Mediaboss Marketing

Its a complicated time to be a Black entrepreneur. Some Black founders in recent years have created formidable startups with towering valuations. But there are still shockingly few large VC-backed startups with Black leaders, and recent months chaos in the venture capital market has taken a disproportionate toll on their companieswiping out diversity gains in fundraising.

On the heels of the Black Lives Matter movement, Black entrepreneurs raised record amounts of venture funding. In the second quarter of last year, they took in $866 millionaccording to Crunchbase data, almost double the previous years US total.But in the second quarter of this year, Black-founded companies raised just $324 million, a 63% drop. Meanwhile, the decline in the VC industry as a whole was not nearly as stark: PitchBook data shows that overall VC funding in the US fell by just 23% in the same period.

Here is the original post:
Black Unicorns Are Rare in Tech and the Downturn Could Make It Worse - Bloomberg

Posted on: August 25, 2022; Updated on: August 25, 2022By Craig Brandhorst, craigb1@mailbox.sc.edu, 803-777-3681

The History of American College Football: Institutional Policy, Culture, and Reform, edited by Christian Anderson and Amber Falluca, examines the role of the popular American sport on college campuses from its 19th century roots to its contemporary cultural dominance. Anderson is an associate professor in the College of Educations Department of Educational Leadership and Policies. Falluca is associate director at the Center for Integrative and Experiential Learning and an instructor who teaches a course on intercollegiate athletics and higher education. The two also co-curated a companion exhibit at the universitys Museum of Education at Wardlaw College.

The book begins with your chapter, Christian, looking back at the 100th anniversary of college football or whats generally agreed upon as the 100th anniversary, 1969 and most of the subsequent chapters also focus on that first 100 years. Why that inflection point?

Christian: College football made a lot out of the 100th anniversary. They had a centennial game between Rutgers and Princeton, who played what is generally considered the first college football game in 1869. They had a nationwide homecoming queen. Then they had the Game of the Century between Texas and Arkansas. ABC Sports got them to change the schedule because they anticipated that these two teams would be undefeated at the end of the season, and they were. President Nixon was in the stands and awarded Texas a plaque to name them national champions. Thats one part. Its also just how it fell out. The chapters all happened to fall within that first 100 years, except for the chapter about the NCAA versus Board of Regents decision in 1984. But even that didnt just pop up out of nowhere. The events of the previous 30 years shaped that decision.

You also emphasize mythmaking. You write the mythology looms larger than life in college football and argue that we need to understand the function and purposes of those myths. What is that function on our campuses or in the larger culture?

Christian: Were always trying to make meaning out of our lives and football just seems to fit that niche by helping us make sense of who we are and who we arent. We all seem to give over part of our identity to our football team in the fall. If your school is 12-0, or 10-2 or 6-6, it affects your mood and your campus mood and your communitys mood. Basketball is huge, baseball is huge, they all have their own rhythms, but theres just something about football.

Politics and history also run throughout. And some of it is eye-opening. One chapter explores the relationship between football, masculinity and the Lost Cause in the South following the Civil War.

Amber: When I read that chapter in draft form, I kept asking myself, How did I not know these facts already? One example is the name Ole Miss for the University of Mississippi. Thats how its commonly referred to. On their uniforms, on the helmets, it still says Ole Miss, and you think nothing of it. Then you learn the history, that the nickname originated with the school yearbook. Then when you unpack that, you learn that the yearbook was a reference to the slave masters wife or mistress.

So we have this sport where the student athletes are largely African-American males. Its no question in Division I, particularly within the Power Five conferences. Theyre members of the team, representing their school, but at the end of the day theyre wearing this emblem. Thats a fascinating societal puzzle, especially today. Given all that has happened with Black Lives Matter, why has that not come to bear yet? Or will it come to bear?

We mentioned the NCAA earlier. The second-to-last chapter is about Board of Regents versus the NCAA, the 1984 Supreme Court case that opened the floodgates to the commercialization of college sports.

Amber: The 1984 case speaks to this opportunistic piece of college football, with television. Who controls the revenue? Who will not only reap the rewards from the monetization, but in essence, who will have the power and influence as a result? With the NCAA prevailing, it really set an additional course I wont even say new course, because there was momentum already.

Theres even an anecdote about the rule change forbidding the dangerous flying wedge formation, how the NCAA perpetuated its own mythology on the matter as you write, Christian, to assert their indispensability. Their timeline was wrong, they overstated their role, but whatever. They asserted their indispensability, and they havent lost it.

