The charge leveled at conservative demonstrators is especially ironic given the accusers. The media are notoriously "overwhelmingly white." The American Society of Newspaper Editors reported in April 2010 that minorities total only 13.26 percent of newsroom staff, a decline from the previous year. The report found 465 newspapers have no minorities on their full-time staffs, a number that "has been growing since 2006."
The organization launched a program in 1978 that "challenged the newspaper industry to achieve racial parity by 2000 or sooner." It failed. That goal has since been moved to 2025 because, "Over three decades, the annual survey has shown that while there has been progress, the racial diversity of newsrooms does not come close to the fast-growing diversity in the U.S. population as a whole."
Newspapers aren't alone. The third annual Television Newsroom Management Diversity Census found that "persons of color" only make up 12.6 percent of staff in TV newsrooms. A 2007 survey by the Radio Television Digital News Association found that minorities make up 21.5 percent of the television news workforce - higher than print but still short of the 34.5 percent of the population. Only 10.2 percent of broadcast news directors are minorities.
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Well of the "overwhelmingly white" media can dismiss the "overwhelmingly white" TEA party as being "overwhelmingly white"
Then the "overwhelmingly white" TEA party can dismiss the "overwhelmingly white" media as being "overwhelmingly white."
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Well of the "overwhelmingly white" media can dismiss the "overwhelmingly white" TEA party as being "overwhelmingly white"
Then the "overwhelmingly white" TEA party can dismiss the "overwhelmingly white" media as being "overwhelmingly white."
How "overwhelmingly white" of them both.
The TEA PARTY didnt dismiss the media as being overwhelmingly white!
They were dismissed for being overwhelmingly liberal!
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Because the same media coverage has labeled Tea Partiers, Beck, and other conservatives as racists, so it helps push their portrayal if they include that a crowd at an event was predominantly white. They don't label the color of people's skins at environmental rallies or war protests, both of which are typically liberal causes.
AndyDufresne wrote:Maybe something like: 'White folk discussions for whites: When white folks say white folks are white folks--whites preferably'
That probably exceeds the character limit for a thread title.
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Because the same media coverage has labeled Tea Partiers, Beck, and other conservatives as racists, so it helps push their portrayal if they include that a crowd at an event was predominantly white. They don't label the color of people's skins at environmental rallies or war protests, both of which are typically liberal causes.
Your mind is highly politicized. You see conservative v liberal and Democrat v Republican in all things, even when they're remotely involved--if at all.
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Because the same media coverage has labeled Tea Partiers, Beck, and other conservatives as racists, so it helps push their portrayal if they include that a crowd at an event was predominantly white. They don't label the color of people's skins at environmental rallies or war protests, both of which are typically liberal causes.
Your mind is highly politicized. You see conservative v liberal and Democrat v Republican in all things, even when they're remotely involved--if at all.
Have you noticed this about yourself?
can't we all just agree that the white media and white tea party people are all just a bunch of racists? And everybody that's not included in those 2 groups are a bunch of rapists too.
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
They weren't predominantly white - they were "overwhelmingly white"
Which probably means that the people who were quoted in the story were overwhelmed at the amount of whiteness. It's an easy thing to get overwhelmed by.
PLAYER57832 wrote:I hope we all become liberal drones.
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Because the same media coverage has labeled Tea Partiers, Beck, and other conservatives as racists, so it helps push their portrayal if they include that a crowd at an event was predominantly white.
So we're in agreement. Saying that the crowd was predominantly white is not a criticism at all, but calling them racist is.
"How dare they point out the large majority of white people in the group?!" still reeks of playing the victim card.
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Because the same media coverage has labeled Tea Partiers, Beck, and other conservatives as racists, so it helps push their portrayal if they include that a crowd at an event was predominantly white. They don't label the color of people's skins at environmental rallies or war protests, both of which are typically liberal causes.
Your mind is highly politicized.
Night Strike, i would honestly be interested to see the media coverage you mentioned. I'm not american and I don;t read/watch US news too much, but I am interested in this stuff. If you could post a few links that would be awesome.
AndyDufresne wrote:Do you think you include more references to white in your title? I feel like it would benefit the topic, attracting more respondents.
I was going to use the article's title, "Overwhelmingly White Media Criticize Conservative Rallies as 'Overwhelmingly White'" but as you know Andy, there is a limit on how long the title can be. So I had to condense it a little.
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Because the same media coverage has labeled Tea Partiers, Beck, and other conservatives as racists, so it helps push their portrayal if they include that a crowd at an event was predominantly white. They don't label the color of people's skins at environmental rallies or war protests, both of which are typically liberal causes.
Your mind is highly politicized.
Night Strike, i would honestly be interested to see the media coverage you mentioned. I'm not american and I don;t read/watch US news too much, but I am interested in this stuff. If you could post a few links that would be awesome.
I linked to the msn.com article about the event where the phrase was first used. The story may have come from the Associated Press because it was also in my local paper nearly the same, but I don't remember for sure. Stories on MSN also run on MSNBC and NBC, which have frequently shown their disdain for Tea Partiers (look up Hardball, Morning Joe, etc.).
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
Because the same media coverage has labeled Tea Partiers, Beck, and other conservatives as racists, so it helps push their portrayal if they include that a crowd at an event was predominantly white. They don't label the color of people's skins at environmental rallies or war protests, both of which are typically liberal causes.
Your mind is highly politicized. You see conservative v liberal and Democrat v Republican in all things, even when they're remotely involved--if at all.
Have you noticed this about yourself?
Your point? Making the connection between values, coverage, and opinions and how they relate to political situations and policies is important in a society where everything the government does will have some effect on the way we live our lives. And when individuals continue to push a false characterization of a group of people they disagree with, especially when I would consider my values in line with those of that group, I justifiably get angered over it.
AndyDufresne wrote:Do you think you include more references to white in your title? I feel like it would benefit the topic, attracting more respondents.
Maybe something like: 'White folk discussions for whites: When white folks say white folks are white folks--whites preferably'
--Andy
I was going to use the article's title, "Overwhelmingly White Media Criticize Conservative Rallies as 'Overwhelmingly White'" but as you know Andy, there is a limit on how long the title can be. So I had to condense it a little.
I wish it could say: 'White folk discussions for whites - Overwhelming whiteness, aka the White Sandwich: when white folks say white folks are white folks--whites preferably.'
Night Strike wrote:And when individuals continue to push a false characterization of a group of people they disagree with, especially when I would consider my values in line with those of that group, I justifiably get angered over it.
Night Strike wrote:the liberal mindset of teaching kids that they shouldn't listen to their parents or be disciplined by them... Teaching them that it's better to ignore their parents than respect them
Night Strike wrote:...they feel that the government has to provide every want. Today being "liberal" means bigger government... Liberals want to fight prosperity and use the government to distribute the wealth. Liberals fight for "equality of outcome"
Timminz wrote:How is saying that an event was predominantly white being portrayed as a criticism?
They weren't predominantly white - they were "overwhelmingly white"
Which probably means that the people who were quoted in the story were overwhelmed at the amount of whiteness. It's an easy thing to get overwhelmed by.
... Stop and think... what percentage of black Americans voted for Obama? Wasn't it up around 90%. Do such folks attend tea parties? No.
... Black Americans are 14% of the US population... so... (do the math).
... The remaining 10% (or less) of black Americans who did not vote for Obama represent what % of the US population? The number is overwhelmingly small, isn't it? (10% of that 14%).
