White Privilege at MU

[Pakuni]

I'd agree the "media" should not take any steps to adapt to the Trump base, they are conditioned to not believe them anyway.

Separate from that, I do think the media does need to be careful at balancing speed to market, accuracy, and amplification of stories. I've seen a tendency to report news breathlessy but the story either isn't as "important" as reported or might be inaccurate in certain details (especially the ones sourced by "administration officials" - 538 had a great article on some of the sourcing discussion). At some point Trump will not be in power and I don't want to media conditioned to tip the scales.

Maybe another way to put this, I think(especially in TV media) we are seeing a blurring of reporting and opining which I think could be problematic long term.

I think this is fair and accurate.
Regarding the sped to market, there is an immense amount of pressure on journalists in today's media environment  to be first with stories or, if not first, not very far behind. The result of that can be (and too often has been) inaccurate or incomplete reporting. I don't cite that as an excuse, but as an explanation. The days of a reporter spending hours developing the story of the day are long gone. Often a story can go from source to publication/air in a matter of minutes.

[mu03eng]

I think this is fair and accurate.
Regarding the sped to market, there is an immense amount of pressure on journalists in today's media environment  to be first with stories or, if not first, not very far behind. The result of that can be (and too often has been) inaccurate or incomplete reporting. I don't cite that as an excuse, but as an explanation. The days of a reporter spending hours developing the story of the day are long gone. Often a story can go from source to publication/air in a matter of minutes.

I completely agree. I'm not sure what the solution is but I think it has to come out of the media themselves. It isn't a new phenomenon, retractions always show up on page 17 for a page 1 story, but I think the media has to find a way to negate the need to be first. Additionally, I fear some of the tribalization of news "sources" impacts this as well. The ability to get news from a source friendly to your viewpoint is problematic.

[MU82]

Not sure what everybody means by "the media," but the tireless reporters and editors at the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post are true American heroes these days.

[tower912]

http://www.newsweek.com/black-firefighter-questioned-videotaped-and-reported-police-while-conducting-994991

911 called over black firefighter doing his job.   

A personal story.    I was filling in as captain for a few months at a different station a couple of years ago.    Our department was out doing building inspections.    The crew on the other shift was two African American firefighters and one Caucasian female.    They were performing an inspection and familiarizing themselves with a 6 story office building in our district.     They were in uniform with the big red truck parked outside.    Occupants of the building called our fire administration because they were concerned they were terrorists canvassing the building.   When this story was relayed to me, the African American lieutenant involved had to physically restrain me from going and unloading on the a-hole who had called.     He turned it into a joke, saying that clearly they were afraid of women firefighters. 

[MU82]

http://www.newsweek.com/black-firefighter-questioned-videotaped-and-reported-police-while-conducting-994991

911 called over black firefighter doing his job.   

A personal story.    I was filling in as captain for a few months at a different station a couple of years ago.    Our department was out doing building inspections.    The crew on the other shift was two African American firefighters and one Caucasian female.    They were performing an inspection and familiarizing themselves with a 6 story office building in our district.     They were in uniform with the big red truck parked outside.    Occupants of the building called our fire administration because they were concerned they were terrorists canvassing the building.   When this story was relayed to me, the African American lieutenant involved had to physically restrain me from going and unloading on the a-hole who had called.     He turned it into a joke, saying that clearly they were afraid of women firefighters.

That's an amazing story, tower. Not surprising, but amazing.

There will be some who claim that the presence of the white woman "proves" that there was no racial profiling involved.

[Jockey]

http://www.newsweek.com/black-firefighter-questioned-videotaped-and-reported-police-while-conducting-994991

911 called over black firefighter doing his job.   

A personal story.    I was filling in as captain for a few months at a different station a couple of years ago.    Our department was out doing building inspections.    The crew on the other shift was two African American firefighters and one Caucasian female.    They were performing an inspection and familiarizing themselves with a 6 story office building in our district.     They were in uniform with the big red truck parked outside.    Occupants of the building called our fire administration because they were concerned they were terrorists canvassing the building.   When this story was relayed to me, the African American lieutenant involved had to physically restrain me from going and unloading on the a-hole who had called.     He turned it into a joke, saying that clearly they were afraid of women firefighters.

It's too bad he stopped you from doing what you wanted to do.

This stuff will only end when WHITE people get pissed and speak up.

[StillAWarrior]

http://www.newsweek.com/black-firefighter-questioned-videotaped-and-reported-police-while-conducting-994991

911 called over black firefighter doing his job.   

