This year marked 100 years since the founding of Black History Month’s predecessor, Negro History Week, established in 1926 by Carter G. Woodson. A century later, the mission remains the same: not simply to celebrate Black history, but to place it where it has always belonged — at the center of the American story.

As the United States marks 250 years of existence, it is important to remember that Black history has never been a side narrative. It is America’s story.

That is why the colors most associated with the American identity — red, white, and blue — carry a deeper meaning for the descendants of American slavery.

Not symbolically.
Not “in spirit.”

But in blood.
In labor.
In innovation.
In sacrifice.
In receipts.

🔴 Red: The Cost

Red is the color of sacrifice. And when it comes to the American project, no group has paid more consistently into it than the descendants of American slavery.

ADOS paid in blood during slavery.

We paid in blood during the Civil War, when nearly 200,000 Black soldiers and sailors fought to preserve the Union and end the institution that had bound their people in chains. Their service helped redefine both the war and the meaning of American citizenship itself.

As Abraham Lincoln reflected near the end of the war:

“Until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword…”

We paid again during Reconstruction, when the brief expansion of democracy in the South was met with violent backlash.

We paid through the Jim Crow era, when laws and institutions enforced a racial caste system long after emancipation.

We paid again during the Civil Rights Movement, when ordinary citizens risked their livelihoods, freedom, and lives to bring the country closer to its own ideals.

Even today, the receipts remain visible in wealth disparities, gaps in health outcomes, and uneven investment in communities that helped build the nation’s economic foundation.

So when we see the red in the American flag, we do not see abstraction.

We see the cost.

⚪ White: The Line That Was Drawn

White on the American flag traces back through the nation’s British roots — the same red, white, and blue palette carried from the Union Jack into the early identity of the republic. Traditionally, white has been associated with purity or innocence.

But in the American context, white evolved into something far more structural.

Within the ADOS framework, “white” has functioned less as a phenotypical description and more as a designation of normalcy, belonging, and full civic inclusion. It became the default setting of American citizenship — the category against which everyone else was measured.

And ADOS was deliberately placed outside of it.

Not by accident.

By policy.

Through slavery statutes that defined Black people as property.
Through the Naturalization Act of 1790 limiting citizenship to “free white persons.”
Through Black Codes, Jim Crow laws, redlining maps, FHA underwriting standards, and GI Bill exclusions that helped build the American middle class while systematically routing ADOS families around it.

For generations, “white” in America functioned as the legal and economic fast lane — and ADOS was assigned to the shoulder.

Yet even while being structurally excluded from the full benefits of American belonging, ADOS consistently pushed the country to live up to its stated ideals.

We expanded democracy.
We strengthened the Constitution through struggle.
We made the promise of America more real — even when it was least real for us.

So when we examine the white in the flag, we do not just see a virtue.

We see the line that was drawn — and the unfinished work required to erase it.

🔵 Blue: The Backbone

Blue is often said to represent vigilance, perseverance, and justice.

But blue can also represent something even more foundational to the ADOS story: the water itself.

The oceans define America’s borders and helped sustain the nation’s commerce, expansion, and connection to the world. But for ADOS, the water carries a deeper meaning.

It marks the trajectory that brought our ancestors to these shores.

Across the Atlantic, through the brutal machinery of the transatlantic slave trade, generations of Africans were carried into the making of what would become the United States. That violent passage created a new people with a distinct lineage rooted in this land.

Water, after all, is resilient.

It adapts.
It shifts shape.
It flows around obstacles.

But it remains the same substance.

ADOS has done the same.

Across centuries, descendants of American slavery adapted to changing systems — from slavery to Reconstruction, from Jim Crow to the Civil Rights era, mass incarceration, and beyond. Each era demanded resilience, reinvention, and the ability to navigate new structures.

Yet through every transformation, the lineage and the claim remained the same.

And even while navigating these shifting tides, ADOS repeatedly stepped forward to stabilize the nation itself.

ADOS soldiers served in every American war.
ADOS leaders expanded democracy during Reconstruction.
ADOS organizers and citizens strengthened the Constitution through the Civil Rights Movement.

So when we look at the blue in the American flag, we see more than loyalty.

We see the ocean that carried the origins of our American story.

We see resilience.

And we see a people who, like water itself, adapted to every container history placed before them while continuing to shape the nation that rose from these shores.

Conclusion
There’s a reason ADOS people have a complicated relationship with American symbolism: we know how to read it. The cover of the story reads Betsy Ross, but the work beneath it bears the fingerprints of Grace Wisher — much like America itself, where Black labor, sacrifice, and democratic struggle shaped the nation while often being removed from the credit. For many descendants of slavery, the red, white, and blue were not just the colors of a flag, but the colors carried into Galveston when Gordon Granger arrived on Juneteenth to announce that our ancestors were finally free. That is why ADOS does not see red, white, and blue as abstract colors or empty patriotism. We see red as the cost, white as the shifting line of belonging, and blue as both the waters that carried our story and the republic we helped hold together. And because our claim is rooted in lineage, citizenship, and the unfinished debt owed to descendants of slavery, our focus remains fixed on the American promise — not symbolic detours away from it.

As the United States approaches its 250th anniversary, the question is no longer whether ADOS belongs within the American story. History settled that long ago. The real question is whether America is finally prepared to align its symbols with its obligations and deliver justice to the people whose labor, resilience, and struggle helped build the nation itself.

A video circulating widely on social media recently showed a college applicant completing the federal Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and pausing in confusion. After selecting “White” as her race, the form prompted her to choose a more specific category — German, Irish, English, Italian, Polish, French, or “other.”

Her reaction was simple: “When did this start happening?”

While the viral moment sparked curiosity online, it signals the early stages of a broader shift in how demographic data is structured across American institutions — including the workplace. Federal statistical standards that have guided racial data collection for decades are beginning to evolve, and those changes may eventually influence how organizations collect and interpret workforce demographic data.

