That's all fine although I don't think the analogy between messaging a human rights issue and a product marketing is comparable. But if as you say nobody is taking the stand that we don't need any action, I will ask again - what is GW's action plan besides messaging?

 

BC, I am sure you find this bewildering because I don't fit into the false little construct you and others have for all conservatives nor am I easily bought off with virtue signaling. And there folks you have a prime example of everything that is wrong with America and why progress becomes elusive. .

The Smith Center is probably the most high-profile, visible place on GW's campus, putting the BLM logo on the court will be viewed by wide/sometimes national audiences on TV as 22nd and F wrote, and by those who attend the games in person(also remember that high school games are played at Smith Center). Is there any other place or area on GW's campus that will bring more outside people/eyes than the Smith Center? Of course, the BLM logo isn't going to instantly solve the racial injustices but the symbolism is very important when you consider the current state of the country. I agree with BC and Gwmayhem, putting the logo on the court is a small step in the right direction and it will maintain awareness!!

22ndandF wrote:

Dr Mike wrote:

Well, let me add something. If GW was serious then the BLM signage would be prominently displayed in multiple locations including all academic buildings, Rice Hall, Student Union, etc.

By singular placing the BLM signage on the court in the Smith Center sends the message that GW sees this as an athletic matter and only patrons and visitors to the Smith Center are brought awareness. 

While I recognize the importance of sport and society, when a message of this importance is concentrated in a singular location (Smith Center) it sends a clear message that the university (GW) actually does not understand BLM.

Dr. Mike, I tend to think you may be right, but could it be that this is just the beginning of a broader effort by GW to support BLM? I recall a thread on this board that spoke to the University considering changing the name of the Marvin Center.  So maybe the logo on the court is not just an isolated attempt to pacify a small group of people.  It will also be seen by a wider audience on television.  Believe me, I know this might just be window dressing, but the hopeful part of me thinks maybe there's something bigger going on.  

To me if GW was really interested in a broader move they would have announced a comprehensive plan to address BLM of which the court logo would be but one aspect. To modify Gwmayhem's example, its like they marketed the Coca-Cola logo but don't have much or any product to sell. Other than statements and symbolic gestures, can anyone point to any recent actions that GW has taken to date that would improve hiring, expand educational opportunities at GW, create additional courses and programs examining this issue? Maybe they have and I missed it.. Everyone keeps harping on awareness. Awareness suggests people aren't aware. Again, I challenge anyone here to show me who isn't aware of the issue (which is different than who doesn't agree). The real question is when does existing awareness create enough critical mass that translates into action? That happens when real initiatives are developed and implemented. Not to be flip, but the GW court logo isn't saving any lives, generating any justice or equality or preventing any abuses, The idea that someone at home or at a game will see the logo and go "Gee I never considered the issue" is a very low probability event. So the only awareness that is being created is a crass  marketing ploy so GW can get off on the cheap. I guess institutions virtue signal as well as individuals in this age of social media and traditional media. I can hear it now ... "we support BLM see we put this nice logo on our court."

BC wrote:

GWrising, so we know you don't like the BLM signage, please tell us what you would like GW to do in addition to a BLM on the court?  
 
I would like GW to give out at least 100 free rides to deserving DMV persons of color.  Invest in medical research to see why persons of color seem so susceptible  to Covid-19.  Set up a Law center with perhaps Georgetown, AU and Howard to pursue cases against police brutality.  Those would be further steps in the right direction.  

How about these for starters ...

1. Foster Hiring Practice at all Levels of the University that seek and identify candidates of color for all positions - a better Rooney Rule.
2. Develop opportunities and mentorship programs to enable employees of color to progress into the upper realms of GW management 
3. Develop a Minority Entrepreneurship Program where minority owned start-up businesses can get assistance (much like a legal aid clinic)
4. Offer more scholarship opportunities for citizens of the District.
5. Develop and implement through GW Hospital free or very low cost wellness programs to assist citizens in minority communities to improve their health. These would focus on diet, exercise and other health issues.
6. Host dialogues, forums and programs on appropriate police reforms and other equality/social justice issues  bringing together all relevant stakeholders.
7. Invest in real estate opportunities in areas of the District that could use an infusion of capital to restore the neighborhood. Perhaps become a partner in housing developments.
8. Support and finance student-based programs whereby students can act as big brother/big sisters, tutors, mentors to minors in the community.

If GW was serious, any or all of these would make a great place to start.

Let's also add that GW is conducting its sixth annual Diversity Summit this week (virtually of course).  While this may not have the action plan that GWRising is seeking, it does convey the importance GW places on educating those interested in learning more about the subject.

https://www.gwhatchet.com/2020/11/10/annual-diversity-summit-to-feature-more-than-two-dozen-virtual-events-this-week/

GWRising wrote:

FWIW, GW's placement of BLM on the court is in a place where it won't be easily seen on television. Seems to suggest to me even more that this was a token gesture because if you really wanted it seen you'd place it prominently on the court or on the baseline. So those clamoring for awareness might wonder why it was placed where it was.

GWRising, thank you for writing about this. FWIW, I thought the BLM logo location was the result of excellent planning.  I saw it often and it made my entire family feel great, as we watched the scrimmage together.  I like that the BLM logo is placed where our team's bench will be located.  That will get it on TV even more as the cameras focus on our bench activity.  Additionally, being by our bench will inspire our players and the season ticketholders.  I feel GW should be congratulated.  If they change anything about the location, I'd suggest leaving it where it is AND putting the BLM logo on the opposite end of the same side of the floor.  That will get BLM even more TV exposure and will let the opposing team know that, on this extremely important issue, GW leads the way. 

GWRising,  I hope you have a great weekend, and Raise High.

Gwmayhem wrote:

GWRising, you seem to be implying (tongue-in-cheek) that anyone who sees awareness as a benefit should be lobbying that the arena be renamed the Black Lives Matter Center.  Nobody here has suggested that as long as BLM appears on the court, every step should be taken to maximize awareness.  We don't need to hear the Black Lives Matter starting lineups or be subjected to the Black Lives Matter dance contest.

The fact that it appears on the court at all is simply a gesture designed to help maintain awareness on a very small level.  Broadcasters are likely to mention it, writers are likely to include it in an article, or perhaps write an article solely about this.  When the current Washington landmarks began appearing on the court, the school received some favorable publicity.  (And, when the scoreboard came crashing down, far less favorable publicity.)

This discussion really has little to do with where the words are positioned on the court and more to do with your beliefs that: a) maintaining awareness of the cause is somehow not legitimate and/or b) selecting this cause to put on the court somehow undermines or penalizes other worthwhile causes or at the very least, opens the door toward GW having to have to support all social and charitable causes, which would be nice but isn't reality.

It is admittedly hard to comprehend what your strenuous objections towards BLM on the court are based on.  I mean, why should BLM on the court be considered either a bad thing to do or the wrong thing to do? 

The points I am making are multi-layered and not so much objections to the logo as cautions (you could put BLM 100 times on the court and I wouldn't care if there was real change behind it):

1. Fostering awareness without corresponding action is not a serious undertaking for an academic institution.
2. Even if you did believe in awareness as very important, you wouldn't place the logo where you did - see NBA for example.
3. BLM is a serious issue that has less to do with lack of awareness and much more to do with inaction or failed policies.
4. My main objection to this is that inequality continues to fester because we allow token gestures and slogans that make us think we are doing something rather than real and serious action to rule the day. I believe that this is largely a phenomena of social media and narcissism (virtue signaling). 
5. To illustrate that most people aren't serious about this ... funny how everyone here comments on my concerns (not objection) about the logo but not one comment about eight action items I posted above which I promise would do more good for this issue than 100 logos.

Again, I get it ... the logo as 22nd and F says makes people feel good. To that I say "great" but it isn't going to do anything to fix the systemic issues. To me, marketing comes after you have a product. We have no product as has been evidenced time and time again over the years at GW - both in hiring practices, investment in communities, etc.. What's the old saying ... you can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all of the time.

So if you want, you and others can declare victory at GW because they placed a logo on a basketball court and call it a day. But I promise you the average black person in DC isn't too concerned about BLM logos on basketball courts - they are way more concerned with things that GW can and should do something about that affect everyday lives - jobs, education, medical and housing. How do I know this? Because I interact with this community regularly and have listened frequently in addition to seeing what my eyes tell me (I didn't just pull those 8 items out of my ass). 
 

Gwmayhem wrote:

GWRising, no comments on your eight action items because nobody is arguing against any of this.  

I didn't just mean comments against, I meant comments period. Like "those are some ideas we should move forward with" or "what about this idea in addition or in place of"? No discussion period when we have everyone weighing in on the logo for days makes you go hmm.

GWRising wrote:

Gwmayhem wrote:

GWRising, no comments on your eight action items because nobody is arguing against any of this.  

I didn't just mean comments against, I meant comments period. Like "those are some ideas we should move forward with" or "what about this idea in addition or in place of"? No discussion period when we have everyone weighing in on the logo for days makes you go hmm.

GWRising, without intending to diminish the BLM logo or the move to change the name of the Marvin Center, I feel many of your ideas are excellent.  I appreciate that fact that you've given the subject serious consideration and support it in certain ways. 

Last edited by 22ndandF (11/16/2020 5:19 pm)