A personal story.    I was filling in as captain for a few months at a different station a couple of years ago.    Our department was out doing building inspections.    The crew on the other shift was two African American firefighters and one Caucasian female.    They were performing an inspection and familiarizing themselves with a 6 story office building in our district.     They were in uniform with the big red truck parked outside.    Occupants of the building called our fire administration because they were concerned they were terrorists canvassing the building.   When this story was relayed to me, the African American lieutenant involved had to physically restrain me from going and unloading on the a-hole who had called.     He turned it into a joke, saying that clearly they were afraid of women firefighters.

You can't be too careful, what with all those terrorist attacks from African American men and white women.  If you see something; say something.

[mu03eng]

Not sure what everybody means by "the media," but the tireless reporters and editors at the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post are true American heroes these days.

For the most part yes, but they are also part of the rat race that is trying to be the next Bernstein which doesn't always mean they get it right. Additionally, I get some sense that especially the TV media are setting themselves as an opposition to the Cheeto in Chief which I get at a personal level but if that colors the reporting I think you are doing a disservice to media. Report the facts and the context of why the story/facts are important and let the public decide if they need to oppose. Don't get me wrong, this isn't intended as a bash the media post, I'm simply saying that in my humble opinion the media is starting to blur the line between reporting and opining and that is a real tough line to unblur.

[Pakuni]

I completely agree. I'm not sure what the solution is but I think it has to come out of the media themselves. It isn't a new phenomenon, retractions always show up on page 17 for a page 1 story, but I think the media has to find a way to negate the need to be first. Additionally, I fear some of the tribalization of news "sources" impacts this as well. The ability to get news from a source friendly to your viewpoint is problematic.

I don't think you can (or should) negate the need to be first. While there's a downside to it, it's that kind of competitiveness that often drives the best reporting. As much as Woodward and Bernstein wanted to expose corruption in the Nixon Administration, they also wanted to kick the NY Times' rear sideways.
As far as getting news from sources friendly to your viewpoint, I don't think that's a new phenomenon. The tribalism of which you speak is perhaps worse than it was 30-40 years ago, but historically speaking, it's nothing like the first 150+ years of US history. The notion of an objective and unbiased news media is a relatively recent development in America.

[mu_hilltopper]

Our village's police department has specifically communicated this:  If you see something you think is odd, call 911 and we'll come figure it out.  That's what we're here for.

We all have different thresholds for what we think is odd, not to mention a threshold of the fear of political correctness reprisal if we "wrongly" think something is odd. 

[Pakuni]

Our village's police department has specifically communicated this:  If you see something you think is odd, call 911 and we'll come figure it out.  That's what we're here for.

We all have different thresholds for what we think is odd, not to mention a threshold of the fear of political correctness reprisal if we "wrongly" think something is odd.

The accusations of racism come when someone find it "odd" to see a black person engaging in perfectly normal behavior (like having a BBQ or being a firefighter or napping on a dormitory couch) that they wouldn't find so odd if a white person were doing it.
In such cases, it's not "odd" behavior that's leading people to calling police, it's the skin color of the person engaging in routine behavior.

[mu03eng]

I don't think you can (or should) negate the need to be first. While there's a downside to it, it's that kind of competitiveness that often drives the best reporting. As much as Woodward and Bernstein wanted to expose corruption in the Nixon Administration, they also wanted to kick the NY Times' rear sideways.
As far as getting news from sources friendly to your viewpoint, I don't think that's a new phenomenon. The tribalism of which you speak is perhaps worse than it was 30-40 years ago, but historically speaking, it's nothing like the first 150+ years of US history. The notion of an objective and unbiased news media is a relatively recent development in America.

Don't disagree for the most part. However the volume of friendly "news sources" has exploded of late so it becomes very difficult to find an amalgamated source of truth. this is where I think things like 538 are beneficial and I'd like to see more "just the facts" type of news sources. They don't have to be fast or first, but hey here's what we know of this story in the last 24/48/72 hours, what we know and what we don't. Unfortunately, there probably isn't a way to monetize but it'd be nice.

[Jockey]

I don't think you can (or should) negate the need to be first. While there's a downside to it, it's that kind of competitiveness that often drives the best reporting. As much as Woodward and Bernstein wanted to expose corruption in the Nixon Administration, they also wanted to kick the NY Times' rear sideways.

Excellent point. We need to remember that The Post of the early '70s was still just a family newspaper and not the influential giant that it is today. Their reporting on Ellsberg and then Watergate shortly afterwards is what made them a national paper.

[tower912]

The accusations of racism come when someone find it "odd" to see a black person engaging in perfectly normal behavior (like having a BBQ or being a firefighter or napping on a dormitory couch) that they wouldn't find so odd if a white person were doing it.
In such cases, it's not "odd" behavior that's leading people to calling police, it's the skin color of the person engaging in routine behavior.