For HR leaders, understanding this shift early may prove critical.

A Quiet Overhaul of Federal Demographic Data

In March 2024, the OMB Statistical Policy Directive №15 was updated for the first time since 1997. The directive establishes how federal agencies collect and report race and ethnicity data across surveys, administrative records, and compliance systems.

The revised standards introduce several structural changes.

Race and ethnicity are now collected through a single combined question, allowing respondents to select multiple identities simultaneously. The updated framework also introduces a new category — Middle Eastern or North African (MENA) — which had previously been grouped under the broader “White” classification.

Perhaps most notably, the revised directive encourages federal agencies to collect more detailed ancestry or origin information within major racial categories. This means respondents may be asked not only to identify with a broad racial group, but also to specify more detailed national or cultural backgrounds.

Forms such as FAFSA are among the first places where the public is beginning to encounter this shift.

Why the System Is Being Revisited

The racial categories used in most demographic reporting today were largely established during the civil rights era, when policymakers needed broad statistical tools to monitor discrimination in employment, housing, and education.

At the time, these categories served an essential purpose: identifying whether historically marginalized racial groups were being excluded from economic opportunity.

However, the demographic landscape of the United States has changed significantly since those frameworks were developed. Following the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, immigration expanded dramatically from regions including Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa.

As a result, many racial categories now encompass populations with widely different historical backgrounds, migration patterns, and socioeconomic outcomes. The category “Black or African American,” for example, may include descendants of American slavery, Caribbean immigrants, African immigrants, and multiracial individuals identifying as Black.

Similarly, the category “White” includes a wide range of European ancestries that historically have not been distinguished in federal demographic reporting.

This growing diversity within racial categories has prompted policymakers and researchers to reconsider whether existing demographic data frameworks are detailed enough to capture meaningful differences within the modern American population.

Why Disaggregation Is Gaining Attention

Calls for more detailed demographic data are also emerging at the state and regional level.

In Maryland, the population totals approximately 6,180,253 residents, of which roughly 31.7 percent — about 1.9 million people — identify as Black or African American, according to the United States Census Bureau.

Advocacy organizations such as the ADOS Advocacy Foundation have argued that disaggregating this category could provide policymakers with a clearer understanding of how different communities experience economic and social outcomes.

Supporters of disaggregated data suggest that more detailed demographic measurement could help inform targeted policy decisions related to workforce development, economic opportunity, and public health.

“In South Florida, the Black population totals roughly 1.2 million residents, with estimates based on the 2020 American Community Survey suggesting that approximately 800,000 to 850,000 individuals may fall within the ADOS lineage category…”

Similar demographic complexity exists in other regions of the country. In South Florida, the Black population totals roughly 1.2 million residents, with estimates based on the 2020 American Community Survey suggesting that approximately 800,000 to 850,000 individuals may fall within the ADOS lineage category, while the remaining share includes Caribbean and African immigrant communities.

These distinctions illustrate why some policymakers and researchers believe broader racial categories may not fully capture the diversity within modern American populations.

The Practical Reality Inside HR Departments

While federal policy discussions often focus on statistical accuracy, the operational reality inside HR departments can be far more complicated.

Many HR professionals have built their careers working within a relatively stable set of racial categories — White, Black or African American, Asian, Hispanic or Latino, Native American, and Pacific Islander. These classifications are embedded in compliance reporting systems, employee demographic surveys, and workforce diversity analytics.

According to HR practitioners, some organizations — particularly in rural regions — still collect workforce demographic data through paper-based forms rather than fully digitized HR systems.

This reality highlights the scale of change that more detailed demographic reporting could require. Expanding racial and ancestry categories would likely require updates to HR information systems, reporting structures, and internal data management practices.

Many HR professionals acknowledge that an overhaul of demographic data infrastructure may eventually be necessary, but the timeline and feasibility of such changes remain uncertain.

Why Some Employers May Resist the Shift

While policymakers and researchers increasingly support more granular demographic data, many employers may approach these changes cautiously.

Workforce reporting systems across the private sector have been built around the same broad racial categories used in federal statistics for decades. Updating those systems to accommodate more detailed ancestry information could require significant adjustments to HR information systems, compliance reporting tools, and internal data management practices.

For large organizations with sophisticated HR technology platforms, such changes may be manageable. But for smaller companies — particularly those operating in rural regions or industries with limited administrative infrastructure — the transition could be far more complicated.

Cost is another factor. Implementing new reporting frameworks may require investments in software updates, training, and administrative oversight. Some HR professionals worry that regulatory shifts tied to new data standards could increase administrative burdens, particularly for smaller firms already navigating economic uncertainty and industry consolidation.

For these reasons, any major shift in demographic reporting standards will likely involve a gradual adjustment period as employers balance compliance expectations with operational realities.

Preparing HR Departments for What Comes Next

Despite these challenges, demographic data systems are unlikely to remain static. The modernization of federal statistical standards suggests that the way institutions measure race and ethnicity will continue evolving alongside changes in the country’s population.

For HR leaders, preparation may involve evaluating whether existing HR systems can accommodate more flexible demographic categories, monitoring regulatory developments tied to federal reporting frameworks, and ensuring workforce analytics teams are prepared to interpret more detailed identity data if it becomes more widely adopted.

Equally important will be maintaining transparency with employees about how demographic information is collected and used. As questions of identity and ancestry become more nuanced, organizations will need to ensure that demographic data collection remains both respectful of individual self-identification and meaningful for organizational decision-making.

A Viral Moment That Signals a Larger Shift

The FAFSA applicant who paused at the question asking her to identify her European ancestry likely did not realize she was encountering an early sign of a broader transformation in how demographic data is structured in the United States.

