Statistics and Other Taboos
Seven ways to shut up if you're in a "conversation" about race.
JAMES TARANTO
When politicians and media people call for "a conversation about race," one suspects that what they have in mind is an exchange so one-sided that it would be more lecture than conversation. A detailed confirmation of that suspicion comes from Jen Eyer, who is not from Charlotte but from Michigan. She is "statewide community engagement director for MLive Media Group," which publishes a website for a consortium of midsize Wolverine State newspapers.
Eyer has a post--one of a series on what are termed HOT BUTTON ISSUES--titled "How to Discuss Racial Issues on MLive Without Violating the Community Rules." It should be titled "How Not to Discuss Racial Issues . . .," because it consists of a list of seven things to avoid:
1. Overt racism. . . . 2. Accusations of racism. . . . 3. Generalizations. . . . 4. Thread-jacking. . . . 5. False equivalence. . . . 6. Racial descriptions. . . . 7. Crime statistics.
We should preface our critique of Eyer's rules by noting that this is not an issue of free speech. Every form of speech that MLive bans or discourages is protected by the First Amendment, but so is a private corporation's right to exercise editorial control over its own website--and, of course, our right to criticize the manner in which it does so.
Some of the restrictions are reasonable. It's hard to quarrel with the injunction against "overt racism," which turns out to mean the use of racial slurs, "a one-strike violation" that results in immediate banning, according to Eyer. On the whole, however, the rules are designed to skew the conversation so as to favor what these days is called the "liberal" view of race. . . .
Posts
