The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 7 of 13)

: br> /p>

In a freshman-year psychology course, I took a computerized test -- a headshot or a word was flashed on the screen, and I pushed a button if the person was white or if the word was positive [i.e. "happiness"]. I pushed a different button in response to black faces or negative words.

But then the program switched up on me. Now I had to push one button for white faces or negative words, and another for black faces and positive words.

Like 87.9 percent of white American participants, I performed faster and with greater accuracy when asked to pair "white" with "good" and "black" with "bad."

br> One can certainly put these results in perspective -- it takes a professionally devised test to unearth this, and white racism probably ranks well behind gangs in hurting the black community. But it's wrong to pretend the results don't exist, or that they mean nothing. br> -- Robert VerBruggen br> ( www.therationale.com ) p> Lisa Fabrizio's column is a must-read, for more than the following paragraphs, but they do crystallize what is wrong with sports reporting: br> /p>

Because, although not too many years ago, sports-writing was considered the "toy department" of journalism, the boys and girls in the press box have been eager to catch up to their counterparts in the "real" world. And so, they are also no longer content with merely reporting the scores, trades and what have you; they must now generate the news. And, similar to the mainstream media, they need divisive issues in order to push the agenda of all J-school graduates: to change the world.

Class envy, which is the one of the main devices used by liberals and their media wing to influence the masses, is not available in the sports journalists' playbook for obvious reasons. But racism; there's the true straw that stirs the drink of controversy, even when that cup may be empty.

br> This is why we have such inanity as ESPN's "Sports Reporters," where the overinflated egos of the sports press compete to see who can get the biggest advance on his/her next book by uttering something scandalous and "controversial."

topics:
Taxes, Trade, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Mainstream Media, Television, Business, Social Security, Sports, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Military, Iraq, Israel, NATO, Conservatism, Energy