In Response to that Article

ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2006

I know it’s late, but a few people have asked me about my comment made in Sovo [Southern Voice] a few weeks back.For those of you that aren’t savvy, in the March 17th 2006 issue of Southern Voice (Atlanta) a cover story read “Atlanta Pride festival accused of racial bias”. Not to rehash the story but to give anyone unknowing the background to it. The story basically entails Dwight Powell (black) publisher and editor-in-chief of Clik Magazine, a national magazine publication geared to black men, was turned down by Atlanta Pride festival’s ED Donna Narducci (white) for his sponsorship of close to $10,000 ($9,500 for those techies) in free advertisement. The offer was originally rejected along with sponsorship offers from Out in America (internet) and Just Living magazine according to Atlanta Pride because it would not bring revenue to the event. When question of possible racial bias came into play on the part of Atlanta Pride, the offer for sponsorship was later accepted. However, Mr. Powell rejected it. This after Narducci originally recommended that Clik instead become a vendor.My comment:What the hell? As hard as it is to get sponsorship for any gay organization why would Atlanta Pride turn down any free publicity? It’s practically Marketing 101 to know that any exposure equals some consumption. Therefore, if the “product,” so to speak, appeals to the consumer then it has the strong potential of pulling in the needed revenue. Not closing the (potential) door on it. So, I am very much confused on why this basic strategy is being turned away when it is offered for free by the very organizations that we are supposed to “proud” of?Then, to add flames to the fire, reverse the decision that should have been never been turned down in the first place. (What? Has AP’s changed its stance? If so, what brought on the change other than ignorance?) Personally, I don’t blame Mr. Powell for not jumping at the opportunity to become a sponsor after his hand (close to $10K in advertisement circa. 54,000) has been pushed away. As for dialogue, this has been a dialogue in the black community forever and a day. Sadly, the black and white gay communities are so segregated in Atlanta that this joint discussion en masse is still a long ways off.I have not and will not change my stance on this view until a change has occurred. The first paragraph is self-explanatory in my opinion. (In my opinion, the whole thing is self-explanatory!) But I will break down the second paragraph for those that want more insight into it.I must start off by saying that I never had the pleasure of meeting Ms. Narducci and made a very conscientious effort not to mention her name, and met Mr. Powell briefly once in 2002 during Black Pride in Atlanta when he offered me a copy of the now-defunct Groove Magazine.Don’t get me wrong, an organization has a right to change their mind and recognize any error in their judgment at that time. And I must commend Ms. Narducci (even if only for PC reasons) for at least putting forth an effort for trying to remedy the situation. However, most in the black gay community and other minority gay communities (and some from the white gay community), question why would any organization turn away publicity? Sure, it can be argued that it wasn’t bringing in revenue. However, it had the strong possibility of doing so. I’m not familiar with Just Living magazine or Out in America. I do know that the (from the article) that Out in America is on the internet. Internet = accessible anywhere. And from my experience working in nonprofit, there is always somebody looking for nothing more than a tax write-off (for the sake of revenue).I can only imagine being in Mr. Powell’s shoes, publisher and editor-in-chief of Clik magazine. Here, I am publisher of a magazine dedicated to black gay men, and I want to offer close to $10K in free advertisement ($9,500 for those techies) so that my nationwide readers will know and possibly be a part of Atlanta Pride, considering there is a large community of black gays living in and around the city. Instead of receiving open arms from the organizers, I am told to become a vendor and purchase a booth.I can’t speak on Mr. Powell’s behalf, but that would have stung. That is why I think the backslap didn’t help too much when Atlanta Pride and Narducci “apologized” and offered to accept sponsorship. I don’t know about anybody else, but the tone I got from the article was kind of underlying and snobbish. Like ‘we didn’t really do anything wrong by turning away your offer but now that we “apologize” you shouldn’t have any problem doing what you were planning on doing in the first place.’ Unfortunately, I’ve been around both races long enough to know that sometimes interpretation can be misconstrued. But the most aggravating thing about the article to me was that I’m going to name every black person and every black organization that I’ve been involved with to prove to everybody that I’m not racially bias; once again, a defense mechanism that has various interpretations on racial lines, be it genuine or borderline hypocritical.At one point in my life, I worked under a well-known racist that was also the owner of the company. In saying that, the majority of his workers were black and Latino that he kept all at low-levels in the organization. It sounds like a Catch-22, but it was the God honest truth. And the owner made no point of hiding his distaste for non-Aryan skin. The only person that saved his butt from filing with the EOE was his co-owner and wife who were fascinated with people of color. Thankfully, the owner had such distaste for people of color that he never showed up to the restaurant unless he necessarily had to, and later was forced to close the business down due to outstanding debt. So pulling out all-the-black-folks-I-know card doesn’t work too well for me.I’m not going to revisit the reasons and the understanding of why it was important for Atlanta Pride to reconsider the offer. They did in fact make an apology for their initial rejection of it. That, for whatever reason, is good enough for me for now.Personally, I do not blame Narducci because she is just only a face to the ever-rising racial tension between black and white in Atlanta’s gay community. Before this—lets be real—Atlanta Pride in the black community is handsomely labeled “White Pride” or “June Pride” for those who want to be politically correct. A large part of this has to do with the fact that we have our own Black Pride celebration, but most importantly we [African-Americans] never had any strong connections to the Atlanta Pride Festival. And if you look at new.atlantapride.org little is left to imagination of why me and my black culture feel excluded and hold on ever so tightly to Black Pride during Labor Day weekend.Sad to say, that earlier in my youth my experiences with gay organization regarding race has been harsher here [in gay organizations] than anywhere else. I remember quite well being a member of a couple of youth-oriented organization where I felt uncomfortable on the basis of my skin color. One organization in particular sticks out in my mind after I was turned away because they were having a fundraiser. It wouldn’t have been so bad, if I wasn’t so rudely turned away simply because I didn’t fit the “part”. The very organization that was supposed to have been open arms to me turned me away that night while a good number of white elites were welcomed with smiles. I also felt that same organization unfairly separated kids by race. It was like Black one night. Latino another night. And white another night. There was no mixture of anything. Yet, we all were in the same boat young GBLTQs, really not bogged down with race as we were our sexuality.This isn’t to say that this isn’t a national problem because if you talk to just about anyone anywhere there is a cry over the same problem. It’s just here in the south where it is more on the basis of skin color rather than overall associations.So as far as dialogue in the black and white gay community over this family spat, we are still so segregated here in Atlanta, in the south that this joint discussion en masse that the article somewhat suggests is still a long ways off.