CHATTERBOX
Racism and the Pantagraph
On Sept. 29, the Pantagraph ran a viewpoint by Dora Doyle declaring that "work still needs to be done to eliminate racism in Twin Cities." For proof, all you needed to do was turn to the viewpoints page of the Pantagraph the very next day, and the headline above Kathleen Parker's column: "'Barbershop' ain't do nothin' but good." A headline like this implies that this is how all black people talk-that they're not literate like most white people.
The Pantagraph didn't intend to be racist. The headline (written by the Pantagraph editors, not by Parker) was meant to be a clever re-working of the words spoken in the movie by one controversial character about a civil rights legend: "Rosa Parks ain't do nothin' but sit." However, there's a difference between how people (white and black) speak in casual conversation depicted in movies, and the grammar expected in a newspaper. By taking vernacular and putting it in print in an almost mocking way, the Pantagraph stepped too close to the racist presumptions of many of its readers.
To make matters worse, the headline appeared just beneath an openly racist letter to the editor by Dale Wiegand of Normal, who contended that the Democratic Party was breaking the law by "bribing" black voters with welfare benefits: "Almost all blacks have to do for a living is vote the way they are told by their political taskmasters."
No doubt, the Pantagraph does not endorse such racism. So why does it print racist hate (in addition to the even more common homophobic letters)? Because newspapers don't normally comment on letters. Of course, most major newspapers get a lot of letters and edit out the bigots. Not the Pantagraph (though it has been known to reject anti-war letters).
In the movie "Barbershop," the other characters mock the one who denigrates civil rights heroes, exposing him as a fool. In the Pantagraph, though, nonsense gets printed without comment.
The IMF and Other MFs
The Saturday, Sept. 28 Pantagraph began with an Associated Press article buried on page A10, "Police arrest 649 at demonstrators." The protesters chanted, "The whole world is watching" as they were arrested. Unfortunately, the American media weren't explaining anything. Although the AP article quoted some critics pointing that police arrested people without warning, it also quoted DC police chief Charles Ramsey's absurd claim, "We followed everything by the book." The Sunday coverage in the Pantagraph got even worse. Page A3 featured a large headline, "IMF directed to find sweeping debt solution." The article celebrated the IMF for proposing to allow countries to try to reduce their debts by declaring bankruptcy. No criticism of the IMF for this half-hearted measure (which primarily increases IMF control over countries' policies) was even hinted at. A smaller article declared (in an odd reference to the weather), "Under blue sky, protester challenge policies." In three days of coverage, the sole photo that Pantagraph printed (on Sunday) of the protests only showed police wearing riot gear-conveying the message that the peaceful protesters were violent.
But by far the longest article on Sept. 29 was an AP story (complete with illustration and diagram) of how protestors like to dress. This lengthy fashion essay was most notable for what it omitted: the reasons why protestors criticize the IMF/World Bank polices. On Monday, Sept. 30, the Pantagraph finally put the IMF meeting on the front page-in order to celebrate it: "Leaders to focus on debt, markets." A subhead later in the article proclaimed, "Protests fizzle" (the fact that the protests were restricted by violations of the First Amendment and false arrests of activists was once again omitted). The AP article exclusively quoted IMF and World Bank leaders, not allowing a single critic to have a single word. The Pantagraph's paeans to corporate-run globalization never included any quotation criticizing the World Bank and IMF.
By contrast, the Vidette, although also running an AP story, quoted the aims of the protestors and headlined it, "Protesters consider efforts successful; Goals achieve through talking, nonviolent acts." When the ISU students who protested in DC contacted the Pantagraph, they were told, "It's kind of old news. We're not really interested."