Christian: Well, let me tie this back to the 1984 case. Byron White, the Supreme Court associate justice, had been a football player himself. In dissenting against the majority decision, he talks about the history of intercollegiate sports. He says, look, were getting far afield from the educational value. When we talk about student athletes, were really moving into something that more closely resembles professional sports. Most likely, even if they had ruled differently in 1984, we would have ended up somewhere close to where we are now. The forces were too big.But that ruling really sped things up.

We started with the 100th anniversary of college football. We just passed the 150th. Theres a lot of debate about those salaries, the big budgets, and the sport continues to evolve. If there were a sequel, what are the chapters?

Amber: I think what well see with some of the emerging legislation is the student athletes are the drivers. You cant ignore it. So I think well see implications of Image and Likeness (NIL), good and bad. It gives a good opening for student athletes to finally say, Youre going to market me, Im going to get a piece of the pie. And I think thats great. But one thing Im curious about is the dynamic that creates within a team structure in a sport like football. Are there the haves and the have nots? And how does that play out on the field? Does it influence how the coach interacts with the players or how they recruit student athletes?

And how about you, Christian?

Christian: You know, the origins of college football were students playing students, setting it up and organizing it. It was very student-run, almost intramural except that it was intercollegiate. It wasnt us playing a pickup game on the Horseshoe. It was us challenging Clemson, or, in the early days, even the YMCA and high schools. I mean, you look at some of those early schedules and its bonkers who they were playing.

But then faculty got involved in trying to oversee it, and some were even coaches. Then you saw the administrative take over. Faculty still had a role, but their role diminished. Now were almost coming full circle. Well never have student control like in the earliest days, but theres more student influence, like Amber was saying. So I think that if you were to write the 50-plus years since 1969, you could devote half of the book just to the student athlete. In fact, the term student athlete would be chapter one.

Banner image: University of South Carolina football team, 1898, Garnet & Black yearbook. Photo provided by University Libraries.

Share this Story! Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Topics: Faculty, Research, History, College of Education

See the article here:
Big game on campus - UofSC News & Events - University of South Carolina

By M.D. Kittle

MADISON On the anniversary of the August 2020 riots that devastated Kenosha, Republican gubernatorial candidate Tim Michels campaign is out with a new social media ad hammering Gov. Tony Evers on his handling of the destructive demonstrations.

The ad, titled No Regrets, opens with a clip of a mask-wearing Evers telling reporters that his administration had filled every request for assistance as the rioters like the fires they set raged out of control.

Evers is caught in a lie, as the video includes audio of a newscaster reporting that Kenosha County officials were frustrated after their request to deploy 1,500 National Guard members wasnt fulfilled.

Our county is under attack. Our businesses are under attack. Our homes are under attack. Our local law enforcement agencies need additional support to help bring civility back to our community, the Kenosha County Board of Supervisors urgently wrote to the governor.

Scores of businesses, government buildings, and residential properties were damaged or destroyed in the Black Lives Matter riots, causing more than $50 million in damage.

An email obtained by Empower Wisconsin shows a staff member from U.S. Sen. Ron Johnsons office effectively telling Evers top aide to wake up and smell the smoke.

Maggie our office have received numerous calls from folks in Kenosha pleading for help, wrote Julie Leschke, Johnsons deputy chief of staff to Maggie Gau, Evers chief of staff, in a frantic email sent at 8 a.m. on Aug. 26 Theyre really scared and reporting that police are standing down and letting the rioters destroy and take over.

Leschke asked the same question Kenosha city and county officials had been asking for three days.

Will you be talking about steps the governor will be taking? Will he accept the Presidents offer to help? the Johnson staffer wrote.

As has been well documented, the governor was slow to deploy the National Guard, and he failed to provide adequate support when he eventually consented. And Evers initially rejected federal law enforcement assistance from then-President Donald Trump in what clearly was an act of political pettiness.

I did turn down the bringing in the Homeland Security, Evers says in a clip in the Michels ad.

The campaign video is filled with scenes of the chaos from those nightmarish days, including vehicles on fire at a car dealership beneath a Black Lives Matter sign.

I feel confident that we met our obligations, Evers says in the video. I would not change anything we did. I have no regrets.

The Michels ad ends by urging voters to, Have no regrets on November 8th. Fire Tony Evers.

Evers campaign did not return a call seeking comment.

Watch the video here.

Original post:
Michels ad hits Evers on Kenosha riots - Empower Wisconsin

Coventry High School leaders forced a science teacher to remove two wall hangings deemed political, including a Black Lives Matter sign, from her classroom before the start of the school year.

Coventry Local Schools Superintendent George Fisk said he and the high school principal told the teacher the signs needed to come down because they were political and did not reflect all sides of an issue.

Fisk said he could not describe in detail the second wall hanging, which was a kind of tapestry with several symbols or expressions he deemed political.

The leaders discovered the signs in the teacher's classroom during a walk-through of the building with three school board members on Aug. 10. Fisk said no students were present and the board members were not involved in the conversation to remove the signs. While the removal of the signs was not discussed at a board meeting Wednesday, Board President Chris Davis noted he and board Vice President Josh Hostetler were not present for the walk-through.

Fisk said the signs were not appropriate for a science classroom because teachers have to remain neutral on politics. Any political signage or discussion must show both sides, he said.

But the principal, the superintendent and teacher failed to identify what the "other side" of "Black Lives Matter" would be, Fisk said.

"We all struggled with that," Fisk said in an interview Wednesday night. "Obviously the opposite side of Black Lives Matter would be something hateful."

Still, he said, the principal was within his rights as the building leader to tell the teacher to take down the signs.

The Beacon Journal has not confirmed the identity of the teacher and has not spoken with her. Fisk said she took down the signs and was not disciplined.

Dozens of teachers around the country have been asked to take down Black Lives Matter signs or LGBTQ Pride flags in their classrooms over the last several years, according to a report from Education Week, while other schools have allowed them, furthering the debate about their nature as either political symbols or gestures of support for students and acknowledgments of the realities of their lives.

The debate is happening along with a broader conversation in Ohio about the role of schools in providing students with a full understanding of history and its ramifications today, specifically as that history pertains to race, or whether that crosses the line into politics or lessons that should be learned at home. Conservative critics have labeled many attempts at teaching history or providing diverse literature as examples of school districts of "indoctrinating" students with liberal beliefs around racial and LGBTQ issues.

Some districts, like Akron Public Schools, have pushed ahead full force with building a curriculum around diversity, equity and inclusion with little consideration of possible political blowback, while still sticking to the state standards and expecting teachers not to push any political agenda. Some districts have tried to walk a line of neutrality, while others have passed resolutions banning anti-racist teachings.

Political discussions are welcome, Fisk said, in a government or history class, but still, teachers have to be neutral and show all sides of an issue.

"I agree that we need to remain neutral on political issues," Fisk said, noting the school's job was to "educate" and not "alienate" students.

He said he would hope all the district's 1,600 student district know they are loved and thought of as whole people without the need to hang a sign.

"I think we do a great job of honoring all of our students," he said. The school district is made up of about 87% white students.

When asked whether a student would be allowed to wear a Black Lives Matter T-shirt, Fisk said "it would depend on the disruption it made to the building."

Cynthia Peeples, the founding director of Honesty For Ohio Education, said focusing on the reaction of others to a message instead of the issues raised by a message itself is "prioritizing the feelings of the white majority."

Deeming a Black Lives Matter sign "political" does the same, she said.

"We see it as a human statement, not as a political statement," Peeples said.

Schools, she said, should be a place where people with differences can meet each other and talk about those differences. To believe schools should be insulated from that is to speak from a point of privilege, she said. Black students, she noted, "dont have the privilege of separating themselves from the Black Lives Matter movement."

"We feel that educators, staff and students should be able to fully express their support and belief in the dignity and humanity and civil rights of all cultures and communities and populations," Peeples said. "And thats non-negotiable."

Contact education reporter Jennifer Pignolet at jpignolet@thebeaconjournal.com, at 330-996-3216 or on Twitter @JenPignolet.

See more here:
Coventry High School teacher forced to remove Black Lives Matter sign from classroom - Akron Beacon Journal

[co-author: Taylor Washington ]*

Q: Have any courts addressed a companys ability to regulate the type of masks that employees wear at work?

A: At the height of the pandemic and after the death of George Floyd in June 2020, many employers grappled with whether they could and should regulate the type of face masks worn in the workplace. The appellate courts for the First and Third circuits recently addressed this issue, reaching different conclusions. The First Circuit ruled that an employer is permitted to discipline employees for wearing Black Lives Matter (BLM) face masks in the workplace in violation of its dress code. In a Third Circuit decision, the court enjoined the employer from enforcing a dress code policy, banning employees from wearing BLM face coverings. The differences in outcome can be attributed mainly to the fact that the employer in the First Circuit case was a private employer, and the employer in the Third Circuit case was a public employer.