What appeared to be an unusual question on a government form is, in fact, a glimpse into the early stages of a larger evolution in the country’s demographic data infrastructure.

For HR professionals, the takeaway is not simply that forms may change. It is that the demographic frameworks shaping workforce reporting — frameworks that have remained relatively stable for decades — may soon begin to evolve.

Organizations that recognize this shift early will be better positioned to navigate the next chapter of workforce demographic data collection.

The 2024 Presidential election marked a pivotal moment in American political history. President-elect Donald Trump secured 312 electoral votes and garnered 77,301,997 popular votes, achieving a margin not seen since George W. Bush’s victory over John Kerry in 2004. In contrast, Vice President Kamala Harris won 226 electoral votes, falling short by 2,284,371 popular votes. Despite Black voters overwhelmingly supporting Harris (86%, according to national exit polls), a notable shift occurred within the Black political sphere that mainstream media largely overlooked. This shift can be attributed to the political awakening sparked by the American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) movement.

“By defining ADOS as individuals descended from U.S. chattel slavery, the movement centers its advocacy on reparations as the sole remedy for centuries of systemic harm. This focus has fundamentally changed political expectations and demands from Black voters.”

Founded by Antonio Moore and Yvette Carnell, President of the ADOS Advocacy Foundation, the ADOS movement has spent years educating Black Americans on the stark economic disparities between them and White Americans. By defining ADOS as individuals descended from U.S. chattel slavery, the movement centers its advocacy on reparations as the sole remedy for centuries of systemic harm. This focus has fundamentally changed political expectations and demands from Black voters. ADOS mainstreamed the reparations discussion during the 2019 Democratic Presidential debates and has since achieved significant milestones, including:

• Forcing Harvard to retract a misleading journal article.
• Training thousands of members to present public comments to the Office of Management and Budget.
• Establishing chapters across the United States to advocate for reparations and a transformative Black agenda.

“The ADOS Effect is not a novel phenomenon. Historically, ADOS has been at the forefront of major political movements, from the Civil War to the Civil Rights era.”

Mainstream media’s failure to recognize this shift demonstrates a lack of understanding or acknowledgment of the ADOS Effect, which is reshaping the political landscape and awakening a new consciousness among Black American voters. The ADOS Effect has pressured candidates like Kamala Harris to develop Black agendas and has popularized the use of lineage-based arguments, a critical factor in the U.S. Supreme Court’s dissent on Affirmative Action.

The ADOS Effect is not a novel phenomenon. Historically, ADOS has been at the forefront of major political movements, from the Civil War to the Civil Rights era. For instance, during Reconstruction, formerly enslaved individuals’ political activism led to the establishment of public education in the South. Similarly, during the Civil Rights Movement, ADOS leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. championed systemic change that fundamentally reshaped American society.

In the modern era, the ADOS Effect has revived this legacy by demanding that lineage-based reparations and policies be prioritized. The Supreme Court’s dissent in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard reflects this influence. Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson emphasized the importance of addressing the unique historical inequities faced by descendants of U.S. chattel slavery, arguing that affirmative action policies should more effectively target these specific harms.

The ADOS movement has shifted from a general focus on racial equality to a more targeted agenda addressing the unique needs of ADOS. This includes challenging the misuse of affirmative action policies, which have often benefited non-ADOS groups at the expense of those descended from American slavery. By focusing on data-driven advocacy and emphasizing the economic realities faced by ADOS, the movement has reshaped the narrative around Black political engagement.

“ADOS has long addressed issues like the misuse of H-1B visas to displace American workers, demonstrating foresight in addressing economic and cultural challenges.”

Beyond the Black community, the ADOS Effect is influencing broader American politics. For instance, recent debates surrounding Indian American Secretary of Commerce Vivek Ramaswamy’s critiques of American culture have highlighted concerns about the erosion of traditional American values. ADOS has long addressed issues like the misuse of H-1B visas to displace American workers, demonstrating foresight in addressing economic and cultural challenges. Similarly, Elon Musk’s commentary on the decline of American innovation underscores broader anxieties about maintaining national identity and economic stability.

And the ADOS Effect was on full display during Kendrick Lamar’s Super Bowl LIX Halftime performance. As the Grammy Award Winner had his dancers draped in red, white, and blue forming the American flag, with legendary actor Samuel L. Jackson dressed as Uncle Sam, in a direct representation of the landscape created by the ADOS movement. He also began “They Not Like Us” by declaring, “40 Acres and A Mule, This is bigger than the music,” which is a reference to reparations and speaks directly to what ADOS is advocating for.

The ADOS Effect defined

“The ultimate goal of the ADOS Effect is to secure reparations and policies that address the systemic inequities faced by descendants of U.S. chattel slavery.”

The ADOS Effect can be defined as the ability to influence an increased understanding of systemic issues through rigorous research, education, and advocacy. This process leads to structured organization and actionable solutions aimed at achieving transformative goals. The movement’s success lies in its ability to galvanize a community around a shared lineage and historical experience, ensuring that ADOS-specific concerns remain central to the political discourse.

“The ADOS Effect is a testament to the resilience and political acumen of a community determined to secure justice and equity.”

The ultimate goal of the ADOS Effect is to secure reparations and policies that address the systemic inequities faced by descendants of U.S. chattel slavery. This includes:

• Supporting the Justice for Generations campaign, an initiative led by the ADOS Advocacy Foundation to fight for reparations. Your donations will fund the creation of a comprehensive ADOS Reparations Bill, designed to address systemic inequities and advance lineage-based justice.
• Enacting federal legislation to provide reparations based on lineage.
• Establishing targeted economic programs to close the racial wealth gap.
• Ensuring that Black Americans’ voices are central in shaping policies that impact their communities.

