Too many white, middle-class liberals define racism solely as a crude and extreme reality. To think that is the only kind of racism that exists is to reside on Planet Denial, Defensive and Dishonest. The real issue for them is they are not prepared to define racism as educated, articulate discrimination; as subtle, complex and dangerous, with calculated intention - minus bricks, bats or the BNP.Really? Does this stand up – as a generalization, I mean - the idea that white, middle-class liberals reject the notion of racism as comprising anything other than violent assault? Doesn't sound right to me, but Armah believes this notion is so widespread that: “It stifles discussion about the numerous subtle ways that racism in the media is manifest."
Does it? Aren’t many people aware of at least some examples of racism in the media? They should be, the issue is addressed often enough. Search for media racism at the BBC, the Guardian or the Independent and follow the links: there’s been rather a lot of discussion about “the numerous subtle ways that racism in the media is manifest.”
More discussion might be useful, it might even be necessary, but to imagine that there's been no previous discussion of the issue is to ignore a wealth of literature on the subject.
And statements like this from Armah don’t seem designed to engender serious discussion:
Educated minds abandon intelligence when debating racism in the media and resort to intellectual tantrum-throwing.Maybe, but it’s usually best not to throw them back.
