Consider the following passages from what purports to be a news story, not an opinion piece, in today’s Washington Post by Robert E. Pierre and Hamil R. Harris on the upcoming “Millions More” march in Washington to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the “Million Man March.”
First, the lede:
In the immediate aftermath of the Million Man March, black men nationwide held their heads higher, vowed to be better men and walked with a more confident air.
Did they really? Is this news, or biased hyperbole? Maybe it would be poetic license, if it were poetic.
“Those who had their eyes closed, Katrina opened them up,” the Rev. Willie F. Wilson, pastor of Union Temple Baptist Church in Southeast Washington and national executive director of the event, said yesterday. “Those who thought we had it made will see that we don’t. The masses of our people remain in impoverished conditions.”
I suppose it would have been too much trouble, or spoiled the mood, for the authors to point out that according to the 2000 census
[t]he Black poverty rate … fell to 22.1 percent. And although Blacks continue to suffer a disproportionately high poverty rate, since 1993 the disparity between Black and Non-Hispanic White poverty rates has narrowed dramatically, from 23.2 percentage points to 14.6 percentage points. The poverty rate for Hispanics, at 21.2 percent, equaled – but did not fall below – its record low.
Pierre and Harris write that “Farrakhan is no longer considered an outsider,” and that
Farrakhan, who survived a bout with prostate cancer, said he has also grown in the past decade. Instead of a purely black, nationalistic message, he said, his goal is to join forces with all like-minded people.
Did he really say “all” like-minded people? That’s not what Pierre and Harris quote him as saying:
“We must attend to the needs of our people, but we must also form strategic alliances with Latinos, Native Americans and the poor people of this nation to find common cause, to pool our resources and to reshape foreign policy,” Farrakhan said.
What about “like-minded people” who are neither Latino, nor Native American, nor poor? Would he make common cause with them? What if they were Jewish?
Speaking of Jewish, Pierre and Harris report that
Black leaders, including D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams, fully support this march, seemingly without worrying that some of Farrakhan’s past comments — criticized by some as mean-spirited, sexist and anti-Semitic — will tarnish them.
So, Pierre and Harris report as fact that black men walked taller after the first march — no “it is said,” etc., there — but refuse to report Farrakhan’s anti-semitic and other obnoxious remarks (Judaism as a “gutter religion”; the Pope as “the anti-Christ,” etc.) without hiding behind a “criticized by some as….”
If I wanted to emulate these authors I would say that their article will be criticized by some as offensive. But since I don’t, let me just say that it is.
John, I guess great minds think alike. As I read your post I was starting to write a response that would have made the same point as you did. The news media will never directly criticize any minority group no matter how odious are the comments that they make. At best they will attribute the criticism to a small (and obviously misguided if not bigoted) group of people. Just because he calls Judaism a gutter religion is no reason for the news media to state that Farrakhan is an anti-Semite. After all, that would be making a value judgment. However, they don’t have a problem with calling Bill Bennett a racist.
If Calypso Louie speaks at this event, watch for the MSM to censor his remarks like they did at the first 400,000 man march. My local paper, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, sent about 5 writers and photogs to DC, but somehow was unable to print a complete transcript of this idiot’s ranting, methinks it clearly was because they didn’t want to relate and therefore expose his hallucinations about numerology in his remarks. Something tells me that any such hilarity will get a bit more exposure now, something about a little different media structure….
I also challenge anyone to find inthe MSM any listing of who actually spoke at the first march. The Washington Post, a newspaper that lists everyone who attend a formal dinner at the White House, failed to list the pdoium guests or list of speaker at the first MMM.
Also, why are political leaders not criticized for supporting such a bigot?
Superdestroyer,
Mayber this attendee, conservative talk show host Armstrong Williams could lend a hand in helping you understand the issue.
>>>”MR. WILLIAMS: Well, you know, I was, Ms. Gault, opposed to the march because obviously I was misinformed, and I allowed my emotions to override common sense and just good judgment. And so I decided for myself to attend instead of listening to the media and listening to others, and, and I was just amazed at the love and the warmth and the respect; that sometimes what we forget, sometimes in our own world, is that there are a lot of people in pain, a lot of people are not as fortunate to have grown up with two parents, a strong mother and a strong father, a loving community, a loving home. And a lot of kids today, especially the younger generation, are being reared without a strong father in the home and sometime without a mother, and the thing is that people are looking for hope. They
Cobra, do you think Armstrong Williams gets a special dispensation because he is a “conservative ” talk show host? This reminds me of the old joke: Except for that Mrs. Lincoln how did you enjoy the play? Except for the fact that Farrakhan is a bigot and an anti-Semite how did you like his message? If Armstrong Williams is unable to understand that you can
Richard writes:
>>>”If Armstrong Williams is unable to understand that you can
Cobra, unlike the Democrats we don’t patronize minorities. The last I noticed Armstrong Williams is a man, not a child, and he is responsible for his own actions. When he does something dumb he will be criticized just the same as President Bush has been criticized over his Supreme Court nomination. Do you really think that Mr. Williams should be exempt from criticism because he is a minority?
Richard,
That’s not part of the RNC talking points memo. The strategy is to defend minority conservatives at all costs. People like Alan Keyes, who ran for the Illinois Senate last year on the REPARATIONS Platform hardly got a peep out of the masses.
Now, I’ll grant you, unwavering loyalty and dedication from people like Condoleezza Rice puts the conservative nation at ease, but sacrificing an dutiful agent like Armstrong? Come on, Rich.
–Cobra
That’s not part of the RNC talking points memo
Cobra, when were you put on the list of recipients of the RNC talking points? As far as your characterization of the conservatives
Cobra,
Maybe you are confusing the RNC talking points memo with the CBC memo that says never, ever criticize another black Democrat politican. No matter how much coke they snort, how many 15 y/o interns they seduce, how many bastard babies they fathers, or how much union money they steal, Americans can count on blacks to support corrupt politicians as much as they support felons like OJ or racist like Farrakhan.
Excuse me, but I wasn’t aware that the RNC or the Bush admin. had commented here. I also fail to see the relevance of Cobra’s introduction of Armstrong William’s attendance at the first million man (or perhaps million man plus one conservative) march. How is his attendance and warm fuzzy feelings about it relevant to my criticism of the mealy-mouthed Wash. Post article (which, if you’ll recall, was the subject of my post)?
John,
I was simply responding to the challenge offered by Superdestroyer here:
“I also challenge anyone to find inthe MSM any listing of who actually spoke at the first march.”
The challenge was not only MET, but exposes the strategy of marginalization utilized by many right of center types when discussing minority activism.
That’s the relevance.
–Cobra