that have been removed.  

[bk]

"Can we mass exodus from this site?  I'm so sick of racist diatribes being left up for everyone to see while BroadwayWorld is deleting responses to it.

Disgusting.

Can we make a new message board?  There are multiple sites to host message boards on.  This site's moderators have long taken the bite out of this board."

Amusingly, people keep saying this and yet don't leave.  This is not your message board - it is owned by the site on which it appears.  It has a TOS.  Read it.  

[bk]

AlfredDrakeII said: "I'm a Black performer. The agent is correct. I disagree with Dave's assertion that quotas should be enforced by any means. But his broader point is one worth debating: how does one quantify "diversity", and what does it mean precisely, other than "fewer white people"? How do we know we've reached our "diversity" goals? IS there a chart or an equation??

At any rate I do have many hard-working and skilled white friends that are in some cases being supplanted by people I personally know to be of lower caliber, all for the sake of "diversity". Furthermore I find it insulting that Progressive Racists still believe I need a helping hand, as if I'm a child, despite my high-level training and years of experience.

I don't need any favors. Not all of us are victims, though it's funny to watch the Progressive Racists on this board act as though we are.
"

This is a wonderful post - and in typical fashion, all those doing the loudest breastbeating have not even mentioned it.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

You know...the term "progressive racist" isn't really a term used much except from one person and to see another poster use it is highly suspicious. Sock puppeting and so classic. Ignore and belittle the majority of opinions by POCs and use one that happens to agree with you and treat it as if their word is gospel even if you have to create one yourself.

[bk]

ScottyDoesn'tKnow2 said: "You know...the term "progressive racist" isn't really a term used much except from one person and to see another poster use it is highly suspicious. Sock puppeting and so classic. Ignore and belittlethe majority of opinionsby POCsand use one that happens to agree with you and treat it as if their word is gospel even if you have to create one yourself."

Hold on there, friend - are you accusing me or anyone else of having created a sock puppet account to post this Alfred Drake thing?  You need to respond to this right now, especially if you're accusing ME.  Let's have it.

 

[BWWMatt]

Ok folks, I think it's time to take a deep breath here, as things are getting heated to a point where it is derailing the conversation completely. It is 11:25 p.m. EDT as I type this, and I think the best thing to do right now is to lock this thread for the night, as even lowly moderators have to sleep some time, and I would hate for this to get to a point where we would have to delete things en masse in the morning.

When I log on in the morning, we will unlock the thread, and hopefully cooler heads will prevail, so that we can get back to arguing about the points of debate, and not about any other accusations made. 

I do realize that while this is locked (and we are asleep) that, of course, someone could just start another thread to continue the heated exchanges. However, I do ask that if you are going to continue the discussion in another thread, that you do so respectfully.

If that's not the case, that would likely be an indication that the conversation has run its productive course, and we will probably leave the thread (and others that pop up to continue down its path) locked. 

Thank you all for working with us today, as we continue to make efforts to get this right. Have a good night!

[Dave28282]

ScottyDoesn'tKnow2 said: "I'd argue there have been numerous posts in which a disdain for black people has been expressed."

I totally agree. It happens in the way AlfredDrakeII describes. Forever entrenching the idea that black people should be treated differently, the whole core of this discussion.

You might not be ready to understand that this is not the solution to equality, but some people, including that agent are.

[Dave28282]

seaweedjstubbs said: "I'm just confused, Dave.

But hey, according to your logic, if a show has an all-white cast, they MUST have been the absolute best people for the job, because white performers are clearly superior to actors of color, right? There's just no way these actors of color who are taking over Broadway could possibly be talented enough on their own, right? That's what I'm gathering from your posts.

But trust me, there are PLENTY of actors of color out of work. Not all of us are perfect for HAMILTON, believe it or not. I'm very fortunate to have the job I do, and I feel confident that I got it because of my talent, not the color of my skin."

You are confused indeed. The problem of this discussion is exclusion behaviour. People thinking they earned the right to unfair behaviour. This agent is trying to rise above that. If we want a level playing field, we should also accept the fact that a white cast is a possibility. If 10 actors audition for a role, of which one black, there is a 90% chance the role does not go the black actor, based purely on neutral statistics. The number of contracts in musical theatre is already around 12% for black people. That is level to society, even higher in commercials. Which is extremely high, given the chance theory, because statistically, if there would be a show with a cast of 8, ending up with 2 black actors (such as Grease live, JCS, every lawyer, judge, love interest in tv and film etc), and let's say 60 people audition, of which 10 black and 50 white, it means that 20% of all auditioning black actors was hired versus 8% of all auditioning white actors.

This happens all the time, so you tell me, are black people that ridiculously more talented? Are they so much more superior? Or might there be a bit forced pressure for this unfair behaviour on casting agencies and is it just fine with you because you want to get even?

