Always hostile to conservatives, the New York Times is so besotted with Trump hate that it is resorts to reverse racism. How then, to treat the Facebook censorship of two conservative black women who support Trump? With disdain, of course.
Ann of Althouse (go there, she needs the traffic), neatly encapsulates something that leapt from the pages of Sunday’s Times:
The NYT explains Diamond and Silk to its readers as “a modern-day minstrel show” aimed at “white conservatives”…
It is a process of biased journalism called “stacking.” Under the thin veneer of objectivity, the biased journalist elides the purported thesis — in this case, censorship — with a single paragraph buried in the middle of the article.
The sistersreceived a note from Facebook on April 5 that said the company determined the content on their page to be “unsafe to the community.” They said the note, along with a decline in traffic to their page, was proof that Facebook has an anti-conservative bias.
Next crooked reporter’s trick: trivialize the censorship by casting it as merely partisan.
Their Facebook woes have been heavily covered on Fox News, and their case was taken up by Republican lawmakers during the hearings.
Which is why the Times can no longer ignore the story. It’s all over cable. The obvious question is why that censorship is not “heavily covered” by the New York Times? Why has not its editorial pages “taken up” the case? Hold not thy breath.
Time to play the race card
“Do Diamond and Silk have critics?” the suddenly inquiring mind (singular) at the Times asks, unhelpfully. You can be certain as a tenured sociology professor they have critics! And we’re going to quote them!
Cue the identity politics scolds. Unleash the race baiters:
They have been criticized for supporting an administration deeply unpopular with African-Americans …
Don’t we know all black people think alike? Those who deviate are deemed “inauthentic”?
Time to play the gender card on top of the race card:
… and [of] being unrepresentative of African-American women
The Times employs another trick in the prejudiced journalist’s kit bag: the selective quote. Do they quote First Amendment academics like Alan Dershowitz or Floyd Abrams? Are you kidding?
NO! The biased news purveyor locates “an Artist And Activist” (need we say more?) to utter the “money quote.” