Cultural Appropriation as Masked Racism: Humor, Hip-Hop and The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon

Cultural Appropriation as Masked Racism: Humor, Hip-Hop and The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon

David F. Potter

North Park University

Diversity Colloquy

08 April 2015

Cultural Appropriation as Masked Racism

1

Masked Racism

Cultural exchanges within popular media outlets and entertainment sources in the United States

provide an insightful view of the approach of American society to racial discourse and embrace of

– or resistance to – cultural diversity. These cultural exchanges oftentimes rely on comedy as a

vehicle through which to express underlying ideologies, in both direct and implicit manners. As

overt prejudice and cultural insensitivity is commonly unwelcome in public discourse, these

ideologies most frequently use overt methods through which to manifest themselves – a process I

refer to as masked racism.

Masked racism in the entertainment industry can be seen evidently in popular late-night talk

shows. Dominated by white male hosts, these programs rely on racialized humor – a process of

using cultural difference as a source of comedy – as a means of seemingly displaying progressive

social views while attempting to cater to a broad public audience. This approach is effective, in

part, as it appeals to its prominent demographic, that of majority culture white viewers.

Specifically, The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon (TTSSJF), the topic of this research, provides

several examples for the integration of masked racism in popular entertainment.

Hosted by a white male, TTSSJF employs the backing of a renowned Hip Hop group, The Roots, of

which the core majority are black members. While The Roots occupy a prominent position as the

show’s house band and are, at times, included in sketches, they are oftentimes used as secondary

contributors. Perhaps the most notable re-occurrence of this trend is in the History of Rap

performance by Jimmy Fallon and Justin Timberlake – a segment in which the two white

performers educate the audience on the development of black Hip-Hop music while The Roots

provide a backing soundtrack and otherwise do not participate. This example of cultural

appropriation, when analyzed alongside underlying ideologies, is problematic for a number of


2

reasons.

Using theories of post-racialism, color-blind ideology, critical race theory, and humor psychology,

while drawing parallels to the history of minstrelsy and the counterhegemonic development of Hip

Hop, this research identifies evidence of masked racism in examples of racialized humor and

cultural appropriation within TTSSJF.

Research Methodology

Research for this topic was conducted in three primary phases, data collection; literature review;

and a final analysis. The initial phase of data collection consisted of identifying several reoccurring

segments in which Hip Hop music played a prominent role and was used for comedic effect in the

show. As many of the identified segments are longstanding and continued comedy bits predate

TTSSJF, this data includes sources from Jimmy Fallon’s previous tenure as the host of Late Night

With Jimmy Fallon, as well as his current role as the host of The Tonight Show. The most

prominent reoccurring segments included the following: The History of Rap with Jimmy Fallon and

Justin Timberlake; The Ragtime Gals, ragtime versions of popular Hip Hop songs frequently led by

a white male celebrity guest; Lip Sync Battles, in which celebrity guests competitively lip sync to

pre-selected song tracks from a variety of musical genres; remixes of Brian Williams performing

iconic rap songs; Broadway Versions of Hip Hop Songs, in which celebrity guests rearrange Hip

Hop music in a Broadway style; and lastly, Black Simon and Garfunkel, in which members of The

Roots perform pop songs in a style reminiscent of Simon and Garfunkel. Once identified, these

segments were viewed multiple times in order to sufficiently identify racialized cultural exchanges

and themes of cultural appropriation.

Sources for the literature review phase of this research were obtained after viewing data from the


3

TTSSJF and identifying prominent themes. To sufficiently analyze cultural exchanges in the

material, critical race theory and psychology of humor were used as a framework from which to

understand the topic. Review of the history of Hip Hop and minstrelsy, as well as theories of color-

blind ideology and post-racialism served to enhance the examination of cultural appropriation and

its significance. The final phase of research consisted of reviewing segments from TTSSJF and using

previous scholarship sources to identify grounded theory parallels in the data.

The following provides a review of the two prominent themes informing masked racism in

instances of humor and cultural appropriation. While providing a description of cultural

ideologies, this portion also offers critiques of those ideologies. Additionally, an overview of

critical race theory provides a framework from which to engage the topic of this research.

Ideologies of Colorblindness and Postracialism

Color-blind ideology is the belief that removal of race consciousness from public discourse and

psyche will result in an elevation of societal equity. The ideal formation of this ideology is in the

construction of a future society in which individuals do not see race, and thus do not account for

racial characteristics or factors within relationship or community with one another. At its present

state, colorblindness is effectively a process that seeks the erasure of awareness to racial difference

and instead embraces seemingly unifying similarities.

Historically, colorblindness is rooted in the early twentieth century judicial system. (Lopez 2011,

809) Initially, race-based law decisions were argued to be contrary to the intent of the constitution

and colorblindness was subsequently heralded as a means to progress beyond racial segregation

legalized through the landmark Plessey v. Ferguson Supreme Court case. The rational for this

argument being that the “separate but equal” precedent relied upon racial distinctions – removal


4

of the validity of those distinctions would inherently result in the deconstruction of racial

subordination. After lack of success in creating racial equality, this embrace of colorblindness was

reversed in the 1960’s when civil rights lawyers stressed the necessity of “race-consciousness

remedies to achieve integration and substantive equality.” (Lopez 2011, 810) Following this

reversal, colorblindness was also embraced as an argument by those in opposition to forced

integration – recognizing that the erasure of racial distinctions would also result in the elimination

of expectation of race-based integration. As colorblindness has shifted from its primary position in

the court system to greater influence in education and other public institutions, it has evolved into

a form of cultural ideology.