The ADOS Effect is a testament to the resilience and political acumen of a community determined to secure justice and equity. By shaping the 2024 Presidential election and influencing broader political debates, the movement has proven its ability to drive transformative change. As ADOS continues to push for reparations and a Black agenda, its impact will undoubtedly shape the future of American politics, ensuring that the unique history and contributions of American Descendants of Slavery remain central to the nation’s ongoing quest for justice. To stay up to date on news surrounding ADOS, follow our various social media.

Introduction

Even though Black History Month is drawing to a close, there are still opportunities to create new history. One thing that has become increasingly clear is the role politics play in our society and there is a need to get involved at the legislative level. Internal drivers — deep-seated beliefs, personal experiences, and emotional triggers — are powerful forces that shape our actions and decisions, often motivating individuals to engage in political advocacy.

Films, with their ability to tell compelling stories and evoke strong emotions, can act as catalysts by tapping into these internal drivers, making distant issues feel personal and urgent. A well-crafted documentary or narrative film can expose injustices, highlight underrepresented voices, and create a sense of moral responsibility that pushes viewers beyond passive awareness into active engagement. By seeing real or dramatized struggles unfold on screen, audiences often connect with causes on a visceral level, inspiring them to research, donate, or even organize for change. If you’ve ever felt stirred by a film to take action, you know its power — here are the 7 films we watched that jump started our advocacy:

BOYCOTT (2001)

Boycott (MAX), starring Jeffrey Wright as Martin Luther King Jr., dramatizes the historic Montgomery Bus Boycott, a pivotal moment in the civil rights movement. The film follows King, Rosa Parks, and other activists as they organize a year-long protest against segregation in public transportation, facing threats, arrests, and intense opposition. Through powerful storytelling, it highlights themes of justice, grassroots advocacy, and the power of collective action in challenging systemic racism. Ultimately, Boycott illustrates how everyday individuals, motivated by ethical beliefs and personal motivations, can spark societal transformation through tactical defiance and steadfast determination. Hmm… that rings a bell…

The Five Heartbeats (1991)

The Five Heartbeats (Tubi), directed by and starring Robert Townsend, follows the rise, struggles, and redemption of a fictional 1960s R&B group (loosely based on The Dells) navigating the music industry. As they achieve fame, they face exploitation, racism, and internal conflicts, highlighting the tension between success and staying true to their values. The film explores the entertainment industry’s injustices, from corrupt record executives to systemic barriers for Black artists, while also emphasizing the importance of humility, brotherhood, and using one’s platform for advocacy. Ultimately, The Five Heartbeats is a powerful story about resilience, the price of fame, and the enduring fight for artistic and social justice.

The Meteor Man (1993)

The Meteor Man (Tubi), also starring and directed by Robert Townsend, is a unique superhero film that blends comedy, action, and social commentary. When mild-mannered teacher Jefferson Reed is struck by a meteor, he gains superpowers and decides to use them to protect his crime-ridden neighborhood from the ruthless Golden Lords gang. As a hero, he inspires his community to stand up against violence and injustice, but he also experiences the fickleness of support when people hesitate to fight for themselves. The film emphasizes the power of reading and education, as Reed’s ability to absorb knowledge instantly becomes one of his most valuable weapons. Despite his powers, humility remains central to his journey, reminding audiences that true heroism lies in service, not just strength. Ultimately, The Meteor Man is a socially conscious take on the superhero genre, using entertainment to advocate for justice, community empowerment, and the importance of knowledge in overcoming oppression.

Harlem Nights (1989)

Harlem Nights (Amazon Prime), starring Richard Pryor and Eddie Murphy, is a stylish crime-comedy that explores Black entrepreneurship, resilience, and survival in 1930s Harlem. Pryor’s character, Sugar Ray, and his son Quick (Murphy) run a successful nightclub, navigating the challenges of corrupt law enforcement, the mafia, and internal betrayals. The film highlights the power of community and business ownership, showing how Black entrepreneurs must outsmart their adversaries in a world rigged against them. It also critiques sellouts, those who betray their own for personal gain, while emphasizing the importance of strategy, intelligence, and even literacy in overcoming oppression. Despite its comedic and action-packed nature, Harlem Nights underscores humility and the necessity of advocating for one’s people in the face of systemic injustice. Ultimately, the film blends entertainment with sharp social commentary, celebrating the fight for independence and the ability to turn the tables on those who seek to exploit and destroy Black success.

The Distinguished Gentleman (1992)

The Distinguished Gentleman stars Eddie Murphy as Thomas Jefferson Johnson, a smooth-talking con artist who unexpectedly wins a seat in Congress by exploiting name recognition. Initially entering politics for personal gain, he soon realizes the depth of corruption and how it harms everyday people, pushing him to overcome his ambivalence and fight for real change. With the help of a diverse coalition and key allies, he outsmarts his adversaries, using their own tactics against them to advocate for justice and community uplift. The film highlights the power of reading and knowledge in navigating complex systems while also emphasizing humility as Johnson transforms from a grifter into a true public servant. Through humor and sharp political satire, The Distinguished Gentleman showcases how the right mix of strategy, advocacy, and coalition-building can challenge power and create meaningful change.

The Banker (2020)

The Banker, starring Samuel L. Jackson and Anthony Mackie, is a powerful drama based on the true story of two Black entrepreneurs, Bernard Garrett and Joe Morris, who defy systemic racism to build a real estate and banking empire in the 1960s. Despite doing everything by the book, they still face relentless opposition, forcing them to outsmart their adversaries by hiring a white man as the public face of their business. Their fearless perseverance and strategic coalition-building uplift the Black community by providing access to homeownership and financial independence. However, their success threatens the establishment, leading to legal battles that expose the harsh reality that even when Black excellence follows all the rules, the system still finds ways to punish it. The Banker is a gripping tale of justice, resilience, and the power of allyship in the fight against economic oppression.

