this is kind of feature-y but interesting nonetheless.

I don't feel like this story can actually be considered a report, it's more of a profile story in which case one can't asses whether it's "biased" or editorial, especially since the person profiled was able to comment and take part in the story itself rather than a written profile in which quotes are picked out and may result in some form of editorializing. I thought it was interesting and helpful to have radio listeners call in and ask about where to draw the line with stereotype ... More »

Raises good questions and reflections. How do we become more "racially sensitive" and then deal with everything being interpreted in terms of race? Seems like that's got a lot of touchy repercussions. Or the other point brought up about mocking caricatures. No one complained about the elephant-eared Bush that was slapped on the papers 365 days of the year.President Obama can only expect to be ridiculed. The chimp cartoon could have referred to the mental capacity of those who drafted ... More »

There’s been a lot of talk about abolishing black history month, but this piece wasn’t particularly compelling as to why we shouldn’t get rid of black history month. There’s only one piece really, that sparked some kind of realization or that I deemed thought-provoking and that’s the bit where the author declares, “Black history is American history (not this part). Its two trains running . . .” For some odd reason after the series of metaphors I realized how engrained ... More »

The author outlines the history of the origins of black support for the republican party. There is no editorializing on behalf of the writer (so it seems) with words or phrases that endorse/or disagree with republican campaign tactics. It simply lists what some of the republican ideologies were when it came to rallying southern white votes vs black votes. Like how in the 1970s, a GOP strategist was quoted saying that Republicans weren't going to get more than 10-20 percent of the ... More »