Audio: FCC's Diversity Czar: 'White People' Need to be Forced to 'Step Down' 'So Someone Else Can Have Power'

NewsBusters.org | Media Research Center
One Giant Censorship Step Down For Personkind

Mark Lloyd is the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)'s Chief Diversity Officer, a.k.a. the Diversity Czar. And he has in a recently discovered bit of archive audio goodness detailed his rather disturbing perspective on race, power and the American system.

(Audio located below the fold, courtesy of Breitbart.tv and Naked Emperor News)

This is of course in addition to Lloyd's rather disturbing perspective on the First Amendment.

"It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.

"[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance."

And Lloyd's rather disturbing perspective on Venezuelan Communist dictator Hugo Chavez's "incredible...democratic revolution." To go with Lloyd's bizarre admiration for the thuggishly fascistic manner in which "Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country."

We have said repeatedly that Lloyd is a man myopically focused on race. What is revealed here is more than just that. Listening to excerpts of his offerings at a May 2005 Conference on Media Reform: Racial Justice reveals a man that finds great fault with our nation's power structure - as he defines and sees it. And in his racially-warped, finite pie worldview, too many white people sit alone in the too few spots atop the heap. They're "good white people," mind you, but ...

This... there's nothing more difficult than this. Because we have really, truly good white people in important positions. And the fact of the matter is that there are a limited number of those positions. And unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions we will not change the problem.

We're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power.

So white people, good though they may be, must "step down so" "more people of color, gays" and "other people" "can have power." And thereby "change the problem" of whites running the show.

So who is "in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power?" Why, Lloyd is.

Lloyd now sits astride the FCC, which regulates and oversees a very finite world indeed. That being the radio dial, and the limited number of broadcast licenses that can be issued.

As Lloyd has said repeatedly if not exhaustively in writing, he thinks too few white people hold too many of this finite resource. And he has designed (in his 2006 book Prologue to a Farce) and co-authored (the 2007 Center for American Progress report "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio") a fee, fine and regulatory nightmare to effect a reduction in the number of the licenses they hold so that they may be redistributed to "more people of color, gays" and "other people."

This is how Lloyd wishes to "change the problem." This is his definition of "media diversity."

The tape also contains audio from a July 2007 interview Lloyd did on the very liberal Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR)'s CounterSpin radio show, where he had this to say about the so-called "Fairness" Doctrine.

(Which - we will say for the umpteenth time - we KNOW he does not wish to reimpose. Members of the media and the Left [pardon the redundancy] have repeatedly inaccurately reported that we have said he does, so as to ignore our very legitimate concerns regarding Lloyd's plans for "media diversity" and "localism" enforcement.)

What we're really saying is that the Fairness Doctrine's not enough. And that having a sort of over-arching rule that says broadcasters ought to be "fair" or ought to provide issues important to communities and that they ought to do it in a fair and balanced way is simply enough. Unless you put some teeth into that and put some hard, structural rules in place that are going to result in fairness.

So in other words, as stifling, as "chilling" as the mis-named "Fairness" Doctrine was when enforced, it fell and falls way short of Lloyd's censorship intentions. Hence his book and report, the "hard structural rules" he wants to put in place to wring his definition of "fairness" out of the system.

On the tape, Lloyd has an additional gem.

The conversation about how we communicate with each other despite being aware of the clear impressions that I know that I make in rooms that I walk into, when people hear my voice, is a challenge. How much do I express the... I think really pretty obvious complaints of black Americans in rooms full of whites....

There are few things I think more frightening in the American mind than dark skinned black men. Here I am.

We told you he was myopically fixated on race.

I can think of a great number of things far more frightening than dark skinned black men. Government censorship - imposed by anyone of any color - leaps to this American mind.

The more we learn of Lloyd and his views, the more clear it becomes he has no business holding any gig at the FCC. He should forthwith join Communist "Truther" Van Jones as an ex-Administration official.

----------------------------------------------

The tape's transcript en toto:

Conference on Media Reform: Racial Justice
May 2005

During the Clinton Administration, largely because of Congress who was then very concerned about affirmative action and believed that - although affirmative action largely benefited white women - that affirmative action was largely viewed as something that was benefiting blacks. Not necessarily any of the other racial groups (his laughter) but blacks. And that blacks had gotten enough and it was time to do something about this. These affirmative action programs needed to be stopped. We have not made much improvement since we've begun to pull back (sic) from those things in the mid 1990s.

The conversation about how we communicate with each other despite being aware of the clear impressions that I know that I make in rooms that I walk into, when people hear my voice, is a challenge. How much do I express the... I think really pretty obvious complaints of black Americans in rooms full of whites.

This... there's nothing more difficult than this. Because we have really, truly good white people in important positions. And the fact of the matter is that there are a limited number of those positions. And unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions we will not change the problem. We're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power.

There are few things I think more frightening in the American mind than dark skinned black men. Here I am.

Fairness and Accuracy In Media's CounterSpin Radio
July 2007

What we're really saying is that the Fairness Doctrine's not enough. And that having a sort of over-arching rule that says broadcasters ought to be fair or ought to provide issues important to communities and that they ought to do it in a fair and balanced way is simply enough. Unless you put some teeth into that and put some hard, structural rules in place that are going to result in fairness.