The Hateful Eight (2015)

The Hateful Eight (Netflix), directed by Quentin Tarantino, is a tense Western thriller set in post-Civil War America, where a group of strangers, each with their own secrets and prejudices, are trapped in a remote cabin during a blizzard. The film’s climax forces former enemies, including a Black bounty hunter (Samuel L. Jackson’s Major Marquis Warren) and a Confederate-sympathizing sheriff (Walton Goggins’ Chris Mannix), into an uneasy alliance to bring down a manipulative fugitive and her gang. This mirrors the themes in They Were Her Property, which details how white men and women, despite their own power struggles, maintained unity in upholding the institution of slavery when their economic interests were at stake. Similarly, The Hateful Eight suggests that self-preservation and shared interests can temporarily override deep-seated divisions, demonstrating how a common enemy can drive strategic, albeit fragile, coalitions. The brutal ending underscores how these alliances, though necessary, are ultimately built on convenience rather than true reconciliation. The film serves as a stark reflection on America’s history of shifting allegiances and the ways power is negotiated, even among those who fundamentally oppose each other.

Conclusion

Life can often imitate art. We hope this small list of films can provide some inspiration for your advocacy. This curated list of films is designed to spark inspiration and fuel your passion for advocacy. If you still need additional inspiration, feel free to visit www.joinados.com, www.adosfoundation.org, or follow us on our various social media. There is a wealth of information and motivational content awaits you. The ADOS AF community is a vibrant community where you can engage, share ideas, and draw strength from like-minded individuals who are equally passionate about making a difference.

The Struggle for Ownership: ADOS and the Business of Black Music Labor

Labor Day is upon us, and as Americans gear up to spend their last days of summer grilling, enjoying time with family, and listening to music, a significant portion of that music will be by ADOS artists, both past and present. These artists have made immense contributions to the music world but were consistently prevented from reaping the benefits of their labor. “Black Music Month was originally created to promote, protect, and perpetuate the business of Black music, not just to celebrate Black music,” says Cochrane, as quoted in Maria Sherman’s article titled ‘Black Music Month has evolved since the 1970s. Here’s what you need to know.’ This statement highlights a key issue: an emphasis on cultural celebration overshadows the original financial goals of Black Music Month, which are equally, if not more, essential.

We need to rediscover the original purpose of Black Music Month. Although the American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) helped shape a variety of musical genres, we were not permitted to own or operate the means of production for our groundbreaking work. This exclusion has hampered Black Music Month’s original goal of becoming akin to the Country Music Association. It is primarily to blame for its inability to materialize.

The Business of Black Music

Cochrane’s observation raises the question of why there isn’t a bigger emphasis on the commercial aspects of ADOS music. The concentration on cultural elements, including music from the African diaspora, has diluted the original goal. Like many others, the music industry has a consistent pattern of ADOS exclusion from ownership and financial participation. As ADOS President Yvette Carnell so eloquently puts it, “we were plundered,” despite our immense contributions to the music world. ADOS musicians shaped American culture by establishing genres such as Blues, Jazz, Gospel, Country, Rock, Funk, House, and Hip Hop, which altered the music industry and generated substantial profits for white-label owners, music publishers, and retailers.

According to Visual Capitalist, the total revenue from music sales between 1973 and 2023 was around $771 billion. This massive wealth was accumulated mainly by people who owned and managed the music industry, allowing them to transfer wealth over generations. While Black Music Month may have aimed to compete with the Country Music Association, this was never a realistic goal owing to ADOS’s structural economic marginalization. Despite our tremendous achievements, ADOS were barred from accumulating wealth during the Jim Crow era.

When ADOS artists attempted to own and operate their own music labels, they were often unable to compete with white-owned companies due to systemic barriers that blocked access to capital, technology, and distribution channels, which were almost entirely controlled by whites. This issue persists today, as seen in the recent case involving Katherine Jackson, mother of the King of Pop, Michael Jackson. She recently lost a legal battle in which she sought to prevent the estate’s executors from selling Michael’s catalog back to Sony. Michael Jackson, who made history by owning his masters following the release of his critically acclaimed album Thriller — a rarity, especially for ADOS artists — had previously partnered with Sony in a joint venture.

In 2016, 21 years after Jackson and Sony formed Sony/ATV Music Publishing, Sony bought out his half of the company in a deal that netted the Jackson estate $750 million. Jackson had first acquired ATV Music Publishing, which owned the publishing rights to most of The Beatles’ music, in 1985 for $41.5 million. Eleven years later, he merged his stake in ATV with Sony Music to form Sony/ATV. Now, Sony will regain full ownership of the catalog of Michael Jackson, the premier artist of our time — a feat that no one, especially an ADOS artist, is likely to surpass in sales or ownership. This buyout underscores the grim reality that no other ADOS artist will ever achieve the level of control and success in the music industry that Michael Jackson did, given the systemic barriers that continue to dominate the industry.

The Struggle of ADOS-Owned Record Labels

The history of ADOS-owned record labels confirms our exclusion from ownership in the music industry. ADOS previously owned and controlled labels such as Motown, Black Swan, Vee-Jay, T-Neck, and Sussex. These labels released music that is still cherished today; however, prominent white labels bought them out over time. These hostile takeovers frequently occurred because ADOS labels were undercapitalized or deliberately undermined by major white-owned companies like Paramount and Columbia.

For example, Vee-Jay Records first signed The Beatles when they were relatively obscure. And in 1964, they sold 2.6 million copies of The Beatles’ songs in one month. However, following The Beatles’ breakthrough, Vee-Jay was sued by Capitol Records and subsequently went bankrupt. This instance demonstrates how ADOS’ marginalized economic condition allowed more powerful entities to exploit them. Historian Matthew A. Killmeier explains, “Segregation and racism, combined with only fleeting access to capital, technology, and distribution — which were almost exclusively controlled by whites — placed the African-American labels at a disadvantage and ultimately contributed to their quick demise.”