Or being a child selling bottles of water.

[MU82]

For the most part yes, but they are also part of the rat race that is trying to be the next Bernstein which doesn't always mean they get it right. Additionally, I get some sense that especially the TV media are setting themselves as an opposition to the Cheeto in Chief which I get at a personal level but if that colors the reporting I think you are doing a disservice to media. Report the facts and the context of why the story/facts are important and let the public decide if they need to oppose. Don't get me wrong, this isn't intended as a bash the media post, I'm simply saying that in my humble opinion the media is starting to blur the line between reporting and opining and that is a real tough line to unblur.

I don't think you can (or should) negate the need to be first. While there's a downside to it, it's that kind of competitiveness that often drives the best reporting. As much as Woodward and Bernstein wanted to expose corruption in the Nixon Administration, they also wanted to kick the NY Times' rear sideways.
As far as getting news from sources friendly to your viewpoint, I don't think that's a new phenomenon. The tribalism of which you speak is perhaps worse than it was 30-40 years ago, but historically speaking, it's nothing like the first 150+ years of US history. The notion of an objective and unbiased news media is a relatively recent development in America.

Good discussion, guys. Thanks.

I tend to separate TV from newspapers. While newspapers want to compete and sell subscriptions, that is a far different driver than what TV networks face. The TV folks also blur the lines much more readily. With newspapers, it is usually (not always, but usually) obvious what is a fact-filled article and what is opinion/analysis.

Of course newspapers occasionally get something wrong. When they do, they run corrections. Contrast that to the way politicians get things wrong all the time ... and rarely admit it.

I have been most pleasantly surprised by the WSJ. Although their owner is compromised from a bias standpoint, their reporters and editors have done a great job these last couple of years. The Times and Post ... we'd be at the mercy of the powers-that-be without them.

[rocket surgeon]

The accusations of racism come when someone find it "odd" to see a black person engaging in perfectly normal behavior (like having a BBQ or being a firefighter or napping on a dormitory couch) that they wouldn't find so odd if a white person were doing it.
In such cases, it's not "odd" behavior that's leading people to calling police, it's the skin color of the person engaging in routine behavior.

ok, as we are finding quite a few examples, it seems, of more stupid, racist people being stupid and racist, how can these be resolved?  what can we do to do better?
   we seem quick to continue to point these out, but no one, including me, has any answers.  i'm hoping these situations are less than they were, say 10, 20, 30...years ago.  we are human and that means we are imperfect.  there will always be room for more improvement.  but if we are all sitting here waiting for an answer...i'm all ears.  i always say, "things" happen for a reason...why are these "things" happening?  i'm hoping they are occuring in order to bring the goodness out of those who care and to shine the light on the idiots hoping public condemnation allows some to become more aware to the stupidity of their ways

[tower912]

Pointing them out and not letting them go unchallenged is a step.   Educating how actions and words can be interpreted as racist is a step.   It will take the changing of hearts and educating the minds and hearts of the young.   If one wants to change one must look inward and examine thoughts and actions and accept personal failings and make the choice to change.

[mu03eng]

ok, as we are finding quite a few examples, it seems, of more stupid, racist people being stupid and racist, how can these be resolved?  what can we do to do better?
   we seem quick to continue to point these out, but no one, including me, has any answers.  i'm hoping these situations are less than they were, say 10, 20, 30...years ago.  we are human and that means we are imperfect.  there will always be room for more improvement.  but if we are all sitting here waiting for an answer...i'm all ears.  i always say, "things" happen for a reason...why are these "things" happening?  i'm hoping they are occuring in order to bring the goodness out of those who care and to shine the light on the idiots hoping public condemnation allows some to become more aware to the stupidity of their ways

Surface any and everything of this nature in a constructive way. If you see something, say something, especially when you are in the majority. There is some argument to be had for sure but the problem really only gets fixed by white people not accepting casual or accidental racism or any other ism

[JWags85]

Surface any and everything of this nature in a constructive way. If you see something, say something, especially when you are in the majority. There is some argument to be had for sure but the problem really only gets fixed by white people not accepting casual or accidental racism or any other ism

Also, refusing to accept or explain away stuff like "grew up in a different time", "thats how it was where i grew up", etc...  That doesnt mean you have to shout RACIST at people who lack exposure or understanding of why things are inherently racist, offensive, etc... but allowing that to be an excuse or a shoo away for such behavior leads to it unintentionally labeled as ok or an exception, instead of stopping it dead.

