ADVISER REBUKED : RACISM CHARGES STIR NAACP FLAP

A key adviser in the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People’s campaign against alleged racial discrimination in the $4-billion-a-year record industry feels “relatively sure” that some form of “direct action” will be taken soon against either a major U.S. record company or black recording artist.

Participating here Monday in a New Music Seminar panel on racism, L.R. Byrd made it clear that the association wants to work with companies who show “good faith,” but that the NAACP is not reluctant to move against companies or artists who are “insensitive” to the group’s concerns.

Though acknowledging disappointment with initial response from RCA Records, he did not confirm that it would be the target of the proposed action. In fact, he explained in an interview after the panel discussion that conditions had substantially improved with RCA. At the same time he described the situation with CBS Records as a bigger problem.

Byrd’s panel comments immediately sparked a rebuttal Tuesday from RCA Records. Dennis Fine, director of communications for RCA, said NAACP officials, including executive director Benjamin Hooks, met with top RCA executives two weeks ago and were “very satisfied” with the label’s commitment to pursue an agreement on the issue. Fine said Byrd was “misinformed” in singling out RCA. (CBS spokesmen were unavailable for comment Tuesday.)

Later Tuesday, RCA released remarks from NAACP director of communications James Williams, who said: “Mr. Byrd was formerly employed as a consultant by the NAACP for a particular project which he’s no longer working on. His statement made at the New Music Seminar was not authorized by the NAACP. Dr. Benjamin Hooks, executive director of the NAACP, has stated: ‘The NAACP is satisfied with its initial meetings and negotiations with several record companies, RCA being one of those companies. And the organization looks forward to continuing the positive dialogue.’ ”

When contacted by The Times on Tuesday, Williams said his remarks to RCA were not intended to be made public, and he could not clarify Byrd’s status. Read the statement at his home in Greenville, S.C., Byrd said: “I would accept that statement. I would accept whatever Mr. Williams says. I think I was at the seminar with the full knowledge of the director of the (racism) program. Any comments and statements reflected my personal knowledge of circumstances, and may not have expressed those of Dr. Hooks.”

Byrd said his only regret is “That we have not communicated that I fully understood what they wanted me to convey. But I do think my observations and expressions were accurate. Perhaps out of the thought patterns of others, but I don’t think I was acting without authorization.”

Rick Dutka, who organized the “Racism in the U.S. Music Industry” panel for the seminar, said Fred Rasheed, who is overseeing the NAACP record industry investigation, had been originally scheduled to appear on the panel. When he had to withdraw last Friday because of a “crucial” meeting with an unidentified black artist on this topic, Rasheed recommended Byrd as his replacement, describing him, according to Dutka, as “the man who did the investigation.”

In some ways the reaction to Byrd’s comments underscores the volatility of the racism issue. Dutka, who has put together dozens of panels over the years for the seminar, said he’s never had as much trouble getting record company employees--black or white--to participate. “It’s just too hot a potato,” he said.

Though the NAACP organization charged at a Los Angeles press conference March 23 that racism is “rampant” in the record business, Hooks spoke at that time only in general terms about a possible timetable for action.

Byrd suggested Monday that the timetable may be considerably faster than industry executives think, indicating that the committee has been frustrated in its attempts to hold meaningful talks with certain unnamed companies and artists.

While several record executives acknowledged in the weeks following the March press conference that the industry has not done enough over the last two decades to hire and promote minorities, most warned that it will take time to improve the situation.

“I can assure you that the NAACP will not back off your industry,” he told an estimated 500 seminar delegates. “We will meet the artists at the coliseums and auditoriums (if they do not meet with us elsewhere), and we will meet the corporations at corporate headquarters or in the courts.”

In an interview after the panel session, Byrd went even further, saying that the multilevel action may be taken “within the next few months.”

Though he preferred to call the action a “selective buying campaign” rather than a boycott, the net effect would be to encourage radio stations, record buyers and concertgoers to stop supporting certain companies and/or acts. If the action is taken against a company, the recommendation would be to avoid buying all the label’s releases, not just those by black artists.

Byrd stressed that he is only a consultant and that the NAACP board would have the final say on any policy. He said he thinks at some record companies, “we are dealing with ‘show me’ people and that we are going to have to show them that we are serious.”

He described the mood of delegates at an NAACP workshop on the issue here last week as angry and impatient.

“These people, who are from individual NAACP chapters around the country, think it is time that black superstars do for their industry what Muhammad Ali did for the boxing industry . . . open the door for black promoters and managers,” the consultant said.

“I think you’ll be seeing some of these individual chapters challenging black artists when they go on tour to leave some of the money in the community. And the artists can’t say they weren’t warned.

“We have sent (registered letters) to these superstars asking them to meet with us to discuss their role in this problem, but most of them have refused to respond. So, the mood is now one of ‘Let’s go after them.’ ”

Byrd, a business development consultant and negotiator based in Greenville, S.C., became active in the late ‘70s in campaigns to obtain a larger share of the economic pie for himself and other blacks in his hometown. To demonstrate the purchasing power of blacks, he initiated a “Black Dollar Day” in Greenville, urging blacks to use only $2 bills or Susan B. Anthony dollars when making purchases.

The idea was subsequently adopted as an annual Labor Day campaign by the NAACP, which began using Byrd in 1981 as a consultant in campaigns to promote more economic investment in the black community.

In that role, Byrd, who would give his age only as in his mid-30s, has been involved in contract agreements with clothing stores, food stores, soft-drink companies, fast-food outlets and beer distributors around the country.

He and the NAACP staff were about to focus on the clothing industry in the summer of 1985 when Southern California NAACP official Melanie Lomax, apparently acting independently of the national board, accused five black pop stars (Michael Jackson, Prince, Lionel Richie, Diana Ross and Tina Turner) of discriminating against blacks by surrounding themselves with non-black staffs and by failing to contribute a share of their earnings back to the black community.

Without supporting or denying the charges, Executive Director Hooks subsequently called for an NAACP study under the direction of the association’s National Director of Economic Development Rasheed, who asked Byrd to serve as a consultant. The preliminary findings, announced at last March’s press conference, suggested that power within the industry is “virtually the sole preserve of white males” even though black artists generate nearly 30% of recording revenues.

Byrd said during Monday’s panel discussion that the NAACP study is not only concerned with employment practices, but also the investment of money in the black community.

“In a $4-billion industry, we cannot identify a firm that has retained a group of black attorneys. . . We cannot identify a firm that uses (outside) black publicists . . . or a black ad agency.”

The issue isn’t that every black superstar hire a black manager, he suggested, because there may not be enough black managers with sufficient experience to properly represent all the black stars.

“If I am an artist and I want to be successful and I see that all the (most) successful acts have had white managers who have an ‘i’ on the end of their name, then I’m inclined to look for a manager of that same caliber,” he said, apparently referring in the “i” reference to a large number of pop managers of Italian descent.

“We must be careful (with) this term racism because in many instances, what is happening is simply a business decision,” he continued.

Expanding on the thought in the interview, Byrd said, “The manager is an important person in this process because the record companies tell us they can’t control their artists and the artists say the manager makes the decisions for them.

“So, we have to get more blacks into these power positions. The companies have been sending a signal to black America that if you want to be successful in this industry, don’t come to us ‘all black.’ Sell a little of your identity and then come forward. That is what must be stopped and it is something the companies can influence.”