Eduardo Bonilla-Silva provides a helpful framework for understanding the central forms from

which colorblindness operates, those being: abstract liberalism; cultural racism; minimization of

race; and naturalization. (Bonilla-Silva 2013) These frames of colorblindness serve as

“unacknowledged, contextual standpoints that provide the intellectual (and moral) building blocks

whites use to explain racial matters.” (Dietrich and Bonilla-Silva 2011, 192) Through the employ

of abstract liberalism, an illusive reality is created through the use of “abstract and de-

contextualized” liberal economic and political language. This reality permits those of majority

culture to think of themselves as progressive in their opinions toward race matters, while

simultaneously opposing progressive action and remaining shielded from present discriminatory

practices within society – such as segregation within education and residential policies as well as

implicitly biased hiring and policing patterns. The presumption within this frame is that because

perceivable evidence of inequality does not exist within one’s own (privileged) social reality, it

also must not exist elsewhere. Cultural racism goes a step further than abstract liberalism in that it

sees and acknowledges racial inequality but rationalizes its existence through a projection of

inferior cultural practices on the group in question. Individuals within these groups are simply a


5

product of their dysfunctional cultural environment. This frame again isolates itself from systemic

realities, denies institutionalized inequality, and focuses on individual merit within an implicitly

biased Eurocentric system of values. Similarly, minimization of race makes no connection between

the socioeconomic reality of certain racial groups and a continued existence of racism. While

recognizing that racism existed in the past and may have some contribution to the present

challenges facing these groups, this frame is incapable of seeing racism perpetuated in current

situations because it simply no longer exists. Thus, current challenges presented to these groups

can be overcome with effort and determination and any claims of racial discrimination are merely

excuses for lack of achievement. Lastly, naturalization reinforces colorblindness as a frame “that

allows whites to explain away racial phenomena by suggesting they are natural occurrences…”

(Bonilla-Silva 2013, 28) This reasoning presumes that segregation exists because groups of similar

backgrounds, cultures and preferences naturally gravitate towards one another. Employing this

view requires a sort of mental gymnastics on the part of the individual employing it as it identifies

racial difference, yet ultimately affirms colorblind “nonracialism” through the suggestion that, as

Bonilla-Silva elaborates, “preferences are almost biologically driven and typical of all groups in

society, preferences for primary associations with members of ones race are rationalized as

nonracial because ‘they (racial minorities) do it too.’”

Advocates for colorblindness believe in its ability to ultimately create a more just and equitable

society. However, the erasure of race distinctions has little to no direct effect on the reality of

racialized social stratification. Removal of conscious race-based discrimination does not address

the imbalanced reality of power structures. Instead, it merely serves to maintain the unconscious

status quo through application of a quick-fix over matters of prejudice and inequality while

simultaneously ignoring the deeper contextual roots of highly adaptable and ever evolving

systemic structures. At the very founding of the United States a precedent of white supremacy was


6

formed and the continuance of the societal status quo simply operates as an extension of that

supremacy. Perhaps the most problematic effect of color-blind ideology is its function as a “shield”

in which the status quo is isolated from historical context and protected under the guise of counter

racism. (Lopez 2011, 815) Lopez summarizes the shifting trend of race awareness to colorblind

ideology in the following, “Under the semiotics of colorblindness, only open references to skin

color or the use of explicitly derogatory racial epithets count as racism. In contrast, alarmism about

the cultural or behavioral deficiencies of minorities ostensibly bears no relation to racism and

xenophobia.” (Lopez 2011, 816) At relatively minor levels this racial unawareness and colorblind

minimization of character qualities can lead to insensitivity through acts of cultural appropriation,

and at more detrimental levels can result in racialized mass incarceration and the reproduction of

hegemonic Eurocentric cultural values and power structures (i.e. white supremacy).

Functioning in seeming conjunction with colorblindness, postracialism is a comparatively new

development in which racism is similarly denied, manipulated, and masked. In short, this belief

claims that American society is no longer race-based and its citizens have moved beyond the past

constraints and restrictions of racial distinctions. Many scholars identify the presidential election of

Barack Obama as the pinnacle of the post-racial era, as this belief frequently cites his election as

evidence of postracialism. (Dietrich and Bonilla-Silva 2011) (Rossing 2012) (Thornton 2011)

(Lopez 2011) As described by Rossing, the historical nature of President Obama’s election was

commonly used in public discourse “as a symbol of racial transcendence as postelection headlines

declared the dawn of a postracial era.” (2012) This rhetoric often takes a prominent place in

political defenses against progressive initiatives informed by consciousness to racial discrimination

and inequality.

Postracialism, as offered by Lopez, “reduces racism to individual, unreconstructed bigotry. It


7

rejects the argument that racism also describes structural practices, deeply entrenched cultural

beliefs among whites, or political efforts to mobilize the electorate to vote its racial fears.” (2011)

In essentially erasing the lasting influence of historical inequality, this mindset offers no challenge

to the structural reality sustaining racial injustice. This erasure of history and its present day

consequences also absolves personal and societal responsibility for deconstructing any continued

reality of racial discrimination. If racism is identified within this context, it does not function as a

reflection upon the broader societal reality but rather as mere prejudice within an individual.

The implications of postracialist tendency of thrusting prejudice onto “unreconstructed”

individuals while denying its larger reality are vastly detrimental. For example, in the event of an

institutional representative held publicly accountable for prejudiced views and discriminatory

actions, the institution itself is protected in the identification of and distancing from the offending

individual. By condemning the views and actions of the person in question, institutions create a

scapegoat on which to project any evidence of racism while safeguarding its own reputation. This

pattern denies any collective responsibility for instilling racism in the individual or reinforcing the

systemic nature of racism. The result being that once these scapegoats are disciplined, fired, or

otherwise dissociated from, the singular source of racism is expunged. These performative sorts of

incidents both relieve public discomfort with overt prejudice and protect a positive perception of

the implicated institution. Through their shifting of the focus of public attention these incidents

reinforce the view of racism as a non-systemic reality.

Critical Race Theory: A Framework for Identification

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is the application of a race-based lens to critical theory. The framework

of CRT is important as it serves as a constructive approach to identifying and understanding the

aforementioned ideologies. While there is great complexity within the discipline of CRT and it


8

maintains multiple forms, it can be simplified as a critical examination of the intersection and

influence of race within the construction of society and culture. Evolving from its origin in law,

CRT has expanded into inclusion in a number of diverse disciplines, including “education, cultural

studies, English, sociology, comparative literature, political science, history, and anthropology.”

(Delgado and Stefancic 2012, xviii)

Delgado and Stefanic offer a description of the CRT movement as “a collection of activists and

scholars interested in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power.”

(2012, 3) This interest is central within CRT’s believe that racism is a core facet of public

structures, such as legal institutions, cultural values and the collective unconscious psyche.

