Racism: Not Journalists' Fault

     After Gabby Douglas won the women's gymnastics Olympic gold medal this summer, NBC aired a commercial that brought accusations of racism against the network. The commercial, which was an advertisement for NBC's new show "Animal Practice," showed a monkey on gymnastics rings. People found the commercial racist because, in the past, blacks have been referred to as monkeys in a derogatory manner. NBC later released a comment stating that the commercial wasn't meant to be offensive, it was just one of a series of Olympic-themed commercials that had been strategically placed to ensure exposure to viewers. Regardless, Twitter blew up almost immediately after the commercial aired with accusations of racism against NBC, which I think raises an interesting point. 

     Why is it that when a major news network happens to air a monkey commercial right after announcing a black Olympic champion, people immediately jump to accusing the network of racism? Major hip hop artists release songs every day filled with racial slurs and other derogatory terms, but nobody complains about that. It seems a little twisted that it's deemed okay for music artists to use terms like the "n-word" every day when journalists can get accused of racism for coincidental things like commercial placement. The media is constantly accused of publishing stories with racist tones, and, as a result, journalists are being blamed for pushing racism on society. What people need to do is step back and compare journalism with the entertainment industry, and reassess where to launch their attacks. Just listen to the song linked below, and consider what's worse: a coincidental monkey commercial or a child listening to this music and thinking it's okay to use the derogatory terms in the lyrics?

Religious Discrimination: Putting American Safety in Jeopardy

     Muslims across the world are up in arms after the short film "Innocence of Muslims" was published on YouTube earlier this week. The film, which mocks the Islamic Prophet Muhammad, has already prompted a string of assaults in Yemen, Egypt and Libya. The most recent attack included hundreds of angry protesters storming the U.S. Embassy's compound in Yemen and burning the American flag. Although no embassy personnel were harmed in this attack, four Americans were killed in an attack in Benghazi on Tuesday.
     It amazes me that people are capable of such blatant discrimination. Although the staff and crew of the film stated they were "grossly misled about its intent and purpose," the question still remains- how could the film's producer (identified as Sam Bacile) make this video without regarding the effect it could have on America's situation in the Middle East? He even went so far as to tell The Wall Street Journal that "Islam is a cancer." People who think like Bacile are the reason we've had such problems accepting Islam in America. Discriminating against people because of their religious beliefs isn't right, and it's only straining American relations more in the war on terrorism. Freedom of religion is a right guaranteed to Americans in the Bill of Rights. If our founding fathers supported this as a fundamental right of every human being, why can't so many Americans do the same thing today? Americans should be more open-minded about accepting other people's religious beliefs. Just because a person accepts that someone else believes something different doesn't mean that person has to agree with the other person's beliefs. This is a lesson we should all take to heart, for our own country's safety in the war and for the safety of citizens at home with diverse beliefs.

Women: Belittled, Even in Supporting Roles

Michelle Obama
Photo courtesy of KQED News

     The democratic national convention started this week with Michelle Obama giving an opening-night speech to remind people of "the man [Barack Obama] was before he was president."  On Tuesday, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram posted an Associated Press article online notifying people of Michelle Obama's speech.  The problem with this article, however, is that it belittles not only Michelle Obama herself, but also women's roles in supporting the president in general.

     It is AP style to give a person's full name on first reference in an article, but on second reference, the authors referred to Michelle Obama as "Mrs. Obama," specifically breaking the AP style rule to use both the first and last name on second reference when distinguishing between sources with the same last name.  By doing this, the article's authors sent out the message that Michelle Obama was nothing more than a wife, because they found it necessary to tack the "Mrs." onto her name and because they didn't supply her husband with a courtesy title as well.  Looking further into the article, it can be seen that women weren't relied on as heavily as men were as sources in support of Barack Obama.  Virginia Sen. Mark Warner was referenced supporting the president with a host of solid and intelligent facts like Barack Obama helping "the economy rebound" while Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren was only referenced making generalized observations like "it's tough out there" for American citizens.  By referencing men with stronger, smarter facts to support Barack Obama and by referring to Michelle Obama as "Mrs. Obama," the AP reporters sent the message that women aren't independent and intelligent people because they weren't credited as such.  This is an atrocious message to send, especially in a society where women have fought for years to gain gender equality.