Rickeroo's official CNN challenge thread

[Rickeroo]

Will he make an MSNBC dares to mention peoples' races thread?

I don't have much animosity towards MSNBC. They don't have "news" in their name, and they've done the 'lean forward' campaign to tell people know they are a progressive propaganda outlet - their bias is disclosed. However, here's one I found just now:

 

[Rickeroo]

Before I got married in 1998, I must have been a White Bachelor:

 

[Rickeroo]

Are you a vegetarian? Well there's different ways of being one based on your race:

 

[Rickeroo]

Today's "white" references on CNN's front page:





Yes whites are evil of course, but the last one is a bit odd: linguistically, it seems to be declaring that whites are supreme.

 

[Rickeroo]

There's just too many this morning to bother taking screenshots - 8 race-based articles on the front page. Here are the headlines:

Tucker Carlson calls white supremacy problem 'a hoax' after shooter targeted Latinos

Shame on you CNN. The proper terms is "Latinexes".

Why a white nationalist would target my hometown


Shaken by the El Paso shooting, Latinos across the US fear they'll be targeted next

Latinexes.

Shaken communities: Latinos fear they'll be targeted next

Latinexes.

Police apologize after photos of officers on horseback leading handcuffed black man


Rashida Tlaib: How to reverse the decline in black homeownership

The "ownership" of my house is white. I have a white mortgage.

A black 'Bachelor'? ABC's president weighs in


This restaurant is at the forefront of black veganism

 

[HonestJoe]

I don't think you ever needed to convince anyone that your country is obsessed with race and racial division. Do you intend to actually try to do anything about it?

 

[Sampson Simpson]

Wow you must really have nothing going in your life to be glued to CNN 24/7 for 7 days just to prove a point on an anonymous internet forum.

Good luck.

I'd say that about every troll, I mean, how much of a loser does a person have to be to spend all their time trolling trying to get those stupid poopyhead liberals

 

[Rickeroo]

Wrong designation, CNN. If you're going to racially identify Americans, be sure to include the "LGBTQTX" factor:



It's Latinxes-es, or something like that.

 

[Rickeroo]

I don't think you ever needed to convince anyone that your country is obsessed with race and racial division. Do you intend to actually try to do anything about it?

The most I could do is run for office and attempt to ban all mention of race in government and the media. However, this would put me at great personal risk for an extremely minimal chance of success. I've decided to play by the Rules and be sure to refer to the differently-raced Americans by the proper terminology. This is a much safer route and keeps me in the mainstream of polite racial segregation.

 

[HonestJoe]

The most I could do is run for office and attempt to ban all mention of race in government and the media. However, this would put me at great personal risk for an extremely minimal chance of success. I've decided to play by the Rules and be sure to refer to the differently-raced Americans by the proper terminology. This is a much safer route and keeps me in the mainstream of polite racial segregation.

So you don't actually realise you're being part of the problem with this thread? You're not challenging the status quo, only amplifying it.

 

[Rickeroo]

So you don't actually realise you're being part of the problem with this thread? You're not challenging the status quo, only amplifying it.

I point out CNN's race - oriented reporting because I do have an aversion to it. While true that in a way I'm spreading CNN's message of race, I'm spreading it in the hope that others will find it averse as well. At times, I've "advocated" for official genetic and anthropological testing for every American, so everyone will be treated differently based on their precise racial makeup, perhaps denoted with a barcode tattoo. The goal there is to have people take offense to that concept, and the concept of racial designation in general.

 

[Rickeroo]

In contrast to "white" Americans:



It begs the question - how many types of "Americans" are there? Home ownership of the "black" kind was incidentally captured in the screenshot due to proximity.

 

[HonestJoe]

I point out CNN's race - oriented reporting because I do have an aversion to it.

You’re not explaining what is wrong with the CNN reporting though. Just because they use the words “black” or “white” in headlines doesn’t automatically make it wrong or inappropriate in context and in many cases they’re reporting or quoting what other people are saying. There is an issue with race in US culture but, a more nuanced and complicated one than you’re presenting and CNN isn’t a fundamental cause, merely a reflection of that wider society, one of which you are a part.

The goal there is to have people take offense to that concept, and the concept of racial designation in general.

If that is your honest intention, I’m sorry to say you’ve failed.

 

[Rickeroo]

You’re not explaining what is wrong with the CNN reporting though. Just because they use the words “black” or “white” in headlines doesn’t automatically make it wrong or inappropriate in context

CNN is over-reporting racial incidents, and in some cases using mundane human activities and adding a racial component, such as "black travel". Who knew travel could be separated by race? CNN knew, and they told us.

Every single time you see a race of an American mentioned on CNN, it's in contrast to other "Americans" and meant to separate and distinguish - not unify.

 

[Rickeroo]

Would I be allowed to wear the same sunglasses and use the same pipe, or would that be "white male identity" and not "black male identity"?

What would I need to change from the picture to qualify as white male male identity? Different color glasses? No pipe? Different style of pipe?

Or, is it possible that I could dress the exact same way, but due to skin color I would be "white male identity" regardless of style?

 

[HonestJoe]

CNN is over-reporting racial incidents, and in some cases using mundane human activities and adding a racial component, such as "black travel". Who knew travel could be separated by race? CNN knew, and they told us.

