SlimeyLilDude
Richest shooter
The entire black community is standing up against Comcast. This is a fight that Comcast can't win. We will win and Comcast will lose big time.
Last edited:
Diddy vs Comcast
- Thread starter SlimeyLilDude
- Start date
Our YouTube friends about to go at Diddy 
DragonKnight
Banned
Bryon from Detroit I’m with my nikka
But that fakkit Tariq Nasheed and moist Watkins said this was a scam.
SlimeyLilDude
Richest shooter
Yea they wrong on this one but let's not derail to ppl are on the losing side of this. Let's celebrate everybody who's standing up and saying fck Comcast and anybody who supports them. Charter too. This is gonna be a gigantic win for the black community and the biggest L of the decade with Comcast and charter. And when we win we will see who didn't stand up with us and who didn't support us or speak up for us.
SlimeyLilDude
Richest shooter
See Diddy’s full statement about Comcast and Bryon Allen’s discrimination case
Sean “Diddy” Comb's statement:
My name and my network, REVOLT, have been mentioned recently by Comcast in reference to the Comcast/Byron Allen US Supreme Court case as an example of Comcast’s inclusive practices with respect to African American owned cable networks. While it is true that we are in business with Comcast, it is not accurate to use my name or my network as an example of inclusion. I do not want my name to be used inaccurately so I must speak my truth. I also want to make clear that this case is now about much more than cable distribution. It’s about the civil rights of millions of African Americans and other minorities.
First, it’s important that people really understand what’s at stake. In its efforts to get the lawsuit filed by Byron Allen dismissed, Comcast has taken a legal approach that could weaken fundamental civil rights protections. I have a problem with this. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 section 1981 was designed to ensure Black people are able to do business in this country and not be denied because of race. Comcast is arguing that this law only applies if racial discrimination is the only factor that leads to a refusal to do business, which would be extremely hard to prove. If they are successful, it will become much harder for any victim of discrimination to seek justice in court. By taking this stance in the Supreme Court, Comcast has put its legal tactics ahead of the rights of millions of Americans to be heard. This is not OK.
Above anything else, my goal has always been to achieve true economic inclusion for Black people. How can Comcast suggest that it champions diversity and inclusion if it attacks the laws that provide the foundation for economic inclusion? What good are any of their efforts if they are fighting to make it harder for victims of discrimination to be heard in court? Comcast has made this about much more than Byron Allen, and now the civil rights of my children and my community are at stake. To be clear, anything that makes it harder to fight against discrimination is wrong. Comcast is choosing to be on the wrong side of history.
On REVOLT, I can only share the truth of my experience. Starting an independent cable network is incredibly difficult and capital intensive. The start we received from Comcast, which was a condition of the United States government approval for Comcast to acquire NBCUniversal, was important, but it is not the level of support needed to build a successful African American owned network. Not even close. Since that launch our relationship has not grown, and REVOLT is still not carried by Comcast in the most affordable packages nor is REVOLT available in all of the markets that would enable us to serve our target audience.
Comcast spends billions of dollars on content networks every year, but just a few million go to African American owned networks like REVOLT. That is unacceptable.
Supporting diversity and economic inclusion requires a real partnership. The only way Black owned networks grow and thrive is with meaningful and consistent economic support.
Otherwise they are set up to fail. REVOLT has never been in a position to truly compete on a fair playing field because it has not received the economic and distribution support necessary for real economic inclusion. Our relationship with Comcast is the illusion of economic inclusion.
Rather than using this case to diminish the civil rights protections of millions of Americans, Comcast should use this as an opportunity to listen to a community it relies on and, above all, do better.
Sean “Diddy” Comb's statement:
My name and my network, REVOLT, have been mentioned recently by Comcast in reference to the Comcast/Byron Allen US Supreme Court case as an example of Comcast’s inclusive practices with respect to African American owned cable networks. While it is true that we are in business with Comcast, it is not accurate to use my name or my network as an example of inclusion. I do not want my name to be used inaccurately so I must speak my truth. I also want to make clear that this case is now about much more than cable distribution. It’s about the civil rights of millions of African Americans and other minorities.
