Note that the New York Times‘ headline (1/10/19) was not “Steve King Defends White Supremacy”—though that was surely the most newsworthy aspect of this profile.
It should go without saying that things we don’t have names for…go without saying. For years, that’s been the deal with corporate media and racism. Actions, policies, statements and ideas that regular people have no trouble identifying as racist become, in elite media hands, “racially tinged,” “racially charged,” “race-related.” And if racism isn’t a thing our famously objective reporters can see, well, maybe it’s not really out there, right?
Things came to a forehead-slapping peak when Rep. Steve King (R.–Iowa) said to the New York Times (1/10/19):
White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization—how did that language become offensive? Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?
Endorsing the supremacy of white people—that’s racist, right?
Leaked reports showed NBC News, for one, instructing staffers otherwise (HuffPost, 1/15/19): “Be careful to avoiding characterizing [King’s] remarks as racist,” read the internal guidance, adding “It is OK to attribute to others as in ‘what many are calling racist’ or something like that.” Laugh if you will, NBC is reflecting polite society’s rule that besmirching someone—someone white, that is—with the label “racist” is worse than degrading the humanity of millions.
Shamed on social media, NBC reversed course, and now the news industry bible, The AP Stylebook, is reinforcing the move to Realityland. The 2019 edition tells journalists:
Do not use racially charged, racially divisive, racially tinged or similar terms as euphemisms for racist or racism when the latter terms are truly applicable. Mississippi has a history of racist lynchings, not a history of racially motivated lynchings. He is charged in the racist massacre of nine people at a black church, not the racially motivated massacre of nine people at a black church.
It might seem superficial, but for a press corps that calls itself clever for splintering off “factchecking” from reporting, that chest-thumps about the First Amendment but doesn’t defend whistleblowers when they go to prison, symbols can mean a lot.
There’s something else new in the new AP guide. It says, “Deciding whether a specific statement, action, policy, etc., should be termed racist often is not clearcut. Such decisions should include discussion with colleagues and/or others from diverse backgrounds and perspectives.” That diverse people need to be in the room, that reporting involves listening to and learning from them—now there’s a radical idea.
“NBC is reflecting polite society’s rule that besmirching someone—someone white, that is—with the label “racist” is worse than degrading the humanity of millions.”
How is anyone supposed to take FAIR seriously when you so routinely publish insane — not to mention unfair and inaccurate — drivel like this?
Will Killer Clown ever be subject to “truth in labeling”?
The betting window’s open
Capitalism = racism = Zionism = racism = fascism = racism = neo-lib = racism = neocon = racism = msm = racism.
Nice piece, Janine. Rightly angry but well informed, concise and smart. As a UK white anti-racist, I hope that white media will move from mealy mouthed to honest. Western society can make racism history if we acknowledge racism as prejudice plus institutional power, admit that we’re all racist, and choose not to indulge in racist bullying, whether microracism or grandstanding philosphising as spouted by Steve King and co.
See my rolling blogpost, “Colour me racist, blame my genes – racism explained as a redundant instinct” (https://soothfairy.wordpress.com/2016/08/14/racism-a-redundant-instinct).
I guess it is progress when the media can call racism “racism”. Now the media need to learn to stop calling support of Palestinian human rights and criticism of Israel “antisemitism”.
So what is true or false is based on a vote of a racially balanced group. The answer to the question, “What does two plus two equal?” is supposed to be put to a vote of racially diverse people. It is supposed to be put to a vote when 90% of the people in the world are subject to lies like, “The answer to the question, “What does two plus two equal?” is supposed to be put to a vote of racially diverse people.” No one ever that thought of the idea that we are supposed to believe what everyone else believes. Janine Jackson thinks that she is the first one who ever thought of the idea that we shouldn’t think on our own but believe what others tell us.
This seems like a no brainer to me. Like including women on the committees that are making laws that affect primarily women. It just seems logical when deciding whether something is offensive to a person or group that you actually ask that person or group whether it is offensive. Why is this controversial? And yes when addressing math problems its not such a bad idea to seek input from a mathematician.
OK. Let’s worry about the way the MSM uses the word “racism” but not the fact that they won’t call our foreign wars “murder” or our “enhanced interrogation” practices “torture” or our crony capitalist government “corrupt” or Wall Street bad actors “thieves” or our military and its members “socialists” or Israel an “apartheid” state, etc. etc. etc.
But Liam Neeson said something MAYBE racist and openly admitted it in what some might consider a “teaching moment” and that’s what FAIR is dedicating its time to?
Fair writes about all of these things. The fact she has written about racism doesnt diminish the commitment to other wrongs in the media. It would be rather odd if having covered those things they avoided talking about racism. Digital pixels are cheap. We can probably squeeze them all in.