Distinguished from other academic disciplines, CRT is bent towards activism in that “It tries not

only to understand our social situation but to change it; it sets out not only to ascertain how

society organizes itself along racial lines and hierarchies but to transform it for the better.” (2012,

7) The following, as offered by Delgado and Stefanic, are core tenets of CRT: normal science;

interest convergence; social construction; differential racialization; intersectionality and

antiessentialism; and the voice of color thesis. (2012, 9-10) The following is a brief overview of

each of these tenets.

When used within CRT, normal science refers to the ordinariness of racism within society. Far

from an acceptance to the rule, incidents of racism are a common, everyday experience for people

of color. Racism is the normative reality, not a collection of outlying and disconnected

experiences. Because normal science is contrary to a mainstream understanding of racism, it is

difficult to identify common experiences of racism. Rather, blatant acts of discrimination are more

commonly identified while incidents of seeming insignificance to the majority culture go

unnoticed. However, because racism is woven into the fabric of society it manifests in nearly


9

everything produced from within that society regardless of whether it is acknowledged or not.

These common experiences go unnoticed and unaddressed in society because they reinforce the

interests of racism’s social benefactors, known in CRT as interest convergence. Put simply, they

continue to exist because racism functions as a source of social benefit for persons of privilege.

There exists little incentive to identify the normative nature of racism as in doing so the extraction

of privilege and benefits from white people would be compromised. The identification of social

inequality creates a certain level of accountability for its public acknowledgement and eradication.

In the absence of this accountability, the privileges created through racism can continue to be

received with little to no concession of consciousness.

The theme of social construction speaks to the relational formation of race definitions and

understanding. Within this tenet, race is understood as an evolving and environmentally

responsive concept. In its reliance on biological and genetic myths, race is constructed in

opposition to scientific truth. Characteristics of those sharing a common origin are exacerbated to

create hierarchal categories of people groups. The construction of race groups is subjectively

motivated from one’s social position and the desire to elevate the value of their own group. The

fluid nature of race contributes to the understanding of differential racialization. Within this tenet

of CRT, the responsive nature of racial categories is related to the current demands of the labor

market. White majority society shifts its definition of racialized minority groups and their

respective value in order to effectively accommodate labor needs.

Intersectionality and anti-essentialism both refer to the non-singular complexity of individual

identity. Within the categories of – amongst innumerable others – gender, sex, orientation,

socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, and religion, there are infinite distinguishing factors from

one person to the next. Thus, each person has a unique identity that cannot be simplified to any


10

common narrative constructed to define each member with similar origins.

Lastly, CRT holds an overarching theme of a unique voice of color. As Delgado and Stefanic admit,

this final theme coexists in an “uneasy tension” with anti-essentialism. While each is of a unique

identity and experience, persons of color are equipped to more effectively communicate the reality

of oppression due to the aforementioned qualities of normative science. Because of the normative

reality of racism and the more common prevalence of its affect on minority groups, persons of

color are more adapt in identifying its presence and articulating its influence and consequences.

These six core tenets of CRT provide a lens through which to identify instances of masked racism.

The framework provided through the previous work of critical race theorists contributes an

important understanding for ways in which racism exists in mainstream culture. Further, these

aforementioned tenets are helpful in the examination of how racism within racialized humor is

often overlooked and normalized.

Humor, Implicit Bias, and Social Influence

Humor contributes dynamically to the creation of culture and society. The perspective provided

within Psychology of Humor Studies further enhances the approach to understanding the social

effects of comedy. Of the three broad categories of humor’s psychological functions – cognitive

and social benefits, social communication and influence, and tension relief – this section will

primarily focus on the ways in which humor is used in means of social communication and

influence. (Martin 2007, 15) In the distinguishable characteristics created in the construction of in-

groups and out-groups, racialized humor as entertainment subversively reinforces the existence of

systemic racism in society. The following provides context for this discipline – as provided by Rod

A. Martin:


11

Humor can be a method of enhancing social cohesion within an in-group, but it can also be a way of excluding individuals from an out-group. It can be a means of reducing but also reinforcing status differences among people, expressing agreement and sociability but also disagreement and aggression, facilitating cooperation as well as resistance, and strengthening solidarity and connectedness or undermining power and status. (2007, 5)

Humor is thus a powerful form of communication and brings with it a complexity of social

dynamics. Because humor generally occurs within group settings it also has a strong ability to

impart social values onto others. As an expression of a response to humor, laughter is

“fundamentally a social behavior.” (Martin 2007, 9) Further, humor is oftentimes equally created

in its presentation as in its reception. The individual presenting humor must understand the

meaning of words, the social context, and the response its message will invoke in the audience. As

the receiving party of humor, an individual must also understanding the meaning of words to some

degree as well as there intended meaning. In absorbing the information presented, the audience

member(s) actively participate in the creation or aversion of humor after discerning its appeal and

showing an appropriate response based on their personal reaction. In effective instances, humor

playfully manipulates the meaning of words and their connection to the surrounding social

context. Through this creative exchange of information, humor acts as a means to effectively

communicate social messages and values.

The enjoyment of and participation in humor is an essential characteristic defining human

existence. (Martin 2007, 4) The purpose of laughter as a response to humor does not function

merely to communicate to others of one’s own playful state, but to induce a similar state in others.

(Martin 2007, 10) Laughter’s contagious quality elicits a similar response in others. In this process

social bonds are created between members of a group but cognoscente recognition of the implied

message may not actualize. In this environment, behavior can be easily motivated through the

reinforcement of desirable behavior and the punishment of undesirable behavior. Ultimately, in its


12

use of laughter inducing humor, comedy creatively and subtly sends messages to others while also

creating a desired sense of community and identity in relation to the delivered message. Thus,

laughter is both effective in enhancing the “social cohesion within an in-group” as well as in

“excluding individuals from an out group.” (Martin 2007, 5)

While laughter can be contagious, our perception of what is funny is also influenced by each

person’s implicit bias. These biases create the foundation upon which our reaction to humor

depends, this foundation, as provided by Robert Lynch, “functions as an honest signal which

serves to identify other individuals with similar knowledge, attitude and preferences.” The ability

to understand this signal depends on whether one identifies with the social context from which the

signal is being projected. For those outside of the shared context the signal is simply lost and

individuals are left feeling out of the joke. Whether explicitly expressed or not, the message

conveyed is intended for a key audience – effectively reinforcing the construction of an exlusive

status associated with that group. (Lynch 2010, 142)