First, it’s important that people really understand what’s at stake. In its efforts to get the lawsuit filed by Byron Allen dismissed, Comcast has taken a legal approach that could weaken fundamental civil rights protections. I have a problem with this. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 section 1981 was designed to ensure Black people are able to do business in this country and not be denied because of race. Comcast is arguing that this law only applies if racial discrimination is the only factor that leads to a refusal to do business, which would be extremely hard to prove. If they are successful, it will become much harder for any victim of discrimination to seek justice in court. By taking this stance in the Supreme Court, Comcast has put its legal tactics ahead of the rights of millions of Americans to be heard. This is not OK.
Above anything else, my goal has always been to achieve true economic inclusion for Black people. How can Comcast suggest that it champions diversity and inclusion if it attacks the laws that provide the foundation for economic inclusion? What good are any of their efforts if they are fighting to make it harder for victims of discrimination to be heard in court? Comcast has made this about much more than Byron Allen, and now the civil rights of my children and my community are at stake. To be clear, anything that makes it harder to fight against discrimination is wrong. Comcast is choosing to be on the wrong side of history.
On REVOLT, I can only share the truth of my experience. Starting an independent cable network is incredibly difficult and capital intensive. The start we received from Comcast, which was a condition of the United States government approval for Comcast to acquire NBCUniversal, was important, but it is not the level of support needed to build a successful African American owned network. Not even close. Since that launch our relationship has not grown, and REVOLT is still not carried by Comcast in the most affordable packages nor is REVOLT available in all of the markets that would enable us to serve our target audience.
Comcast spends billions of dollars on content networks every year, but just a few million go to African American owned networks like REVOLT. That is unacceptable.
Supporting diversity and economic inclusion requires a real partnership. The only way Black owned networks grow and thrive is with meaningful and consistent economic support.
Otherwise they are set up to fail. REVOLT has never been in a position to truly compete on a fair playing field because it has not received the economic and distribution support necessary for real economic inclusion. Our relationship with Comcast is the illusion of economic inclusion.
Rather than using this case to diminish the civil rights protections of millions of Americans, Comcast should use this as an opportunity to listen to a community it relies on and, above all, do better.
BaileyPark31
Love, Peace, Health, and Wealth
I have no idea what's going on here...
Cliffs?
Cliffs?
SlimeyLilDude
Richest shooter
Byron Allen sued Comcast and charter for discrimination using the 1866 civil rights act. He won 2 times. Charter and Comcast then took him to the Supreme Court where they gave Trump's DOJ 10 minutes of their 30 minutes to help plead their case on why Comcast should be able to discriminate and why the 1866 civil rights act should be dismantled.
If Byron Allen loses then the 1866 civil rights act will be dismantled and anybody can discriminate based off race. Even black people can discriminate against white people for their race which is why white people should also be on Byron Allen's side rooting for him to win.
Last edited:
DUCKED_OFF
Superstar
Diddy don't give a fuk
ThaEruditious
She luv it over here like Gold Watch.
SlimeyLilDude
Richest shooter
Hell nah. Diddy said fck Comcast I'm riding for my people. This will influence alot more people stand up and voice their anger towards Comcast. I'm talking millions of people. Comcast don't stand a chance once the hip hop and Hollywood get behind Byron
So, he waited until Byron Allen did all the footwork and called out Diddy for being a Paper Tiger on the media front
xXMASHERXx
Superstar
Why he did it doesn't matter. The fact that he's speaking out now is huge. Hopefully more people speak out as well. There's one name I definitely want to see say something but I doubt they will.So, he waited until Byron Allen did all the footwork and called out Diddy for being a Paper Tiger on the media front