Okay, I watched the Oprah segment in full, and I have several thoughts:

-- first, I think the Blue-eyed/Brown-eyed experiment was beautifully-designed; however, Ms. Elliott somewhat ruined it by breaking character throughout, at spotty intervals...I feel it would have been more effective if she'd stayed "in character" with her anti-blue role for the entirety of the first half, and then brought in the interlinked commentary on U.S. racism AFTERWARD (once Oprah confirmed that it was just an experiment)

-- since I have brown eyes, it had me thinking/considering what I would have said, as a (hypothetical) well-treated audience member, if I'd been picked by Oprah to speak into her microphone, reflecting upon my experience as part of the privileged group within the experiment...I'm still mulling that over, in fact, because I would have wanted my words to contribute the maximum possible value to the overall discussion

-- Ms. Elliott made salient points about the "melting pot fallacy" (contrasting it with the "salad bowl" metaphor), as well as the "equity-versus-revenge" misconception.

-- Ms. Elliott's "you can't take off the collar" commentary seemed to undervalue and dismiss people's so-called "mutable" attributes in favor of their "immutable" attributes...which is emblematic of the folly of oppression-ranking

-- I thought it was interesting that hazel-eyed (and probably green-eyed) people were lumped in with the blue-eyed people, but the entire notion of biracial and multiracial identities was pretty much glossed over in Ms. Elliott's commentary (and amongst the commentary of the audience, for that matter)

-- clearly, there were still many Karens and Kyles in the audience who didn't understand the point of the exercise, although that doesn't excuse the flaws in Ms. Elliott's philosophy (and it was particularly pathetic that Oprah had to step in to "defend" Ms. Elliott toward the end, rather than letting the featured guest speak for herself in response to certain audience members' criticism)