[Galway Eagle]

Also, refusing to accept or explain away stuff like "grew up in a different time", "thats how it was where i grew up", etc...  That doesnt mean you have to shout RACIST at people who lack exposure or understanding of why things are inherently racist, offensive, etc... but allowing that to be an excuse or a shoo away for such behavior leads to it unintentionally labeled as ok or an exception, instead of stopping it dead.

Honestly this might be the most accurate thing that explains why theres no legitimate dialogue. Half the people out there think jokes,
Accepting institutional disadvantages, etc are not racist because the way they grew up, racism meant lynching and being pro separate but equal. The lines moved and those on the non racist side are too busy screaming racist to simply explain hey times have changed what's considered racist is less now. (That being said you then have a percentage of people who'd say they're sick of PC culture and those people are just looking for reasons to be jerks)

[NWarsh]

Honestly this might be the most accurate thing that explains why theres no legitimate dialogue. Half the people out there think jokes,
Accepting institutional disadvantages, etc are not racist because the way they grew up, racism meant lynching and being pro separate but equal. The lines moved and those on the non racist side are too busy screaming racist to simply explain hey times have changed what's considered racist is less now. (That being said you then have a percentage of people who'd say they're sick of PC culture and those people are just looking for reasons to be jerks)

While I am sure some people do it for that reason, I think the majority do it because they are threatened by the changing dynamics.  They really do not know how to cope with the changes so that and other comments/actions similar to that are their defense mechanism.

[JWags85]

(That being said you then have a percentage of people who'd say they're sick of PC culture and those people are just looking for reasons to be jerks)

That, and its harder.  You're asking people to change behavior they don't deem to be offensive on the basis of a lack of understanding or education about something.  Some of them are just looking for reasons to be jerks, sure, but there is also a disconnect about the idea that sometimes you dont get to be the arbiter of what is offensive.  I remember an elderly relative commenting how she was helped earlier that day by "the nice colored man at the grocery store".  She's not a virulent racist, and she was being complimentary, but its still wrong and inherently disrespectful.  But trying to explain it away based on age, or saying "well then why is the NAACP named as such then, it must be ok", is what perpetuates problems.

Hell, I used to use gay as an adjective all the time when I was a teenager.  I wasn't a bigot, I didn't have deeper meaning behind it...but I grew to realize that problem with it, the impact that kind of speech has, and stopped saying it...as opposed to trying to say "i dont mean anything by it.  Its not meant to be offensive, its no big deal, get over it".

[forgetful]

ok, as we are finding quite a few examples, it seems, of more stupid, racist people being stupid and racist, how can these be resolved?  what can we do to do better?
   we seem quick to continue to point these out, but no one, including me, has any answers.  i'm hoping these situations are less than they were, say 10, 20, 30...years ago.  we are human and that means we are imperfect.  there will always be room for more improvement.  but if we are all sitting here waiting for an answer...i'm all ears.  i always say, "things" happen for a reason...why are these "things" happening?  i'm hoping they are occuring in order to bring the goodness out of those who care and to shine the light on the idiots hoping public condemnation allows some to become more aware to the stupidity of their ways

Simple.  If you see something you think is odd, ask yourself, would I still think it was odd if it was a man/woman, white/asian/black etc.

If you decide, no, it would be perfectly normal if it was a white male, then don't call the cops.  If you call the cops anyway, simply because of the color of their skin, you're a racist.

[MU82]

Pointing them out and not letting them go unchallenged is a step.   Educating how actions and words can be interpreted as racist is a step.   It will take the changing of hearts and educating the minds and hearts of the young.   If one wants to change one must look inward and examine thoughts and actions and accept personal failings and make the choice to change.

This is important, but it's admittedly difficult to do.

An acquaintance of mine - not really a good friend, but we will have a beer or 3 after umpiring together - is a racist. He probably doesn't think he is, but he is. I call him on it: "C'mon, Fred, that's unacceptable." Obviously, I'm not "changing" him. But at least I'm not letting it pass unchecked.

A few years back, I was waiting for my softball game to start when one of my teammates started chatting with me. He made a comment about a player in the game before ours, came right out and used the n-word. I said, "Joe, I'm not going to stand for that. Don't be a racist." You know what he said? "What? I looked around and made sure none of 'em were around who coulda heard me." All I could think to say was: "STFU and get the eff out of here." I never looked at him the same way. He was considered a "good guy" by others, but I told them about our exchange. I didn't care if I was being a "rat." Racists aren't very fine people, and they deserve to be outed.

[tower912]

I have had parallel experiences.  And I, too, cannot look at them the same way ever again.