Implicit biases reflect internalized preferences. Our reaction to humor depends on how well the

presented comedy aligns with our own bias. The stronger the connection between our own

preferences and the message being communicated to us the stronger our reaction. For this reason,

the success of comedy depends upon the comedian’s ability to introduce depictions that will

resonate with the audience’s bias and in turn the audience’s ability to sense the comparison –

either consciously or subconsciously. (Lynch 2010, 142) Because we respond more prominently to

humor that caters to our implicit preferences, a significant response of laughter can be indicative

of an individual’s implicit biases. A significant response from an individual person or a collective

audience indicates shared beliefs and values with the presenter of the humor source. (Lynch 2010,

146)


13

Additionally, the effect of group participation in the humorous message affects our own

participation and level of response. In a study conducted on social influences and laughter

responses to humor, Platow et al. found that individuals respond to humor more significantly and

more positively when they know other members of their shared group also find the routine or

message funny. Knowing that other members with shared values and identity find something

humorous grants permission for the individual to also respond with laughter. The following

provides a summary of the study’s findings:

In our view, the laughter of our participants, in response to an audience’s laughter, was not an automatic, thoughtless process. Instead, our results suggest that people actively attend to who is laughing, and laugh a lot themselves only when they have heard fellow in-group members laughing. (Platow, et al. 2005, 548)

Group membership provides a framework from which individuals understand society. Our sense

of identity and affiliation with others provides us with an easily accessible reference point from

which to receive and interpret information. When responding to humor we can quickly determine

our own response based on the whether the source of humor is found within the group context. If

so, humorous response is acceptable and does not threaten our own status within the group.

However, if the source of humor is located outside of group affiliation a process of discerning an

acceptable response is necessary. (Platow, et al. 2005, 542) The presence, or absence, of in-group

laughter is an influential social factor on how an individual understands and responds to

humorous stimulus.

Minstrelsy, Hip Hop, and Media Stereotypes

From blackface minstrel shows to Hip Hop music to numerous news outlets, American culture has

a longstanding fascination with black culture and experience. During the nineteenth century,

minstrel shows were prolific – a common attraction well captured in Mark Twain’s well known


14

love for the form. Today, the extensive influence of Hip Hop music and culture continues to

expand. As made evident in numerous predominantly white social settings purchasing the music

from Hip Hop artists and adopting its culture. This fascination extends to the broadcasting trends

of most television news stations. Given the longstanding nature of this pattern, the proceeding

overview of minstrelsy, Hip Hop, and media stereotypes of African Americans serves to show,

albeit briefly, the underlying significance of how white performers and audiences interact with

black art and culture.

As provided by Cole and Davis, “Blackface minstrelsy was the first American mass culture.” (2013,

8) However, this culture is emblematic of an ugly and enduring history of white hegemony.

Initially developed in the early to mid nineteenth century, minstrel shows provided a space in

which white performers created and performed characterizations of African slaves and their lives

on plantations. Because the negative perception of being subjected to entertainment by a black

person of seeming social inferiority, blackface was developed as a means for white performers to

more effectively portray black characters. In the depiction of slaves as simplistically inferior

beings, these performers and their audiences actively reinforced a notion of white supremacy.

While simultaneously constructing and receiving the social benefits of societal dominance, white

audiences were provided with a means to access the illusive and intriguing reality of the black

experience. Through this access, white people extracted from the cultural expressions of black

slaves to obtain control of cultural expression and its value. In its production of racial

characterizations, as described by Eric Lott:

The minstrel show indeed was based on a profound white investment in black culture which occasionally surfaced in certain less malign ways. This produced a popular form in which racial insult was twinned with racial envy, moments of domination with moments of liberation, counterfeit with currency…comprising a peculiarly American structure of racial feeling. This structure began to take the form of a complex dialectic: an unsteady but continual oscillation between fascination with ‘blackness’ and fearful ridicule of it… (Lott 1991, 227)


15

Blackface minstrelsy was a strategy that erected and preserved racial boundaries and successfully

shaped a romanticized majority perception of black Americans as lazy, hyper sexualized, prone to

criminal behavior, and happily subjugated to inferior labor. (Cole and Davis 2013, 10)

While the origins of early blackface minstrel shows may be traced to genuine experiences within

antebellum slavery, they quickly evolved into an entirely foreign reinvention of black American

life. This depiction of black Americans served not to accurately depict the reality of plantation

slavery, but rather to quench the seemingly insatiable demands of white audiences. Far from

serving as a social critique of white dominance, the intent of minstrelsy in its appropriation of

black artistry was the preservation of black subjugation through white hegemony. In referencing a

quotation from Frederick Douglas, Lott summarizes this process of economic and cultural

extraction through incentivized cultural appropriation:

Blackface imitators were ‘the filthy scum of white society, who have stolen from us a complexion denied to them by nature, in which to make money, and pander to the corrupt taste of their white fellow citizens’ – a denunciation that nicely captures minstrelsy’s further commodification of an already enslaved, non-citizen people. (Lott 1991, 223)

While overwhelmingly racist in their characterizations, blackface minstrelsy revealed a genuine,

yet distanced, interest of white people in the culture of black Americans. This interest continues in

the evolution of Hip Hop and its acceptance into the mainstream music industry – and further in

its cooptation by white performers. Hip Hop as an art form and cultural expression is deeply

rooted in a “counterhegemonic spirit.” (Nocella II 2013) Understanding the significance of this

spirit is essential to identifying instances of masked racism in forms of misguided cultural

appropriation by members of majority culture.

Hip Hop is a means of communication, an expression of social experience and cultural identity.

While frequently and simplistically misunderstood as a celebration of destructive patterns of social


16

interaction, Daniel White Hodge provides the following descriptions of Hip Hop as a transcendent

culture of social belonging for marginalized social groups:

Hip Hop is an urban subculture that seeks to express lifestyle, attitude or theology. Rejecting the dominant culture, it seeks to increase social consciousness, cultural awareness and racial pride. Rap music functions as the vehicle by which the cultural messages of Hip Hop are sent, and the industry by which Hip Hop culture is funded and propagated. (Hodge 2010, 38)

Hip Hop offers its adherents community and a voice as well as…a safe, productive alternative to the streets… Hip Hop transcends age, political status, socioeconomic status, social standings, even gender, offering an alternative source of identity and social status for young people in a community that had abandoned them. (Hodge 2010, 42)

Hip Hop developed in response to the oppressive forces of racial injustice, police brutality,

community disinvestment, and discriminatory subjugation. The unique voice constructed in this

expression was one formed by profound suffering. (Hodge 2010, 75-103) At its core, Hip Hop

exists to bring light to the existence of injustice and in the exposure of truth, to confront and

transform social stratification. While this culture exemplifies “resistance, critique, and education,”

Nocella II argues that Hip Hop is regularly stigmatized as violent and misogynistic as a result of its

corporatization by white majority culture. Incentivized by economic profit, this process of

corporatization is an extension of “messages of the dominant white, capitalist, colonized, U.S.

imperialist culture that promotes patriarchy, sexism, and homophobia via all forms of media…”

(2013, 214) While the increasing contributions of white performers in Hip Hop are not inherently

detrimental to the continuation of the culture, as many view Hip Hop as an intersectional

expression of the disadvantaged urban experience, its cooptation by performers isolated from an

informed embrace of its spirit is greatly problematic. When severed from it cultural legacy, Hip

Hop embraced as an art form by members of majority culture is merely a process of ensuring the

prevalence of a hegemonic Eurocentricity.

Many stereotypes of African Americans formed through racist characterizations of blackface


17

minstrel shows are further depicted in mainstream discourse surrounding Hip Hop music and

culture. Further, these stereotypes manifest in a diverse setting of televised portrayals. Conducted

studies show that when individuals were exposed to African Americans portrayals on television

they received them as accurate depictions. (Ford 1997, 266) Thomas Ford conducted a study in

which viewers watched neutral, yet stereotypical, portrayals of African American characters from a

popular comedy television show. Afterwards, subjects read a description of either a white student

or an African-American student accused of assaulting another student. After reading the

description of the incident they were then asked to rate the guilt of the accused student. The results

of the study found that “seemingly harmless comical television portrayals of social out-groups in

stereotypical roles” has a potentially powerful influence on how we respond to members of the

specified out-group. This process of social priming effectively reveals a tendency to project

internalized representations of African American characterizations onto social interactions with

black persons. Discriminatory action is cultivated by the exposure to negative racial stereotypes.

Further, Ford suggests that humor contributes powerfully in an individual’s tolerance of prejudice

ideology against member of out-groups. Through this process of prolonged exposure to subtle yet

harmful media portrayals, white people are equipped to maintain an ethos of inclusion and non-

prejudice towards Africans Americans while simultaneously “possessing (perhaps unconsciously)

negative sentiments towards African Americans.” (Ford 1997, 272) Ultimately, the result of this

dichotomy is a rejection of overt discrimination towards blacks while allowing internalized racism

to silently exist unacknowledged. The use of humor in the delivery of disparaging messages

alleviates the viewer from accountability to challenge racist stereotypes, and instead normalizes

the characterization through a softened and light-hearted delivery.

The preceding review of cultural ideologies, racialized humor, and the historical legacy of white

appropriation of black culture will serve as the framework for the subsequent section. In the


18

following, an analysis of the TTSSJF is provided through the identification of masked racism in

several reoccurring segments of cultural appropriation.

Jimmy Fallon and Cultural (Mis)appropriation

The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon frequently relies on appropriation of black culture as a

source of humor and entertainment. The shows embrace of Hip Hop music is evident even to a

passive viewer. While the performers within these segments may not be acting in a conscious and

intentionally racist manner, given the context of the show and its audience these instances are

potentially detrimental. The presentation of Hip Hop by highly privileged white performers

through a humorous channel is problematic in and of itself. The addition of an ill informed

audience increases the significance of the messaging created in this form of entertainment. This act

is beyond simply appropriating elements of another culture and as such it would be more effective

to refer to the process as misappropriation – given its disregard for the meaning of certain cultural

expressions.

Through the erasure of racial difference and continuation of racisms historic legacy, colorblind

and postracial ideologies enable the participation of white performers in forms of black artistry. As

provided in a study conducted of white youth’s cultural appropriation through performance of Hip

Hop, Jason Rodriguez states that “color blind ideology provides whites with the discursive

resources to justify their presence in the scene, and more important, to appropriate hip-hop by

removing the racially coded meanings embedded in the music and replacing them with color-

blind ones.” (Rodriguez 2006, 645) TTSSJF embraces these ideologies in its usage of a nearly all

black house band, The Roots. While the show frequently features Hip Hop, it does so for and from

a Eurocentric interpretation. The Roots are, at times, included in some segments of the show.

However, in those depicting black culture, they are merely relegated to a supportive role while


19

white performers present black culture to a predominantly white audience. Similar to the

development of blackface minstrelsy, this approach presents a characterization of black people

from the perspective of majority white culture. As provided in critical race theory, this approach

minimizes race through the denial of racisms normative nature. Race, while evidently a factor and

the unspoken source of humor, is not viewed as a significant element within the performances. To

seemingly soften the delivery of these routines of misappropriation by white performers, the show

also has developed a bit in which The Roots perform songs by the white folk artists Simon and

Garfunkel. In addition to performing the groups popular songs, The Roots playfully impersonate

Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel as black alternatives – as glaringly noted in the naming of the bit as

Black Simon and Garfunkel.

Whiteness and Social Difference

Whiteness is actively constructed through a performative process. (Lewis 2004) (Richard Delgado

1997) (Banjo 2011) The construct of whiteness relies on differentiation from people of color,

through the creation of social difference whiteness is successfully created and reinforced.