The Illusion of Ownership Through Hip-Hop

“This period correlates with the attempt to sell hip hop via the perspective of ownership and the advent of boutique labels like Def Jam, Bad Boy, and Young Money, which are music production deals disguised as record labels.”

From the 2000s to now, ADOS music, particularly hip hop, is frequently marketed with a sense of ownership. According to Billboard, hip hop generated $2.78 billion in sales in 2022, with major labels getting a large portion of the revenues. According to data from the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), music sales income peaked between 1992 and 2006. This period correlates with the attempt to sell hip hop via the perspective of ownership and the advent of boutique labels like Def Jam, Bad Boy, and Young Money, which are music production deals disguised as record labels. It would be interesting to see what their true proportion of profits, if any, is.

As ADOS co-founder Antonio Moore put it, “The Celebrity Decadent Veil” conceals the economic failure of the larger ADOS group, creating the image of grandeur and achievement. Moore adds, “This curtain is trimmed with million-dollar sports contracts, Roc Nation tour deals, and designer labels designed for leaders of state.” As black celebrities allowed us into their homes (Some of these houses have been alleged to be rentals) through shows like MTV Cribs, we lost sight of the broader state of African American financial issues” (Antonio Moore, The Decadent Veil: Black America’s Wealth Illusion). The propaganda of lavish living and perceived ownership makes it difficult for ADOS as a group to grasp the extent of our exclusion from genuine economic participation and ownership.

The mainstream media appears to be the driving force behind making it impossible for ADOS to understand true music ownership, as they frequently promote superstars like Jay-Z as the prototypical music mogul while ignoring relatively unknown industry heavyweights like Lucian Grainge, who secretly wield significantly more power. Despite his enormous impact — he and his son Elliot, as chairman and CEO of Universal Music Group (UMG), own around 37.6% of the USrecorded music market — Grainge is rarely portrayed as a notable music magnate in the public eye. This distinction highlights the skewed narrative provided by media outlets, which usually excludes the actual power actors in the sector.

Political Barriers to Music Ownership

Some might say, “Well, we don’t need politics. Just focus on your music. You have to outdo them by hustlin’ harder!” However, policies enacted over 25 years ago have supercharged the barriers to music ownership for ADOS artists. The passage of the Clinton Administration’s 1996 Telecommunications Act led to the elimination of many local radio stations, concentrating the industry in a way that severely limits the variety of music available to listeners. As noted by the University of Alabama College of Arts & Sciences, ‘With the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, broadcasting companies were granted the right to form radio conglomerates which dominate the broadcasting industry today.’”

Entering the music business has become nearly impossible for independent artists as major corporations dominate the industry. The so-called “Big Four” music label giants — Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, EMI, and Warner Brothers — have come to control most of the U.S. recording industry through a series of strategic mergers. According to reports, these companies collectively control over 85 percent of the U.S. music market, creating a significant barrier for new entrants to compete effectively source.

We hate to break it to you, but the system barriers are alive today. This concentration of power is a crucial issue in the industry, and political obstacles are encountered not only by artists but also by their families. The recent treatment of Nina Simone’s inheritance exemplifies another troubling feature of the industry’s structural limitations.

“My family doesn’t run her estate anymore. It was taken away from us & given to white people. Our family name was DRAGGED in the media,” RéAnna wrote. “We get NO royalties, nothing. Wanna hold someone accountable? Ask Kamala Harris why she came for my family.”

Despite these serious claims, it is unlikely that Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic Presidential nominee, would be questioned about this issue, though she should. As then-Attorney General, Harris oversaw a case in which Lisa Simone could not receive the wealth earned by her mother’s estate.

Conclusion

As you celebrate Labor Day, enjoying the food, music, and time with loved ones, remember the countless exploited ADOS music artists, musicians, and composers who made innovative music and were not fairly compensated. Despite their contributions, they were denied the opportunity to enjoy the American Dream. While the original intention of Black Music Month has been overshadowed, the underlying reason is clear: ADOS are locked out from economic participation and ownership in the music industry. This exclusion, deeply rooted in history, has left the community without the wealth to sustain ownership of their creations, including our music.

The only remedy to this systemic disenfranchisement is reparations for ADOS. Recognizing and addressing this economic injustice is essential for fulfilling Black Music Month’s original intent and ensuring that ADOS can finally benefit fully from the music we have given to the world. Suppose you would like to be a part of the solution. In that case, we are hosting the National Reparations Summit from October 3rd to the 5th in the ADOS music mecca of New Orleans, Louisiana.

House of the Dragon is back for another season after a three-year hiatus. Amidst the warring factions of the Greens and the Blacks, fiery dragons, and betrayal at every turn, there are some great pieces of political wisdom when you know where to look. The scene that stood out the most during the premiere episode features a Blacksmith pledging allegiance to the crown while also voicing concerns about the rising cost of iron.

This resonates not just for its narrative value, but for the broader implications it carries regarding loyalty, resources, and negotiation. The Blacksmith’s assertion highlights a crucial dynamic: unwavering support must be matched by adequate provision of resources, especially in times of looming conflict. In terms of engagement and the establishment of a political culture, this scene encapsulated the ADOS political project perfectly. This scenario draws a parallel to contemporary political engagement, particularly within the context of the Democratic Party and its relationship with the Black community.

The Blacksmith’s stance in “House of the Dragon” suggests a model where support is contingent upon tangible benefits, a concept that can be applied to political engagement.

The data clearly shows that the Black community predominantly aligns with the Democratic Party, a relationship further underscored by the visible efforts of political figures to court this demographic. However, the question arises: why does this substantial and crucial support not translate into concrete demands and reciprocal benefits? The Blacksmith’s stance in “House of the Dragon” suggests a model where support is contingent upon tangible benefits, a concept that can be applied to political engagement. In other words, political loyalty should not be given unconditionally; it should be leveraged to secure necessary resources and address community needs.

