Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (119475)	12/26/2000 9:30:58 AM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Tough noogies African-Americans are well aware of your attitude and others like you. That is why Gore received 93% of the African-American vote.

To: jlallen who wrote (119475)	12/26/2000 9:40:27 AM
From: Mr. Whist	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

For those who are fond of "The Map" and election statistics, this is an interesting story. Especially interesting is that outside of the South, Gore carried 71% of the electoral votes. Headline: One nation, divisible, with niches for all By Peter Bart, Daily Variety Editor-in-Chief HOLLYWOOD (Variety) - Everyone would like to forget the excruciating presidential election. Now that we're about to anoint our new president, however -- the ``accidental president,'' as the Economist calls him -- we'd all do well to take a final glimpse at the numbers, and here's why: The returns reveal a nation divided, but the division is more cultural than it is political-- a phenomenon that holds serious implications for showbiz. Indeed, given the regionalism, if not tribalism, gripping the U.S., some strategic re-thinking about the nature of TV and film fare seems overdue. Here are the facts that the election put on display: - Three-fifths of city-dwellers voted for Al Gore, while three-fifths of the rustics voted for George W. Bush. - Gore won the coasts while Bush won the middle of the country plus every Southern state. Gore carried 71% of the electoral votes outside the South. - Men preferred Bush by 11%, while women favored Gore by 12%. - Singles backed Gore by 23% while married voters were in Bush's camp by 8%. - Bush won fewer than one in 10 black votes. - Three-fifths of gun-owners backed Bush while the same proportion of non gun-owners favored Gore. - Bush won the majority of those who attended church at least once a month and 79% of whites who attended church once a week or more. ``There is no majority in this country; there are two deeply divided blocs,'' Morris Florina, a Stanford political science professor, told Ronald Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times. For those charged with the responsibility of coming up with hit TV shows or blockbuster movies, the conclusions are intriguing. This is not a nation that is coalescing in terms of tastes or values, but rather one that is pulling further apart, which helps explain why network programmers find it increasingly difficult to come up with an across-the-board hit shows and why the niche-marketers of cable continue to gain ground. Across our pop culture there are clearly enormous opportunities for black or Latino entertainment, for urban comedy aimed at singles or for other niche programming. On the other hand, the hix in the sticks will increasingly nix those pics that offend their heartland values. The over-riding question is this: Should the stix have veto power over the coasts? Given the fact that two nations hover under one flag, both must be tolerant of the other's tastes and proclivities. Clearly this sort of cross-cultural tolerance will not exist if Lynne Cheney or her ilk assume moral leadership of a new Bush regime. The multinational corporations that rule show business will have to use their economic heft to resist pressure for censorship. Thanks to our two-party system, a culturally divided nation remains viable politically. This is in contrast to a country like Israel, whose political structure gives the Orthodox minority a disproportionate say in policy formation -- a dilemma that may ultimately immobilize that nation socially and politically. There were times in the past when U.S. studios and networks found it much easier to command a vast ``habit audience'' that encompassed coastal dwellers as well as the ``fly-over'' country. Hollywood studios in the '30s and '40s could pull in two-thirds of the population for a mega-hit like ``Gone With the Wind.'' The networks in the '60s and '70s exercised similar reach. Political leaders like Roosevelt and Eisenhower also displayed a remarkable ability to overcome the constraints of regionalism and command broad followings. All the signals of the new millennium, however, point to a growing intensity in terms of cultural divides. It isn't just that people in Los Angeles or New York think differently from the proverbial hayseed in Iowa, it's also that each seems to feel more passionately protective about his position. Given the facts, should most movies cost $100 million to produce and market or should more attention be turned toward the niche audiences? Is the blockbuster mentality an anachronism? The signals from the election provide a reminder that the new millennium may nurture a new era of the rich niche. Reuters/Variety REUTERS