Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/02/04/which-are-these-four-news-orga.html
…
12 Likes
A disturbing number of people seem to want to let the racists define what “racist” means. If someone doesn’t explicitly identify as a racist then it’s rude to call them a racist. And even if they do then we ought to give them the benefit of the doubt, just in case.
49 Likes
So far as I can tell most white people care a lot more about the chance of being called racist and any consequences from racist actions that might befall them than they care about the effects of racism. Not surprising then that a lot of mainstream media in an effort not to upset white people cater openly to racists.
31 Likes
Do they happen to be owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group ?
17 Likes
“I’m not a racist, and I don’t remember asking any &#*$@& their opinion!”
1 Like
Because ratings matter.
I’d be interested in knowing if local Richmond stations are using the words. Remember Richmond is a city that has an entire avenue dedicated to confederate civil war soldiers.
Annnnd the Confederate White House still stands.
The retreating losers burned everything else there out of spite. Sound familiar?
9 Likes
George Stephanopolis called the yearbook entry racist this morning on Good Morning America
4 Likes
To quote an old saying that can have bigoted connotations, it’s well past time to “call a spade ‘a spade’.”
Bigot is as bigot does.
17 Likes
A reporter using the word “racist” is being editorial, which would not be in their job scope. Right?
Or is being “racist” a measurable quality?
1 Like
It’s not editorial to describe David Duke as racist, with racist politics, and affiliations with racist organizations.
It’s a series of necessary descriptions to give context to news events.
27 Likes
. . . but . . . but . . .
3 Likes
If being racist is something that can be defined (yes) and a person has qualities that meet that definition, then it is not editorial to call that person racist.
Now you could say that there isn’t a widely agreed upon definition of racist, or you could debate whether a person’s qualities/actions meet that definition. But in every case I have come across that is the equivalent of debating what the definition of a tree is, and whether or not a Sequoia meets that definition.
17 Likes
Is Racist a legal term? Could they get into libel trouble if they can’t meet some standard of proof before calling someone racist?
Granted, if that is the case then the story should be about how racists can hide behind a racist legal system.
3 Likes
Racism objectively exists.
To deny it is either cowardly, ignorant, or evil.
People who speak and act in a racist way are racists. It’s very simple.
23 Likes
Racism: “you know it when you see it.”
1 Like
Would calling donald trump “dishonest” or sarah huckabee sanders “a chronic victim blamer” be editorializing?
They’re both objectively true statements.
Or would that be too harmful to people’s feelings?
It’s the truth. It’s facts. And in cintext it’s important to point out that donald trump can’t say a true thing to save his life, when discussing some claim he makes.
11 Likes
No. Being nice isn’t a “measurable quality”. Neither is being scary, professional, or almost any adjective used to describe human behavior. Avoiding the word racist has nothing to do with editorializing, and everything to do with caring less about discrimination than about making people uncomfortable by pointing out the discrimination
14 Likes
Nope.
No again.
The trouble comes in offending their audience
9 Likes
No. Sometimes it’s a fact that someone is racist.
15 Likes
