Racism Squared: Et tu CBS?
December 2nd, 2005Not only is the story about racism, how about the dig at the end? Local news can be so ugly.
Two questions:
- The company doesn’t really care about it’s image, but what “other website” did that “information” come from?
- Who wrote the copy for that news story?
Even if the news copy isn’t meant to have racist overtones, it sure reads like it. I’ve seen this a lot with stories in the local media. They’ll report a horrible thing, then end the story with a bit that sounds like support for the awful thing, making the whole package a nice little bit of ass cracker journalism.
Worse still, I believe CBS owns this affiliate.
UPDATE: Salt Lake Tribune story here. Same racist closing paragraph. Unbelievable.
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:12 pm
Jon,
As it happens, there was a link to the site below on The Morning News yesterday. It provides all the data you can think of on every town/state in America. For each town, there’s a racial demographics section that indicates whether each population group is above or below the state average. It bolds the “significantly above” or “significantly below” too. My bet is they lifted it from this site.
http://www.city-data.com/
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:12 pm
These are the same people who tell their kids they’re fat and then realize it was a bad idea years later when the kid invites them to a group session with their therapist.
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:43 pm
Yes, CBS does own KUTV.
http://tinyurl.com/cxe9z
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:46 pm
Sorry, that link is slightly off.
The list of Viacom (which owns CBS) owned stations is here: http://tinyurl.com/bwh6j
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:50 pm
I find it fascinating, inexplicable and painful that there are cities (per that city-data page) in which less than 60% of the population have finished high school, less than 5% have gone to college, and 99% of the people are white.
Somehow, I think I might guess at their voting choices..
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:58 pm
after reading that, i thought they might be owned by these guys.
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:59 pm
sorry, these guys = http://tinyurl.com/a4pew
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:07 pm
While I agree that *promoting* a neighborhood on the basis that it’s “less black than average” is mindbogglingly reprehensible, I’m having trouble understanding your specific outrage at the closing paragraph, which merely states what the actual black demographic is, according to census data.
While reading the story, I found myself wondering what the actual data was, being suspicious that Utah is extremely white. The last paragraph answered my question. I don’t see it in any way as “supporting” the aforementioned reprehensible reporting - unless you see any mention of the objective fact in the context of such a story as implicit support, in which case I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:07 pm
How can copy like that NOT be racist? I can’t think of any other reason to boast a small percentage of blacks as a selling point.
If there’s another interpretation, somebody enlighten me.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:11 pm
Yes, the tone of the article smacks of apartheid, but it creates the opposite effect in my mind. I would never want to live somewhere so homogeneous. As Ashik pointed out, I doubt I’d have much in common, politically speaking, with my neighbors.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:13 pm
I can’t speak for Jon, but for me the point would be to not make race an issue period. By concluding the story with census data, KUTV indirectly verified the accuracy of the builder’s claim when it should have dropped the race issue entirely. The point of the article should be that the builder was wrong to point this stuff out. When KUTV also points this stuff out, what does that say about KUTV?
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:15 pm
Tony, it’s not that the census data is mentioned. This is a perfect example of horrible news writing. It is against the Fair Housing Act to discriminate by race, and that point is completely ignored by two media outlets.
The data is real, but in this context, comes across as neither objective nor presented in such a way as to be relevant to the story except to redeem the racists.
If the data were presented as “this is an extremely white neighborhood already…” and done so higher in the story, that’s a different use of the data.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:24 pm
Honestly, I think I need to agree with Tony on this one. When we were looking into moving to a new town, we looked at the racial data for each one, because we WANTED racial diversity. I don’t think its that unusual to want that info, and the data was copied from the exact format of the city.data website. In addition, the article points out that blacks were not singled out in the demographics, but was one group among others (the city.data site lists several groups for each town as well.
The census data was confirming the data on the original site that there is indeed a small black population in the state and in the town. Honestly, this feels a bit like a tempest in a teapot and a news story trying to create a controversey out of context, which we know is not all surprising. I agree that it’s crappy reporting.