What measure are you basing the “over-reporting” claim on? Are you suggesting they should censor themselves, not reporting incidents if there is a purported racial element? Or should they just refuse to mention race, even if the people they’re reporting on or quoting do? You’ve still not demonstrated what you think CNN is specifically doing differently and wrong or what you think they should be doing instead.

The “black travel” example wasn’t invented by CNN. Apparently there is a travel agency that specifically caters to black American travellers. CNN was simply reporting on that fact. If you have an issue with it (and I’m not sure it’s a good thing), shouldn’t you be taking that up with the organisation doing it, not the media reporting it? What would CNN pretending it doesn’t exist achieve?

Every single time you see a race of an American mentioned on CNN, it's in contrast to other "Americans" and meant to separate and distinguish - not unify.

Every single time you blame CNN alone for it’s perceived offences, in contrast to addressing the underlying politico-social issues across American society, you’re looking to separate and distinguish, not unify.

 

[Rickeroo]

CNN was simply reporting on that fact.

Let's say I make a news service, the Rickeroo News Network (RNN). My reporters go out to a group of WWII veterans who personally witnessed Japanese atrocities during the war, and describe them in detail. They meet weekly, and RNN covers their meetings and discussions.

Would you agree that RNN is simply reporting on the fact that "other people" are saying bad things about the Japanese? Or in choosing what to report on, is RNN fanning the flames of anti-Japanese sentiment?

Take another example. RNN reports nightly on the black on black crime in Baltimore. RNN does not report on murders committed by white people. However, the black on black crime that RNN reports on is "fact". Is there an issue with this?

 

[HonestJoe]

Would you agree that RNN is simply reporting on the fact that "other people" are saying bad things about the Japanese? Or in choosing what to report on, is RNN fanning the flames of anti-Japanese sentiment?

A story about WWII veterans attitudes to their historic enemies would be perfectly valid, though the same facts could be presented very well or very poorly. Weekly coverage of anything so specific would be excessive for a national broadcaster. You’ve not said anything about CNN saying good or bad things about anyone though, you just seem to be interested in counting the number of times you can find the words “black” or “white” in headlines, regardless of context. If you have issue with the actual content of their articles, you could discuss that in more (any!) depth.

Take another example. RNN reports nightly on the black on black crime in Baltimore. RNN does not report on murders committed by white people. However, the black on black crime that RNN reports on is "fact". Is there an issue with this?

Any intentional imbalance would be wrong in any direction, but you’ve not established that CNN is presenting a greater proportion of reports with racial references than is justified by the balance of events and activities in the USA, or in comparison to other broadcasters. If your society is obsessed with race, your news reporting is inevitably going to reflect that. Why are you so determined to focus on one part of one symptom rather than considering the root causes?

 

[Rickeroo]

Here, the shoes are being assigned the "black" race. Who knew shoes could be "African American":



How rude of Katy Perry to 'make fun' of black people with a shoe design! Calling her out, yeah! There - I've just excused myself for another month living in an all-white town with good schools and low crime.

 

[Rickeroo]

Victimhood can be assigned a race:



The headline infers that white victimhood could be dangerous. Does that mean that other races of victimhood (black, brown, yellow, red) could be dangerous as well?

 

[Rickeroo]

No direct race, but we can instantly infer the races of the people involved via the way this is reported:



Teen ran out with a $2 beer. Memphis store clerk followed him and shot him dead - CNN

Just by the picture and headline, and the fact that this was reported at all, means the $2 beer thief is obviously black. However, the clerk that shot him is not named nor pictured, therefore the clerk is not white.

A quick read of the article confirms this.

 

[Rickeroo]

No direct race, but we can instantly infer the races of the people involved via the way this is reported:

View attachment 67262085

Teen ran out with a $2 beer. Memphis store clerk followed him and shot him dead - CNN

Just by the picture and headline, and the fact that this was reported at all, means the $2 beer thief is obviously black. However, the clerk that shot him is not named nor pictured, therefore the clerk is not white.

A quick read of the article confirms this.

CNN has updated the headline / photo:



The article has more political purpose now that a black victim is being shown front and center with a photo. However, the killer's first name is "Anwar", which isn't a very white-sounding name - his picture will never be shown, at least by CNN.

 

[Rickeroo]

TV's sketch comedy boom is hip, smart and inclusive - CNN



I'm always on the lookout for how the mainstream media tells us which words to use for which races. The photo shows 4 black people. The video in the story is about a black-only show called Sherman's Showcase. The article mentions "black" 8 times, no other races are mentioned, not even Latinx (La-teenks). Apparently in this case, "inclusive" means "just blacks".

 

[Rickeroo]

It's been a while. Front page story, albeit a bit of a scroll down:



Magazine publishes image of wrong model in Adut Akech feature - CNN Style

This is designed specifically to chastise white people, specifically the assumed white people running the Australian magazine. CNN fails to mention that the editors would have had equal, if not more trouble, distinguishing between South Korean models:

The 50+ Most Beautiful South Korean Models, Ranked

Thanks CNN for keeping up the "whites hate blacks" mantra.

 

[Rickeroo]

Here's a continuation of the black model theme:



Khoudia Diop: Why the internet loves the '''Melaniin Goddess''' - CNN Style

The message here is that a model's skin tone matters, and this model's skin tone is extra special - it puts her above other skin tones. She's so black, she's purple.