However, because of the shifting nature of race understanding and definition this is a constant

process. An ongoing process of creating whiteness is needed to ensure the maintenance of the

status it provides. Further complicating this reality is the seeming lack of ethnic identity associated

with being a white person. Assimilation demands the denial of cultural identity, and thus strips

distinguishable cultural expression and identity from otherwise ethnic groups as they become

white – leading to the incentivized cooptation of other cultures. As suggested by Rodriguez,

“whiteness seems to provide little substance on which to base identity, and the appropriation of

hip-hop culture forms suggests not that whites want a black identity; rather they want

characteristics of blackness.” (Rodriguez 2006, 646) Obtaining these characteristics enable white


20

people to establish a sense of cultural identity without sacrificing the social privileges of whiteness.

This performative process is fully active in TTSSJF. The performances of cultural misappropriation

fundamentally rely on the trope of white people as stuffy and uptight. In the edited mixes of Brian

Williams rapping, the news anchor is featured singing versions of iconic rap songs such as Baby

Got Back, Bust a Move, Gin & Juice, Rapper’s Delight, Regulate, Rollout (My Business), and

Straight Outta Compton. The selected songs for the remixes feature several repetitive themes, those

of black suave, sexuality, misogyny, violence, marijuana use, and materialism. The humor exists

from the contrast of these themes being projected out of context onto a solemn white news

anchor. The viewer is not expected to think of Brian Williams using explicit language, smoking,

drinking, dancing, or expressing aggression and sexuality. Used as a form of comedy, the implied

message is that black culture is entertaining and not to be taken seriously and that black people

are dangerous and irrational. Inversely, the implication is that whiteness is innocent, composed

and deals only with matters of importance.

This process can be further developed in the “Broadway Versions of Hip Hop” segments. In three

separate editions, Arianna Grande, Anne Hathaway, and Gwyneth Paltrow sing a selection of

popular Hip Hop songs arranged in a Broadway style while Jimmy Fallon accompanies on the

piano. Each segment selects a song that distinctly does not fit common associations with Broadway

performances. Additionally, each performance dramatically ends with an overt emphasis on

explicit language – Grande’s, “this is fucking awesome”; Hathaway’s, “you dirty, bitch ass, Hatha-

hatin’ bitch ass bitch don’t kill my vibe”; and Paltrow’s, “I don’t fuck with you, you little stupid ass

bitch.” The deliberate grand Broadways-esque finish highlighting the most shock provoking lyrics

of the selection relies on the implicit bias of audience members for its comedic factor. The

anticipated bias being that Broadway musicals are harmless and depict white purity, while rap


21

music is socially offensive and indicative of black immorality.

Lastly, the perfomative construction of social difference is evident in the “Ragtime Gals”

performances of popular Hip Hop and R&B music, including It Wasn’t Me, I Wanna Sex You Up,

Sexual Healing, Sexy Back, and Talk Dirty. As the announcer explains in each introduction of this

reoccurring segment, the Ragtime Gals combine four-part barbershop quartette harmony with

some form of music with origins in black culture. With each of these segments the repeated theme

is exclusively referencing sexuality. Again, the comedic effect relies on a common perception of

promiscuously sexualized blackness and innocent purity of whiteness. This same trend can also be

observed in TTSSJF’s Lip Sync Battles, in which celebrities lip sync renditions of popular music –

with white participants commonly misappropriating a selection from a black artist.

Each of these segments relies on social difference as a primary source of humor. In creatively

playing with stereotypical images of positive, or neutral, whiteness and negative blackness, a

strong message of social difference is communicated to the audience. However, while the routines

cannot be isolated from their intentional reliance on racialized characteristics, they do not

acknowledge this social difference. Effectively, these examples humorously minimize the reality of

race and deny its sociopolitical significance. This usage of racialized humor illuminates the

differences between the in-group and out-group and reinforces their continued stratification.

Whitewashed Reinterpretation

The consumption of black cultural forms by white people extends beyond mere enjoyment of their

artistic value to a repurposing of their meaning. (Rodriguez 2006, 650) Described in CRT as

interest convergence, this consumption extracts the value contained within the cultural expression

for the sake of reinforcing ones own privilege but ignores any disadvantaging secondary effects. In


22

this denial of the sociopolitical legacy of Hip Hop music, white people voyeuristically interact

with black culture – accessing taboos but maintaining a clear degree of separation.

Perhaps the most profound example of reinterpretation is a series of performances by Jimmy Fallon

and Justin Timberlake known as the History of Rap. In each performance, the two white

performers rap a chronological selection of iconic Hip Hop songs set to loosely choreographed

dance routines associated with each song. Throughout the series, The Roots provide backing

musical accompaniment but do not actively participate in the routine themselves. Given the well-

respected status of The Roots within Hip Hop, the dominant focus on the two white performers is

peculiar.

At multiple points during the series either Fallon or Timberlake in a dramatic nature seemingly

takes the bit too far. In the History of Rap 2, while rapping the lyrics “I am getting so hot I wanna

take my cloths off” and dancing in a seductive, albeit intentionally comedic manner, Timberlake

pauses as if to acknowledge the absurdity of his evident whiteness contrasting with cultural

stereotypes of black sexuality. Later in the same routine, Fallon follows a similar script except to

display overt aggression. This leads to a theatrical interaction between the two as if to

communicate that, while evidently unacceptable given Fallon’s whiteness, the hostile reaction was

a natural expression of Hip Hop. The shtick continues in History of Rap 3 when Timberlake again

reprimands Fallon for rapping about using an assault rifle, in which the duo pauses to ensure the

irrationality of the comedic message reaches its full effect – that of Jimmy Fallon owning and

potentially using an AK-47. In the History of Rap 5, while aggressively lounging at the camera and

singing “straight outta Compton, crazy mother…” Fallon is cut off by Timberlake before

completing the explicit lyric and the two pause to go over their by now familiar routine.

Timberlake questions the authenticity of Fallon claiming through his rapping that he is from


23

Compton. Again the comedic element rests entirely on the public image of Jimmy Fallon as a

loveable, friendly white person contrasted with the infamous reputation of Compton’s blighted

disinvestment, gang violence and predominant African American population.

A second insightful example is in the introduction to Broadway Versions of Hip Hop, in which the

announcer consistently states, “Ladies and gentlemen, forget everything you know about rap

music. Here to perform Broadway versions of Hip Hop songs, please welcome (guest celebrity).”

Each performance then proceeds through an arrangement of Hip Hop songs set to a Broadway

tune, while Fallon and the guest celebrity exaggerate the silliness of their white characters – in

some instances impersonating black characterizations, as in Anne Hathaway turning away from

the audience, leaning over the piano and popping her hip out after Fallon introduces the next

song, In Da Club.

In each of these examples, race is playfully acknowledged but only inadvertently. Through the

characterizations evident within each performance a semblance to former blackface minstrelsy

subtly exists. In addition to being granted the thrill of breaking cultural taboos, the audience

members are give access into black culture via safe, trustworthy sources. Lastly, the significance of

Hip Hop music exists in its Afrocentricity. As an art form created by black Americans for

expression within their own community contexts, Hip Hop is undeniably from a person of color

perspective – appropriately aligned with critical race theory’s aforementioned tenet of the “unique

voice of color.” Because of the need to continually preserve white dominance of society and

culture, Hip Hop – amongst other black cultural expressions – is coopted and recentered to a

focus on white people. In shifting the focus from a counterhegemonic sociopolitical critique to

harmless entertainment, the message of Hip Hop and its social contribution is belittled and

effectively erased so as to ensure it does not compromise the status quo.


24

Racialized Humor as Masked Racism

The previous examples show in part, ways in which incidents of racialized humor in The Tonight

Show Starring Jimmy Fallon exist as a way of masking systemic racism. Using humor as a means to

initiate exchanges of cultural identity, TTSSJF unconsciously introduces concepts of colorblindness

and postracialism to its audience. While rarely explicitly acknowledging racial difference, the

show relies on characterizations of these common prejudices and perceived differences. In

constructing a strong in-group status through shared cultural identity and the bonding effect of

laughter, the show creates a powerful platform through which to transmit messages affirming

implicit biases and reinforcing white dominance within society.

In the minstrelized reinvention of black culture from a white perspective, TTSSJF commodifys the

cultural art forms of black culture for its own passive entertainment and economic gain. Cultural

misappropriation as comedy functions as a form of cultural control over manifestations of

blackness. Through its own telling of Hip Hop’s history and its shift away from a person of color

voice and onto members of majority white culture, TTSSJF’s portrayal and consumption of

blackness does not serve as a sociopolitical critique of white dominance, but rather as a

celebration of it. As provided by Cole and Davis, the implications of this form of reimagined

minstrelsy “no matter what the white performer’s intention, or willful historicism, reception is over

determined. Not all mimicry is minstrelsy, but racial impersonation – even as drag, homage, and

recognizable “folk” figures – cannot escape a legacy of racist deployments.” (Cole and Davis

2013, 11)

Deconstructing Masked Racism for Transformative Social Change and Future Research

The evidence of cultural appropriation’s role in masking racism extends beyond TTSSJF and has

greater societal influences. The aforementioned examples are merely channels through which


25

ideologies of colorblindness and postracialism are introduced and propagated. However, given the

prominent sixty year presence of The Tonight Show in entertainment media its has developed a

largely influential platform and an iconic status in mainstream American culture. Thus, racialized

messages have the potential to have a widespread and detrimental impact – as well as an equally

positive one. To realize this influential platform as a source of constructive dialogue on race

matters, masked racism must first be deconstructed and replaced with a transformative change

process.

Michelle D. Byng challenges the common assumption that “the social importance of race

identities and the social impact of racism will fade into the past” – as postracislism would suggest.

(2012, 38) As this myth has yet proven to effectively manifest itself, racism must be actively

dismantled in order to ensure its eradication. The resilient and adaptable nature of racism ensures

its ability to continue acclimating itself to passive and ill informed understandings of racism. As

presented by Byng, this transformative approach must account for the multi-dimensional qualities

of racism – meso, micro, and macro societal levels. (2012, 709-710) Thus, to effectively

deconstruct masked racism I provide the following theoretically informed suggestions.

From the Macro level – at which legislation and policy determines the formal definitions of racial

identities – a process of truth telling is essential for legitimizing the significance of race throughout

history and its continued significance today. Ideologies that functionally deny the evidence of

racism in contemporary society are constructed in the absence of a strong legislative platform

affirming the sociopolitical significance of race and acknowledging the complicit nature of society

with regards to how racism creates the very social conditions for its continuation. From the meso

level – at which social discourse and public knowledge is formed through the influence of media

sources – cultural exchanges must exist to present accurate depictions of cultural identity. While


26

the usage of racialized humor can be a form of social critique, it can only be done effectively if

from a place of informed cultural knowledge. Generally, this approach is not constructive when

embraced by a privileged member of majority white culture and should be limited to persons of

color with sufficient ability to communicate the experience of marginalization. (Rossing 2014)

Lastly, from the micro level – from which individuals live daily life and develop lived experiences

– the continuous legacy of racism must be understood and accessed in formation of an individuals

perspective on and response to racialized humor.

This research primarily focused on the TTSSJF’s appropriation of black artistry from an ideology of

colorblindness and postracialism. Future research on this topic should include the following:

diverse minority lens, heteronormativity, and quantitative analysis. First, in narrowing the focus of

this research to Hip Hop appropriation, I chose to focus specifically on racialized humor from

instances in which black culture is either appropriated, minimized, or entirely reinterpreted from a

white lens. There are a number of diverse approaches that could be employed in studying cultural

exchanges within TTSSJF and their function as masked racism. Namely, an examination of Latino

culture would provide a plethora of material to engage. Secondly, in nearly all popular late night

talk shows a straight white male host is selected as the source and defacto definition of

entertainment. An examination of the heteronormative nature of late night talk shows and its effect

on LGBTQ audiences is necessary. Lastly, the incorporation of quantitative data in an analysis of

TTSSJF provides innumerable possibilities. Specifically, a collection and comparison of in-group

and out-group reactions and interpretations of material presented on the show would be

beneficial.

In conclusion, examples of cultural misappropriation are prevalent throughout TTSSJF together

with innumerable U.S. media sources. However, while TTSSJF is a notable source and provides a


27

prolific number of incidents, it is merely a reflection of larger societal prejudices. Given its

longstanding mainstream prominence, masked racism within TTSSJF is significant because its

popularity can effectively be used to gage the proliferation of post-racialism and colorblind

ideologies. Additionally, it serves as a telling measure of general public’s willingness to engage in

a truthful examination of the history and current state of race within the United States. As an

extension of systemic injustice, it is essential that masked racism be identified, named, and

confronted if cultural expression is to be understood and protected and if the hegemonic quality of

whiteness is to be deconstructed and transformed.