Finally, I just showed this to a friend (who’s black) and she didn’t see what all the fuss is all about either.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:42 pm
This really pisses me off. I just wrote yesterday about racism, honoring Rosa Parks and her actions, attempting to spread the word that this shit needs to STOP. NOW. For all races. We need to wake up and accept the fact that we all live on this planet, and we can either learn to love each other and embrace all our differences, or continue to be ignorant fucks. Sorry for the language Jon, but this is the kind of thing that sends me absolutely reeling.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:50 pm
Blurb said: This is a perfect example of horrible news writing. It is against the Fair Housing Act to discriminate by race, and that point is completely ignored by two media outlets.
But this is taken directly from the Tribune news story: The Fair Housing Act makes it illegal “To make, print, or publish . . . any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.”
As far as “who wrote this news story,” I believe the answer is Matt Canham from The Tribune. The Tribune and Channel 2 “share” stories. In addition, Channel 2 cites The Associated Press as its “source,” which is where M. Canham’s story was sent (and eventually trimmed down) after it was sent to press at The Tribune.
Subscribers to AP can publish photos, stories, graphics with no source other than “AP” under most circumstances. That explains why the last graph is exactly the same.
Finally, I have to agree that I do not find the last graph to be without purpose in the context of the story. This story tells the public that a real estate developer used publically available census data on its Web site in a marketing capacity. It tells the public exactly how that data was used, but doesn’t say “And this is an atrocity, be offended!” The story then includes comments from “both sides” — the folks affiliated with the development and someone to represent the folks who were singled out on the Website, in this case NAACP. And for further balance, if you will, a non-partisan type “professional” is included. Pulitzer stuff? Not at all. But I wouldn’t exactly call it shit.
The last paragraph fills in the blanks for readers. “BTW, here are the demographics of your state.” I see nothing inflammatory about it, but on the same hand I see everything inflammatory with the Web site’s use of the data. It’s all interpretation, and the developer (or the scape goat Web guy, give me a break) will NEVER cop to including that information on the Web site as a “selling point.”
But isn’t it true most folks who read the story or see it on the TV news will believe that’s the intention?
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:00 pm
Yeah, I still don’t get what’s so offensive about the last paragraph of the news story. As a newspaper copy editor, if that story came across the desk without that information I’d either tell the reporter to get it or go get it myself. I think it’s pertinent to the story.
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:04 pm
Jon:
As to whether the organizations missed the point you raise, it’s not clear to me that it applies. The Fair Housing Act says it’s illegal to discriminate in the *offering of various real estate transactions to a particular individual* on account of that person’s race. It’s not clear to me that it prohibits the use of objective race data in marketing.
A case could be made that such a use would create a “chilling effect” for some parties that resulted de facto discrimination, but I don’t see that specifically called out in the Act. Maybe there’s a judicial precedent on this, but I suspect it falls in the category of extremely poor taste. What *would* clearly be illegal under the Act is if the builder explicitly stated a racial preference.
(See http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/title8.htm)
As for whether the agencies “verified the accuracy” of the builder’s statement in reporting the census data, my reading of that paragraph is that it actually makes the builder look even more ridiculous. That is, since blacks are already “rare in Utah,” as the opening sentence of that paragraph stated, it seems ludicrous to distinguish the 0.7 percentage point difference between Eagle Lake and Utah as a whole.
I’d really like to see how you would’ve written the copy for this story in a way that you think would’ve avoided your criticisms. I’m not being facetious or sarcastic - just genuinely curious. Part of the challenge is the notion that objective journalism should hew very close to facts and leave interpretation to the editorial page. If you subscribe to that notion, it’s not clear to me how you say “this is just flat wrong” in the story. Of course, plenty of folks think this notion is an utter fallacy.
OK, I’ll shut up now.
