This Year in “This Week in Race”

When we began this blog in September, we didn’t know what to expect. We were dissatisfied with the journalistic and knee-jerk responses to issues of race and politics. It’s not that we thought they were not valuable, but just that they were incomplete. We thought we had a different perspective to add, and we hoped to apply early findings from The Project on Race in Political Communication to current events. But we didn’t know if anyone would care.

We’re academics, which means that we conduct research and teach at the college level. We both hold the highest degrees possible in our respective fields of study. Besides helping to disseminate knowledge to students in our classes and to the broader community, we are responsible for helping to create knowledge through our research. That does not make us any smarter than anyone else writing. That does not make our perspective more valuable than any other bloggers’. That does not privilege our perspective over any others. It does mean, though, that we approach the discussion from a different set of expectations, assumptions and traditions. Our work is rooted in theoretical approaches to understanding politics, race and communication, and is often accompanied by systematic data collection (or observation) and analysis that is guided by principles that have been developed, tested and accepted in the social sciences and humanities for decades.

All of this is to say that while we believe that we have provided a unique contribution to the discussion over the past four months, we recognize that many of you disagree. This week’s blog is a celebration of that disagreement.

Many of you subscribe to the blog via email, so you probably don’t visit the site much. While that convenience has allowed us to share our ideas with you more easily, it somewhat detracts from the community of ideas that partly characterizes the blogging process. So we hope to start a tradition here of relating a few of the criticisms we’ve gotten in the comments section of the blog this past year. We are not interested in defending ourselves or arguing against any of these ideas. We present them so that their voices can be heard alongside ours. Some are thoughtful and insightful; others are hateful and not particularly sophisticated. All are of interest and confirm the importance of continuing the conversation about race and politics in America.

Happy New Year!
(BTW – We’ve gotten a lot of supportive comments, as well, many of them quite thoughtful. Thanks to all who have taken the time to contribute!)
_______________________________________

“‘we scolded the show’s producers for ‘profiting off the centuries of suffering of people of color.’” “Wow! You are arrogant beyond reason and without merit if you dream yourselves capable of "scolding" the shows producers. You're gnats living and dying in the endless shadow of a monolith that will remain forever beyond your capacity to impact. You're significance so infinitesimal it defies definition. Although, perhaps it is inversely related to the contemptuousness audacity that is discharged throughout your writings. Oh! Boys why do a throw away blog about a show that is long since past its prime when you could have written about about wild eyed, hate crazed, animals that were terrorizing the good and decent law abiding and white folks who were trying to buy their Chinese sweatshop made Christmas presents? The black folks in NY are all bent out of shape that the diverse NYPD used its righteous fire power against certain criminal elements corrupting the city. Now thats a good topic. C'mon boys you've got to stay current and keep up with the IMPORTANT issues of the day.” (Mike Nifong, 12/23/2006, 2:19 a.m.)

“Please stop trying to "keep it real" in future blogs. Knowing that you feel comfortable enough to use the word [spit] in the hip-hop context is revolting. . . .Get the fuck out of here! The idea that hip-hop is challenging the "cosnciousness" people in power would be funny if I weren't a little depressed thinking that you two might actually think that it's true. You were kind enough to point out that Public Enemy's vainglorious attempt to curb materialism and enlighten people to African issues. Clearly, they weren't successful as the "community" has gone 180 degrees against in the opposite direction. If Black people don't seem to be challenged by hip-hop why would people in the halls of power be challenged? Oh, you misspelled consciousness in the last paragraph. Buy a dictionary or at least use the spell check...DICK! Oh I don't spell check because I don't care enough about the issue. I guess you don't spell check because you don't care about black people!” (David Duke, 12/16/2006, 6:48 p.m.)

“Wow you both really missed the point on this one. The real racial issue in this whole the whole Michael Richards incident is why the fuck are black people talking during his show? Why are people so shocked to see a comic unload hate and venom in his stand up routine? The people up in the balcony got uppity and Michael Richards had to hit them with the fire hose. . . .You know where THOSE people learned it from? Church, they constantly holler out during the service and now they do it amongst civilized people in comedy clubs and movie theaters across the nation. On the positive side it is good to see that nigger still wounds black people. Despite all the efforts of rap music to take the word back and the claims of so many black people saying that the word doesn't hurt them anymore. Hearing, the pain in the voices of those black people who shouted "Dat wuz uncall'd fo'!" fills me with joy. He didn't even have to use other words in conjunction with nigger. I normally reach for phrases like bitch nigger for men and nigger cunt for women when I'm trying to hurt peoples feelings. But thats just a matter of personal taste more than anything.”(peaches, 11/27/2006, 2:04 p.m.)

“. . .I would like to see more done to address the issue of race in journalism. Especially in political journalism. In my community, minority candidates that are not Democrats are ignored by the local media.” (Raymond C. Dix, Jr., 10/27/2006, 9:03 a.m.)
“Caliendo: I just read the [AP/Washington Post] article in which you were quoted discussing Michael Steele's election bid and the racial dimensions of a black candidate appealing to white voters. I agree with your general premise that there are predispositions, perhaps even subconscious ones, that lead to apprehension on the part of white voters to elect black candidates; however, I think your characterization of the sentiments involved is off and perhaps misleading. Rather than merely supposing that black candidates will not be good leaders, the hard truth, I believe, is that many (most?) white voters are possessed of a sense of superiority that is not qualified by any specific or logical criteria--it is borne purely out of distinguishing skin color, be it on a subconscious level or otherwise. Consequently, voters are uncomfortable with the idea of being "led" by a black person (and all that it symbolically entails). . . .” (Ken, 10/27/06, 3:28 p.m.)

“. . .The idea that black people are going to change the United States all by themselves is a joke. (I know I’m laughing). For the CBC to decline someone membership on the basis of race forces them to rely on the 12.9% of the population that is black. They have denied themselves access to extremely talented allies who share a common vision. Idiots. Lets be honest those 12.9% of Americans who are black are not exactly the brain caste of American society. The CBC has a made the quest for equality exponentially more difficult. . . . "This reasoning is faulty and ignores the historic legacy of racial discrimination." How you manage to talk out of both sides of your mouth is impressive. Rightly condemning the discrimination of the past and still enabling its perpetuation the future. Bravo! One last thing, Stephen Caliendo I realize Italians are just Africans turned inside out but I hope you realize that you are never going to get the NAACP wonderful white man award. The subtleties of your self loathing may have been amusing years ago, but I promise you it has become tedious to those around you. And for the love of God don’t try and join the CBC, I hate to think of you in tears as the people you care so much deny you membership because of your skin color. What a rube. . . .” (Johny Cakes, 9/29/2006, 5:59 p.m.)

“This is what we will see by the end of the so called "rascist" survivor. The hispanic tribe will be good at building their camp. The asian tribe will be good at solving the mental challenges. The black tribe will be good at the athletic challenges. (Not swiming though) And the white tribe... WILL HAVE LANDED ON THE MOON!!!" (Anonymous, 9/16/2006, 3:28 p.m.)