This brings us to Steve Harvey, the host of Family Feud who, in a highly publicized interview with Vice President Kamala Harris, dismissed the notion of making demands (17:28–18:50). His appearance in a flashy pea soup green suit, seeking applause and acceptance, stands in stark contrast to the Blacksmith’s practical and assertive approach. Harvey’s stance symbolizes a troubling trend: the reduction of serious political engagement to performative acts devoid of substantial advocacy for community needs.

Harvey’s stance symbolizes a troubling trend: the reduction of serious political engagement to performative acts devoid of substantial advocacy for community needs.

The imagery of a “King” of “Comedy” representing the interests of a community facing unemployment, mass incarceration, poverty, housing shortages, underfunded institutions, and overall resource shortages, encapsulates a profound disconnect. It raises the question: are the political representatives and cultural figures genuinely advocating for the community, or are they merely participating in a superficial spectacle?
The analogy underscores a critical need for a shift in strategy.
Just as the Blacksmith demanded resources in exchange for his loyalty,
the community must assert its political power to secure necessary
support and advancements.

It raises the question: are the political representatives and cultural figures genuinely advocating for the community, or are they merely participating in a superficial spectacle?

In conclusion, the scene from the season 2 premiere episode serves as a powerful metaphor for the relationship between the Black community and the Democratic Party. It highlights the importance of transforming passive support into active negotiation for resources and rights. The contrast between the Blacksmith’s pragmatic approach and Steve Harvey’s performative one underscores the necessity for a more strategic and demand-driven engagement in the political arena.

The Kendrick versus Drake beef has garnered global attention. In today’s era of sanitized political correctness and think pieces, it is rare to witness the raw display of the Black American tradition of rap. Epic rap battles are not new. Examples include Nas vs. Jay-Z, Biggie vs. Tupac, and even Tex Joe vs. James Brown. What’s new here is the cultural context brought to the forefront by this battle.

The battle highlights issues of authenticity and the exploitation of Black Americans.

While hip-hop fans worldwide nod to “Not Like Us,” many miss the key points, focusing instead on the disses and musical mastery. The battle highlights issues of authenticity and the exploitation of Black Americans. Many think “Not Like Us” is just a West Coast anthem, overlooking Kendrick’s effort to highlight the history of slave railroad labor in Atlanta and accuse Drake of exploiting the culture of descendants of slavery. Kendrick’s hook, “They Not Like Us,” broadens the accusation to others who exploit his community.

This isn’t about questioning Drake’s nationality, heritage, or identity (yes, his father is from Memphis, Tennessee. See our president’s nuanced thoughts on the matter.) The rap beef and “Not Like Us” resonate because they capture a sentiment felt by the Black American community for about a decade.

If you’ve been unaware, a growing number of Black Americans, also known as African Americans, identify as American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) as a way to distinguish themselves from other Black groups. This sentiment has been growing for a decade due to political, academic, economic, and cultural deprivation.

Politically, ADOS experienced a Kenyan-American president who opposed reparations for slavery while supporting reparations for Native Americans and Guam. The Congressional Black Caucus has often used slavery to justify advocating for resources for non-ADOS groups. Other non-ADOS groups have specific caucuses from which ADOS receive no reciprocal benefit (see Hispanic, Caribbean, AAPI, and African Caucuses).

Additionally, the Democratic Party has not respected its most loyal voting bloc, African Americans, who constitute 90% of their voting base. Biden’s “You ain’t Black” comment has fueled resentment since the last election cycle. Furthermore, the Office of Management and Budget denied a request for an ADOS designation in March, despite other groups are represented nationally and locally for government resources.

Furthermore, the Office of Management and Budget denied a request for an ADOS designation in March, despite other groups are represented nationally and locally for government resources.

Academically, many ADOS students are concerned about being the minority among Black student admissions despite their enslaved ancestors building universities. This lack of representation is fueling a desire for justice among student bodies at Yale and Harvard, especially in light of the rollback of affirmative action, initially intended to address slavery.

Culturally, ADOS has witnessed efforts to misattribute or delegitimize cultural expressions that emerged from our unique experience of Slavery in the United States of America. ADOS is fighting to reclaim the origins of hip-hop, honoring pioneers like DJ Disco King Mario, Coke La Rock, and God Father of Rap Jalal Nurridin. (Also Hip Hop’s real Birthday) Historical revisionism has led to claims that ADOS lacks culture, even by some Black Gen-Z social media influencers. (FYI, rap is rooted in the ADOS tradition of Signifying)

Despite making up 90% of the Black population in America, ADOS faces political, academic, social, and economic dehumanization while being exploited for political, cultural, and economic capital. Years of karmic dogpiling on the ADOS community has led to Kendrick’s response, which has been positively received by Black America. The Kendrick/Drake beef serves as a cultural proxy war to express ADOS frustration, with Kendrick using it to “check” those who exploit the community in a language only ADOS can authentically understand. Drake lacks this cultural fluency and connection. (FYI, ADOS doesn’t discuss American Slavery from a third-person view. It is a first-person view as it is an inherited experience from our families. Drake has made this error before, a glaring bat signal to ADOS that he is not one of us.)

Despite making up 90% of the Black population in America, ADOS faces political, academic, social, and economic dehumanization while being exploited for political, cultural, and economic capital.

“Not Like Us” highlights that melanin alone doesn’t grant access to ADOS culture, which is rooted in lineage and lived experiences. The exploitation of ADOS culture must end. True power lies in politics, and our community needs national and state recognition to be respected and protected. We became Americans through laws abolishing slavery and the 14th Amendment, with significant contributions to the Civil War. (In 1865, President Lincoln said, “without the military help of the black freedmen, the war against the south could not have been won”.)

