4 ms·

But your position starts from the basis that we were race-neutral to begin with. I think part of the reason that there is an emphasis on "positive black voices

But your position starts from the basis that we were race-neutral to begin with. I think part of the reason that there is an emphasis on "positive black voices" is the belief that the default narrative is implicitly negative toward blacks. So without intention you'll simply perpetuate the negative voices. For example, would the same people who say "we focus too much on race" view Desantis's policies and opinions as "race neutral"?

unethical_ban 3y ago
>the belief that the default narrative is implicitly negative toward blacks Well, I disagree with that. I just said NPR specifically focuses too much on identity politics, and I think Desantis is implementing anti-LGBT, anti-education, anti-freedom and anti-democracy legislation. I dont support the dichotomy that one must either desire an abundance of identity-based journalism or be blind to the issues minorities face. I think many of the problems this country faces, which may disproportionately affect minorities, can be covered without it being race-based. Poverty, healthcare, education, environment, climate change, foreign policy affect all.
gedy 3y ago
It sounds too much like "So without intention you'll simply perpetuate the negative voices" is "you are either for us, or against us", which has caused the world no end to misery.
TinkersW 3y ago
Desantis is an idiot that I have zero interest in hearing about. Unless the person has done something worth mentioning that isn't being mentioned only because of their so called "identity" I've zero interest in hearing about it, and would consider such a discussion to be bordering on racist.
- josephg 3y ago
  As a counterpoint, I listen to The economist’s coverage of US politics. They often interview people involved with the Democrat and Republican campaigns. And I’ve found some of the interviews fascinating - particularly the republican ones because most of my friends and news are left of center. For example, one interviewee in the trump reelection campaign said they talk a lot internally about obstruction. And so, the campaign has lined up a bunch of politically aligned people ahead of time to take over key departments in the US government if trump gets re-elected, so trump can change a lot of government policies on day 1. I find that fascinating. No matter your politics, it’s interesting to know that the “opposing parties, taking turns governing in different ways” angle seems to be getting stronger. Hearing from people I don’t have the opportunity to understand in daily life is exactly what I listen to podcasts like this for. I’m glad this coverage exists.
  - angiosperm 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - Phiwise_ 3y ago
      You know, I think you might be onto something here. Surely this cannot just be a shorting of "campaign staff of the drmocrats" and "campaign staff of the republicans" that just looks a little weird before you think about it grammatically. No, there's clearly a multimillion dollar right-wing extremist conspiracy afoot to affect a slight change in noun phrases that will have zero impact on any policy or office. Edit: And my typo of "democrats" as "drmocrats" clearly reveals I'm in on the vicious plot of persecution via zero impact phraseology! Probably getting a check straight from the Kochs, even.
      - the_gastropod 3y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet)
        Phiwise_ 3y ago
        I am well aware of this ongoing persecution complex in wikipedia form. I avoid linking it to anyone who does not cite it themselves to keep from strawmanning them, as in this case where it is not the same as what was said.
    - unethical_ban 3y ago
      I'm familiar with your point, but ignoring the rest of their commentary and assuming they're taking tea with Greg Gutfeld doesn't help anyone either. It's possible to use a term without knowing its dogwhistle side, and it's possible to be critical of the democratic party without being Trumpian.
      - josephg 3y ago
        Yes, thankyou. I had no idea about any of that - I thought “democrat” was just a shortening of “democratic (party)”. And I’m Australian, so I both miss many of the nuances of US politics, and I’m culturally required to use shortened forms of everything.
goatlover 3y ago
I disagree. For all the criticism color-blindness gets now, there was a lot of progress from the 70s through the early 2000s that seems to have been forgotten in favor of divisive reporting and social media outrage posts. Just because the post-civil rights color-blind era wasn't perfect doesn't meant there wasn't legitimate progress, and that seems under threat now. Some of it is foreign actors, and some of it's coming from both the extreme right and left. They have amplifiers in social media and have managed to get prominent places of power, so they can forment their social revolutions. I count NPR as one of those now, which is a shame because it used to have good and entertaining reporting.
naasking 3y ago
> But your position starts from the basis that we were race-neutral to begin with No, it starts from the position that race is not the most important facet of a human being's life. > So without intention you'll simply perpetuate the negative voices. Almost none of a person's daily life is dominated by racial issues, except maybe people who specifically work in that field of course, and so very little news would have racial relevance. Going out of your way to use race as a lens on every issue is why it's forced.
- dtjb 3y ago
  >Almost none of a person's daily life is dominated by racial issues I won't presume to know your race but many americans do not live with such comfort. Studies have documented how race is correlated to outcomes in everyday encounters such as traffic stops, employment interviews, rental applications, health care treatment, and school performance.
  - subsistence234 3y ago
    that's your religion
  - naasking 3y ago
    > Studies have documented how race is correlated to outcomes in everyday encounters such as traffic stops, employment interviews, rental applications, health care treatment, and school performance. Traffic stops, employment interviews, rental applications, and health care treatment are not events a single person experiences every day, so even if race was a huge factor in all of them, and "huge" is debatable, this is all besides the point.
    - dtjb 3y ago
      But all of those things directly affect their every day lives. Your experience and the assumptions you've drawn are not representative for large swaths of america.
    - kenjackson 3y ago
jimbokun 3y ago
NPR is the voice of white progressives, even if more of the reporters are minorities. NPR’s audience is disproportionately white. It’s part of the reason polls show some minority voters shifting towards Trump. They don’t see their opinions and beliefs reflected in white progressivism, even with the surface emphasis on DEI.