28

Bibliography and Works Cited Banjo, Omotayo. "What are You Laughing at? Examining White Identity and Enjoyment of Black

Entertainment." Journal Of Broadcasting & Electronic Media (Broadcast Education Association) 55, no. 2 (April 2011): 137-159.

Barndt, Joseph. Understanding and Dismantling Racism: The Twenty-First Century Challenge to

White America. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007. Barnes, Brendon, Ingrid Palmary, and Kevin Durrheim. "The Denial of Racism: The Role of

Humor, Personal Experience, and Self-Censorship." Journal of Language and Social Psychology (Sage Publications) 20, no. 3 (2001): 321-338.

Bell, Derrick. Faces at the bottom of the well: The permanence of racism. Reprint. Basic Books,

1996. Bingham, Shawn Chandler, and Alexander A. Hernandez. ""Laughing Matters": The Comedian as

Social Observer, Teacher, and Conduit of the Sociological Perspective." Teaching Sociology (American Sociological Association) 37, no. 4 (October 2009): 335-352.

Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial

Inequality in America. 4th. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2013. Byng, Michelle D. "You Can't GEt There from Here: A Socail Process Theory of Racism." Critical

Sociology (Sage Publications) 39, no. 5 (2012): 705-715. Cockrell, Dale. Demons of Disorder: Early Blackface Minsteles and Their World. New York, NY:

Cambridge University Press, 1997. Cole, M. Catherine, and Tracy C. Davis. "Routes of Blackface." TDR: The Drama Review (New

York University) 57, no. 2 (Summer 2013). Cummings, Andre Douglas Pond. "A Furious Kinship: Critical Race Theory and the Hip Hop

Nation." University of Lousiville Law Review 48 (November 2010). Delgado, Richard, and Jean Stefancic. Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. New York, NY: NYU

Press, 2012. Dietrich, David, and Eduardo Bonilla-Silva. "The Sweet Enchantment of Color-Blind Racism in

Obamerica." Amercian Academy of Political and Social Science (Sage Publications) 634 (March 2011): 190-206.

Ford, Thomas E. "Effects of Stereotypical Television Portrayals of African-Americans on Person

Perception." Social Psychology Quarterly (American Sociological Association) 60, no. 3 (September 1997): 266-275.

Goldstein, Jeffrey H., and Paul E. McGhee. The Psychology of Humor: Theoretical Perspectives

and Empirical Issues. Edited by First. Waltham, MA: Academic Press, 1972.


29

Green, Aaryn L. "The Impact of Comedy on Racial and Ethnic Discource." (University of Cincinnati) May 2012.

Guerro, Lisa A., and David J. Leonard. African Americans on Television: Race-ing for Ratings.

Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2013. Hodge, Daniel White. The Soul of Hip Hop: Rims, Timbs and a Cultural Theology. IVP Books,

2010. JBHE Foundation. "Can Hip-Hop Be the New Driving Force behind Increased Racial Integration?"

The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (The JBHE Foundation, Inc) 38 (Winter 2002/2003): 64-67.

Johnson, J. Rosamond. "Why They Call American Music Ragtime." The Black Perspective in Music

(Foundation for Research in the Afro-American Creative Arts) 4, no. 2 (July 1976): 260-264. Lewis, Amanda E. ""What Group?" Studying Whites and Whiteness in the Era of "Color-Blindness"."

Sociological Theory (American Sociological Association) 22, no. 4 (December 2004): 623-646.

Lopez, Ian F. Haney. "Is The "Post" in Post-Racial the Blind in Colorblind?" Cardozo Law Review

32, no. 3 (January 2011): 807-832. Lott, Eric. ""The Seeming Counterfeit": Racial Politics and Early Blackface Minstrelsy." American

Quarterly (The John Hopkins University Press) 43, no. 2 (June 1991): 223-254. Lynch, Robert. "It's Funny Because We Think It's True: Laughter is augmented by implicit

preferences ." Evloution and Human Behavior (Rutgers University), 2010: 141-148. Martin, Rod A. The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Inc,

2007. Mayo, Cris. "Being in on the Joke: Pedagogy, Race, Humor." Philosophy of Education Archive

2008. 2008. http://ojs.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/pes/article/view/1372/122 (accessed December 23, 2014).

Nocella II, Anthony J. "Transforming Justice and Hip Hop Activism in Action." In From Education

to Incarceration: Dismantling the School-to-Prison Pipeline, edited by Anthony J. Nocella II, Priya Parmar and David Stovall, 210-223. New York, NY: Peter Lang, 2013.

Platow, Michael J., et al. ""It's not fuy if they're laughing": Self-categorization, socail influence, and

responses to canned laughter." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (Elsevier) 41 (2005): 542-550.

Richard Delgado, Jean Stefancic, ed. Critical White Studies: Looking Behind the Mirror. Temple

University Press, 1997.


30

Rodriguez, Jason. "Color-Blind Ideology and the Cultural Appropriation of Hip-Hop." Journal of Contemporary Ethnography (Sage Publications) 33, no. 6 (2006): 645-668.

Rossing, Jonathan P. "Critical Race Humor in a Postracial Moment: Richard Pryor's Contemporary

Parrhesia." Howard Journal of Communications 25, no. 1 (February 2014): 16-33. Rossing, Jonathan P. "Deconstructing Postracialism: Humor as a Critical, Cultural Project." Journal

of Communication Inquiry 36, no. 1 (February 2012): 44-61. Schur, Richard L. Parodies of Ownership: Hip-Hop Aesthetics and Intellectual Property Law. The

University of America Press, 2009. Thornton, Davi Johnson. "Psych's Comedi Tale of Black-White Friendship and the Lighthearted

Affect of "Post-Race" America." Critical Studies in Media Communications (Routledge) 28, no. 5 (December 2011): 424-449.

Cultural Appropriation as Masked Racism: Humor, Hip-Hop and The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon

Documents

Transcript of Cultural Appropriation as Masked Racism: Humor, Hip-Hop and The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon