In class, we discussed the issue of Black Confederates and the Civil War. With this came the mass of confused information and made up reports. These made up reports were usually created to slander one side, or build up the reputation of the other. Because of this, the issue of “can we really trust this?” comes up. Back during the Civil War Era, many sources were from newspapers. Articles were written by journalists who claimed to be at the scene of the battle, but may not really have been. A good example was brought up by Professor O’Malley. Fredrick Douglas believed that Black soldiers fought for the confederate army. This is a claim that needs a primary source, which he believe that he had. Unfortunately, his primary source was not to be trusted either. This issue still continues today, especially with the rise in the internet.

Anyone can write a story and claim that they were there. There is no need for fact checking or citing sources, since most people will believe you anyway. Because of this, many people think they can just search an issue or topic and have all of the answers on this. Essentially, they think they have become an expert on the subject when they are not qualified to be one. This apparently upset a lot of scholars and professors, I don’t really blame them. If you worked so hard to be certified in a field of study just to be shot down by someone who read a Wikipedia article, you would be upset too. But there is a more positive way to look at this.

Many of these people are curious to learn, or find out about a particular subject. They show some interest in it, so they decide to look up facts about it. Although they mean well, they may get too cocky and try to become the expert of the subject just by doing multiple google searches. This is the stage where the person needs to be stopped by a real scholar, and told that they will not be able to prove that these articles are actually true. If people are stopped early, and told that they need to use critical thinking, and maybe work with some professionals, this “issue” could be stopped. But is it really and issue? And are some scholars really to be trusted? Especially since we all hold a bias depending on nationality, race, etc. I think that’s the bigger question to be explored.

In this past class, we discussed the Minstrel show, and it’s influence on popular culture in the early 20th century. Although this is a horrible but interesting topic, I would like to explore the idea that the image of the minstrel show hasn’t died out, it has just switched the way it is presented. In class, Professor O’Malley brought up the issue that black face is still alive and well, we just don’t realize it. Many modern artists try to put out a “tough” persona, seemingly how a black person would act. Not all black people act like this, and this type of thinking creates a hurtful stereotype. Media likes to portray black people as thuggish, rough, and almost animalistic, which is not true. I believe that our Professor used the example of 50 cent. He seems so rough and tough, but he usually cleans up and wears a suit, not a dirty old t shirt. This is considered black face because he is putting on a persona. It is not truly how he is, but it is how people think he should be. This is similar to the old show of black face; you dress up in a stereotypical outfit to portray a specific race.

Another issue that could be considered modern day black face is the issue of some white rappers and stealing their culture. Some rappers dress up to act rough and tough, but they can just stop that persona at the end of the day. They take from black culture and use slang that they do not know to perpetuate a stereotype. It’s very weird, and also racist.