First Circuit Decision

Employees sued a private supermarket, claiming that the company discriminated against them under Title VII when it disciplined employees, both Black and white, for wearing BLM face masks.

The supermarkets dress code policy prohibits employees from wearing clothing that advertises noncompany-related messages, slogans, and logos. Before the pandemic, the policy largely was unenforced. That is, many employees had previously worn clothing that bore the logos of sports teams and other political/social messages without being disciplined. After the death of George Floyd in June 2020, some employees wore BLM masks at work as a part of a larger movement to demand better treatment of Black employees.

It was only after employees began wearing face masks with BLM messages that the supermarket began to enforce the dress policy prohibiting noncompany-related messages on clothing, disciplining workers who refused to remove their masks. Those employees sued, claiming the markets enforcement of its dress code policy violated Title VIIs prohibition against race discrimination and retaliation.

The district court ruled that the employees failed to state a Title VII discrimination claim because the dress code was applied consistently regardless of an employees race. Likewise, the court held that the plaintiffs did not state a claim for retaliation because, while they claimed to wear the BLM face masks to support Black employees and racism in general, they could not point to an unlawful employment practice of the supermarket under Title VII.

The First Circuit affirmed the district court opinion on somewhat different grounds. According to the appellate court, the fact that both Black and non-Black employees were disciplined for wearing BLM masks did not undercut the discrimination claim. As the court stated: If an employer discriminates both against Black employees based on their race and non-Black employees based on their status as non-Black people associating with Black people, that employer doubles rather than eliminates Title VII liability. The court concluded, however, that the supermarket had an obvious alternative explanation for prohibiting the masks other than the plaintiffs allegation that it was targeting employees because of their race the supermarket wanted to prohibit the mass display of a controversial message in its stores by its employees. The court also found that the plaintiffs retaliation claim failed because there was no causation between the supermarket continuing to enforce its dress code policy and the employees wearing of masks to protest that discipline.

Interestingly, the court noted that because the supermarket was a private employer, the employees could not assert a claim based on the First Amendment.

Third Circuit Decision

Analyzing a public employers policy on First Amendment grounds, the Third Circuit recently reached a different result. In that case, employees of a public transportation company alleged that their employer violated their First Amendment rights by implementing a dress code that restricted employees from wearing BLM masks. In July 2020, the company expanded its ban on employees wearing political/social protest buttons to include face masks. Notably, the political/social protest button policy had not been enforced previously when employees wore buttons supporting local and national political campaigns. In September 2020, the company revised the dress code policy further to detail what masks were proper to wear at work. The policy prohibited employees from wearing masks with any visible logos (besides the company or union logo), images, texts, etc.

Both the company and the employees union moved for a preliminary injunction. The district court granted a preliminary injunction, preventing the company from enforcing its mask ban, and the company appealed. The Third Circuit affirmed the district court opinion, finding that the transportation company was unlikely to succeed on the merits, and the union was likely to succeed on the merits.

First, the court noted that speech by government employees receives less protection than public speech. To be protected, the employees must speak as citizens and not as part of their official duties, and they must speak on matters of public concern. The court found that these two threshold requirements had been met here. The court next looked to whether the employer could show that the companys interest in promoting the efficiency in the public services it performs was outweighed by the employees interest as citizens in commenting on matters of public concern. The court found that the companys argument failed because the masks bore messages relating to matters of public concern on which the employees had a strong interest in commenting, while the company could demonstrate only a minimal risk that the employees masks would create a workplace disruption. Of importance to the court was the fact that the company had not enforced its prior ban on buttons, stating social and political causes and the employees conduct in wearing such buttons did not disrupt operations.

Key Takeaways

For private employers that wish to limit employee messaging on attire at work, it is important for companies to draft policies that do not differentiate between different types of messaging and to enforce those policies equally regardless of race or any other protected category. Public employers must give consideration to First Amendment free speech concerns and ensure that their dress codes are narrowly tailored to real harm.

* a 2022 summer associate with Troutman Pepper, is a co-author of this blog post. Taylor is not admitted to practice law in any jurisdiction.

Here is the original post:
BLM Messaging on Face Masks in the Workplace - JD Supra