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:34 pm
With “skipper n giligan” in the white house, I’ve experienced numerous jaw-dropping moments the past five years. I had another one when I read the article. Reading the responses from Tony and Michelle has left me not only slackjawed, but numb. Their perception of this country (the same perception that gave us the current whitehouse)is so different from mine that I don’t see how we can “agree to disagree”.
The idea that if one is an articulate wordsmith, if one will admit that the article was racist, but quibble about census semantics to (in effect)legitimize using race to sell homes, merits a value judgement of any sort is, beyond my limited comprehension.
Racism is racism. Don’t much matter if you burn crosses and scream at the top of your lungs, or, if you quietly do whatever is necessary to exclude someone different that you from your country club. “Jesus wept”
P>S> i’m not looking for a “post”, don’t really need one,,,, i just got a little to pissed and needed to let off some steam
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:35 pm
the story is that a builder promoted a low black population in the city of his future nazi-neighborhood, as if it’s an incentive to live there. the whole article explains this well. then, at the end, the reporter drops in the statistics, as if to say “whatchya gettin’ your tighty whities in a bind for, it’s just the facts.”
they may just be facts out of context. but in the context of the website and article, they smack of racism.
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:37 pm
I have heard myself say this all too often since my move to the area but, *only in Utah!*
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:56 pm
Wow Harry, whether you are looking for a response or not, you are going to get one, since you essentially called me a racist (not to mention a Bush lover). Your post degenerated what was a healthy and interesting debate to really nasty name calling in one fell swoop.
I didn’t realize that my perception of this article had helped to usher in the current White House administration, all of whom I actively despise. Frankly, I’m a little “slackjawed and numb” that my opinions of this article puts me on the same level as “cross burners.” I spent 10 years of my life until 2 years ago as a minority in a black neighborhood in Brooklyn, which taught me a LOT more about race relations and racism than many converstations with my chest-thumping liberal white bretheren, and I can say that although perhaps some of my non-white friends New York would disagree with my opinion (though certainly not all), NONE of them would have made the offensive leap against my character that you did.
Don’t mind me Harry, just “letting of some steam.”
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:06 pm
First, I know the guy who wrote the story for the Trib. I used to copyedit for a paper he worked on as the lead reporter, and I worked with him every single day for many years. As for his character, intent, and reporting skills, there is very little to criticize.
Second, I think the census data was a necessary element of an article that certainly begs the question, “What kind of percentages are we talking about here, anyhow?” NOT because the numbers could ever condone anything, but because readers will be curious about them. A good reporter will anticipate that curiosity and provide the relevant information.
Third, I agree with Tony. The last paragraph seemed tongue-in-cheek to me in that it pointed out how ludicrous the builder was to mention the relative scarcity of black residents in one of the whitest states in the nation (I say as a Salt Lake native). If the reporter and his editor and the paper were indeed racist, I’m guessing they wouldn’t have even run the story in the first place, as they’d see no need to bring to the public’s attention something that was “no big deal.” The way I read it, the story was printed (at least partially) to definitively embarrass the jerks responsible–both by reporting on their ignorance and then by underlining the extent of their shallow, asshole ways by throwing in the stats.
Blurb–You should send Matt an email and ask him what he was thinking. Unless he’s changed A LOT since we last talked, I’m guessing he put the stats in under the cover of “just the facts, ma’am,” but actually meant them as a dig at the actual racists.
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:09 pm
So, like, this is why dooce turned off her comments. Harry, please chill and refrain from personal attacks.
And I have to agree, the last paragraph of the story is not terribly offensive unless one is looking at it under particular light. In fact, one could interpret the language as a subtle “Utah is so white and lacking in diversity likely because of people like the builder.” Really, there are so many actually offensive things going on around the world, but I don’t think at all that this is one of them . .
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:25 pm
Does Utah have a state chapter of the KKK?
Perhaps soemone should tell Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, the NAACP about this…
Hell, maybe the mormon church should review it’s recruiting efforts.
Remember though, racism isn’t exclusively against blacks. It can be against anyone.
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:26 pm
If anyones interested:
http://www.census.gov