Well, this is not even. ""Even" would be matching society. Which would mean 1 black actor in a project of 10, roughly. That is exceeded by far. Level is already really special, looking at neutral chance on a role.

To me it is all about talent, my favourite artists of all time are black and asian. So talent is where the focus should lie, according to this agent, me, and other people on this board. With this out of balance facts, being supported by seeing actual inferior quality often, the forced casting breakdowns etc, it shows that it is currently a problem and a 1 way street that prevents equality. 

[haterobics]

Dave28282 said: "No offense Kad, but when was the last time I've seen you creating a post that is actually about the subject matter with good arguments?"

How are we (or Kad) supposed to know the last time you personally saw something?

[Dave28282]

You can trust me when I say I see everything that Kad posts here.

Now, enough off topic and back to the subject of this thread.

[seaweedjstubbs]

Dave, you keep calling this person who made these remarks a "casting director." As far as I can tell, she's not a casting director, but a talent agent who represents actors. Those are two very different things. She could be just frustrated that none of her clients are working, therefore not making her any money.

Also, when you say stuff like "If 60 actors audition...." and try to break things down to small numbers like that, it doesn't help your point. No, if 60 people audition for a show and two black people audition but suck, they're not automatically going to get the part because they're black. They have to be talented.

And we HAVE accepted that all-white casts are possibilities. As I said, just as recently as the 2015-2016 season - ironically, one of the most diverse seasons to date - we had a musical with an all-white cast. Guess what? Nobody protested, nobody rioted. In fact, the casting notice for BRIGHT STAR stated that all of the roles in the show were Caucasian, and nobody cared. Yet when HAMILTON's casting notice stated that they were only seeking ethnic actors, people had a meltdown. Now tell me, Dave, which of those casting notices made you angrier?

And nowhere in my post did I say that black performers were "that much more superior" than white performers. You put those words in my mouth. It is not fair in any way shape or form that if a black actor gets cast in a show, they somehow have to do even more to prove to you that they deserved to be there. Good lord, Dave, will you not be satisfied until you see a recording of every person that auditioned for every show that comes to Broadway to make your determination of if the few black performers in the show deserved their jobs? It's just ridiculous.

Anyways, I'm over it. I've got some errands to run before my show tonight that I totally booked just to fill a quota.

[ChildofEarth]

I read this post a while ago and let it marinate for a bit in my mind.

I cannot BELIEVE that a website like this would even think of allowing a thread like this, a thread filled with BLATANT racism and gaslighting, whole threads about silly Broadway drama like a Spongebob stagedooring stalker or Patti Murin’s sensitivity are deleted.

As a person of color, as a woman of color, as a human being, I am appalled and frankly if this is the type of environment BroadwayWorld and the mods want to encourage, I’m not only confused, I’m disturbed. THIS is what you allow to happen? It isn’t even happening behind your backs because you are here. I understand you can’t watch all forums at all times but you have kept this forum going EVEN AFTER SHUTTING IT DOWN.

Is this what BroadwayWorld is? This is America, that’s for damn sure.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

This thread is ridiculous, but I will say this:

Black people may make up only 12% percent of the U.S. population, and Latinos make up about 17%. Asians make up less than 6%. So yes, American is still mostly white.

That said, inclusion is important for the future of the theatre. Forgot actors - part of being an actor is not getting roles for whatever reason - you're too tall, you're too short, you can't hit the high notes, whatever. Rejection is part of the business and if you can't deal with it, go do something else. HOWEVER, it is important for all members of the AUDIENCE to see representations of themselves onstage - especially in fifty years when white people will be getting closer and closer to being a minority themselves.

I went to a play last weekend and the audience was not only almost entirely white, but almost all of them were at least 50 to 60 years old. Who is going to go to these plays when these old white people die? As American continues to diversify, its theatre needs to reflect that or we will finally lose to Netflix.

[qolbinau]

I would claim there is a real practical reason why discussions should still be continued. If we assume that there is genuine racism going on here (there are so many posts I'd have to know which specifically you are referring to - I assume you wouldn't suggest the following is racist because if so that in itself justifies a discussion I think:  criticism of affirmative action, or a vision that unless a role calls for a specific race, people should be treated as individuals and the most talented person for a role should always be selected regardless of race). But if we assume racism is taking place, why do you think that the best course of action is simply to silence it?  It's much better for the ideas to be on the table so everyone knows where people stand than to have it insidiously hiding in the background, ready to strike unexpectedly in the worst possible ways. Assuming you want to change attitudes rather than pretend they don't exist, you will never, ever change them by silencing people. Instead, they'll perhaps express their voice in private where it can really do damage, such as with their vote. And I think in the case of the 2016 election we know where that leads to....

Silencing ideas does not make them go away. The only thing you can do is try to challenge them (as hopeless as it may be because it seems like people genuinely do not want to challenge their thinking).