Not Like Us” highlights that melanin alone doesn’t grant access to ADOS culture, which is rooted in lineage and lived experiences. The exploitation of ADOS culture must end.

We must continue to fight for self-determination. The upcoming National Reparations Summit aims to demonstrate our political influence. Special guests include presidential candidate Cornel West and former Bernie Sanders representative Nina Turner. Secure your ticket if you care about reparations, research, and political representation. The ADOS Research Institute will host a symposium to share data insights with attendees.

https://reparationssummit.com/

Dear ADOS Advocates,

In honor of National Volunteer Month, I am pleased to address you today as we commemorate the remarkable growth and achievements of the ADOS Advocacy Foundation. Our journey has been one of resilience, determination, and unwavering commitment to the improvement of our communities. As we stand on the brink of even greater opportunities, I am filled with immense pride for what we have accomplished collectively.

“A key aspect of our success lies in the establishment and activation of state chapters nationwide.” — Yvette Carnell, ADOS AF President

A key aspect of our success lies in the establishment and activation of state chapters nationwide. These chapters serve as beacons of hope and change in their respective communities, amplifying the voices of ADOS individuals and advocating tirelessly for our rights and reparations. From New York to Maryland, Georgia to North Carolina, our chapters have been at the forefront of meaningful action.

In states such as New York, Maryland, and Georgia, our impact has been evident through Reparations hearings, where we have demanded justice and recognition for the historical injustices inflicted upon our ancestors. These hearings raise awareness while laying the groundwork for substantive change and reparative measures.

“These chapters serve as beacons of hope and change in their respective communities, amplifying the voices of ADOS individuals and advocating tirelessly for our rights and reparations.” — Yvette Carnell, ADOS AF President

Meanwhile, our focus on coalition building in North Carolina has enabled us to form powerful alliances with like-minded organizations, strengthening our collective impact and facilitating collaborative efforts to address systemic issues facing our communities.

Our commitment to providing support in times of crisis has been evident in our disaster relief efforts in Mississippi, where we have demonstrated the true essence of community and solidarity by assisting those in need.

Additionally, our dedication to education and empowerment is showcased through various training sessions we offer. These sessions focus on building Black agendas that uplift communities, identifying ancestral descendants of slavery in the United States, and equipping members with the civic knowledge necessary to effect meaningful change.

“The fight for the rights and recognition of ADOS individuals is ongoing, and we must remain steadfast in our resolve to continue this struggle.”
 — Yvette Carnell, ADOS AF President

As we reflect on our achievements, it is crucial to acknowledge that our work is far from complete. The fight for the rights and recognition of ADOS individuals is ongoing, and we must remain steadfast in our resolve to continue this struggle. Our communities deserve nothing less than full equality, justice, and reparations for past injustices.

I urge each of you to stay engaged and to continue advocating, organizing, and mobilizing for the betterment of our people. Together, we possess the power to effect transformative change and build a future where every ADOS individual can thrive.

Regards,
Yvette Carnell President,
ADOS Advocacy Foundation

Click here for official press release copy ->>

The White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) announced the results of their formal review of how federal agencies collect and report on data on race and ethnicity.

We at the ADOS Advocacy Foundation (ADOS AF) and ADOS Empowerment Project (ADOS EP) are deeply disappointed with the OMB’s Notice of Decision. At the same time, the OMB agreed to require the disaggregation of data on other groups. Yet, the Bureau has called for “more study” on whether ADOS have the right to see their collectively tumultuous lived experience belied by the data. See our full official statement here.

While the Supreme Court’s decision to end race conscious admissions policies in higher education contains certain attitudes and beliefs about the apparent needlessness of providing greater opportunity to groups who have suffered discrimination — a view wholly antithetical to our own — the American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) Advocacy Foundation is encouraged by the Justices’ discussion of the differences in experience that make up the Black category, and how affirmative action policies have failed to make relevant distinctions between them.

As Justice Thomas writes in his opinion, “All racial groups are heterogeneous, and blacks are no exception — encompassing northerners and southerners, rich and poor, and recent immigrants and descendants of slaves.” Indeed it was that latter group, the descendants of slaves, for whom affirmative action policy was originally developed; to proffer assistance owing to what Lyndon Johnson referred to as the “heritage” of “centuries of oppression and persecution” that our group has suffered on American soil and which still today so profoundly constrains our access to the country’s myriad opportunities.

And so it is regrettable that the set of policies aimed at meliorating that distinct disadvantage have instead become applicable to any minority member, regardless of his or her connection to that baleful institution. As Justice Gorsuch writes, “‘Black or African American’ covers everyone from a descendant of enslaved persons who grew up poor in the rural South, to a first-generation child of wealthy Nigerian immigrants, to a Black-identifying applicant with multiracial ancestry whose family lives in a typical American suburb.” It is the relative disadvantage, conditioned by the lineage of the descendant of enslaved persons, that affirmative action is meant to help overcome. The effect of race-conscious policy today in a rapidly diversifying America, however, undermines that intent and denies us our particular identity and experience.

When asked for comment on the decision, Yvette Carnell, president and CEO of the ADOS Advocacy Foundation said, “For too long this country has been dishonest about which groups were most oppressed, for how long, as well as about the impact that oppression has had and continues to have on the descendants of chattel slavery.” She continued, “We see this decision by the Supreme Court as an opportunity to prosecute the case for specificity when it comes to who will benefit from policies that seek to offer measures of redress for slavery and its vestiges, both with particular respect to college admissions, as well as more broadly.”

Moving forward, the ADOS Advocacy Foundation remains ready to collaborate with policymakers, educational institutions, and employers to ensure that these policies are implemented with due consideration and that they fulfill the aim of helping break down the unique barriers created by the historic injustices of slavery and its legacy.