Or something. Couple of things about this article, titled "Blacks, whites hear Obama differently" (which, I must admit, leaves me hoping there will be a follow-up "Asians, Hispanics hear Obama differently, from each other and also from blacks, whites"):
1. "Black-cent." OMGLOL.
2. While some of what's being discussed here is accurately categorized as "dog whistling," some of it is merely the product of a vernacular native to black communities—which wouldn't make it "dog whistling" unless Obama was trying to pass. But, since he isn't, that's just called "talking."
3. Even as I recognize (and agree) why it's actually, genuinely, hugely important for people to hear their president say some little thing like, "Nah, we straight," there's still a part of me that can't stop giggling at the thought of academics being asked to comment, essentially, on our president being black and young and cool.
Which really comes down to the way this article's written. It could have been good, but it's The Politico, so it tried to half-assedly hammer an important cultural story into some rigid race framework, cross-referenced with some largely irrelevant political communications framework, and ultimately achieved nada but FAIL.
Too bad.
Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus