Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seems like a contrived question to me. Why so few black physicists, or senators?
Instead of everyone focusing on black omissions, why aren't they asking why so few Asian Americans? Or even women, considering half the population is female?
Just an aside, has anyone else found themselves in a loop of virtual reality, with one very sober-seeming article citing articles and 'papers' on other very 'spectable-looking sites and "journals," all circular and when you drill down, run by phantoms?
I can see why the clueless and inattentive take this disinformat seriously. It's... frightening. It was worrying when Snopes created one (1) faux page to prove a point, ten years ago.
A large collection of critically-acclaimed films (mostly but not exclusively art-house films). Criterion is well known for their DVDs with extensive bonus features which generally include excellent commentary on the film as well as much pertinent historical information. https://www.criterion.com/
A large collection of critically-acclaimed films (mostly but not exclusively art-house films). Criterion is well known for their DVDs with extensive bonus features which generally include excellent commentary on the film as well as much pertinent historical information. https://www.criterion.com/
I was always under the probably incorrect impression that most of the titles in the collection were older, when Black directors were few and far between. But that may be due to my purchase of mostly films from the mid-1930s through 1970 or so.
I was always under the probably incorrect impression that most of the titles in the collection were older, when Black directors were few and far between. But that may be due to my purchase of mostly films from the mid-1930s through 1970 or so.
That's probably part of it. Another part of the issue is that some notable films (from directors of all hues) Criterion can't get the rights to. But I'm sure some (probably unintentional) bias is present as well. Any curated collection depends on its curators to pick out what will be included, and everyone has biases (both conscious and unconscious). Criterion tries to be biased in favor of "good films" (as defined by auteurs and film critics as opposed to the mass market), but that certainly doesn't mean that every worthy film has been included.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