unethical_ban 3y ago

>the belief that the default narrative is implicitly negative toward blacks Well, I disagree with that. I just said NPR specifically focuses too much on identity politics, and I think Desantis is implementing anti-LGBT, anti-education, anti-freedom and anti-democracy legislation. I dont support the dichotomy that one must either desire an abundance of identity-based journalism or be blind to the issues minorities face. I think many of the problems this country faces, which may disproportionately affect minorities, can be covered without it being race-based. Poverty, healthcare, education, environment, climate change, foreign policy affect all.

gedy 3y ago

It sounds too much like "So without intention you'll simply perpetuate the negative voices" is "you are either for us, or against us", which has caused the world no end to misery.

TinkersW 3y ago

Desantis is an idiot that I have zero interest in hearing about. Unless the person has done something worth mentioning that isn't being mentioned only because of their so called "identity" I've zero interest in hearing about it, and would consider such a discussion to be bordering on racist.

josephg 3y ago
As a counterpoint, I listen to The economist’s coverage of US politics. They often interview people involved with the Democrat and Republican campaigns. And I’ve found some of the interviews fascinating - particularly the republican ones because most of my friends and news are left of center. For example, one interviewee in the trump reelection campaign said they talk a lot internally about obstruction. And so, the campaign has lined up a bunch of politically aligned people ahead of time to take over key departments in the US government if trump gets re-elected, so trump can change a lot of government policies on day 1. I find that fascinating. No matter your politics, it’s interesting to know that the “opposing parties, taking turns governing in different ways” angle seems to be getting stronger. Hearing from people I don’t have the opportunity to understand in daily life is exactly what I listen to podcasts like this for. I’m glad this coverage exists.
- angiosperm 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - Phiwise_ 3y ago
    You know, I think you might be onto something here. Surely this cannot just be a shorting of "campaign staff of the drmocrats" and "campaign staff of the republicans" that just looks a little weird before you think about it grammatically. No, there's clearly a multimillion dollar right-wing extremist conspiracy afoot to affect a slight change in noun phrases that will have zero impact on any policy or office. Edit: And my typo of "democrats" as "drmocrats" clearly reveals I'm in on the vicious plot of persecution via zero impact phraseology! Probably getting a check straight from the Kochs, even.
    - the_gastropod 3y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet)
      - Phiwise_ 3y ago
        I am well aware of this ongoing persecution complex in wikipedia form. I avoid linking it to anyone who does not cite it themselves to keep from strawmanning them, as in this case where it is not the same as what was said.
  - unethical_ban 3y ago
    I'm familiar with your point, but ignoring the rest of their commentary and assuming they're taking tea with Greg Gutfeld doesn't help anyone either. It's possible to use a term without knowing its dogwhistle side, and it's possible to be critical of the democratic party without being Trumpian.
    - josephg 3y ago
      Yes, thankyou. I had no idea about any of that - I thought “democrat” was just a shortening of “democratic (party)”. And I’m Australian, so I both miss many of the nuances of US politics, and I’m culturally required to use shortened forms of everything.

goatlover 3y ago

I disagree. For all the criticism color-blindness gets now, there was a lot of progress from the 70s through the early 2000s that seems to have been forgotten in favor of divisive reporting and social media outrage posts. Just because the post-civil rights color-blind era wasn't perfect doesn't meant there wasn't legitimate progress, and that seems under threat now. Some of it is foreign actors, and some of it's coming from both the extreme right and left. They have amplifiers in social media and have managed to get prominent places of power, so they can forment their social revolutions. I count NPR as one of those now, which is a shame because it used to have good and entertaining reporting.

naasking 3y ago

> But your position starts from the basis that we were race-neutral to begin with No, it starts from the position that race is not the most important facet of a human being's life. > So without intention you'll simply perpetuate the negative voices. Almost none of a person's daily life is dominated by racial issues, except maybe people who specifically work in that field of course, and so very little news would have racial relevance. Going out of your way to use race as a lens on every issue is why it's forced.

dtjb 3y ago
>Almost none of a person's daily life is dominated by racial issues I won't presume to know your race but many americans do not live with such comfort. Studies have documented how race is correlated to outcomes in everyday encounters such as traffic stops, employment interviews, rental applications, health care treatment, and school performance.
- subsistence234 3y ago
  that's your religion
- naasking 3y ago
  > Studies have documented how race is correlated to outcomes in everyday encounters such as traffic stops, employment interviews, rental applications, health care treatment, and school performance. Traffic stops, employment interviews, rental applications, and health care treatment are not events a single person experiences every day, so even if race was a huge factor in all of them, and "huge" is debatable, this is all besides the point.
  - dtjb 3y ago
    But all of those things directly affect their every day lives. Your experience and the assumptions you've drawn are not representative for large swaths of america.
  - kenjackson 3y ago

jimbokun 3y ago

NPR is the voice of white progressives, even if more of the reporters are minorities. NPR’s audience is disproportionately white. It’s part of the reason polls show some minority voters shifting towards Trump. They don’t see their opinions and beliefs reflected in white progressivism, even with the surface emphasis on DEI.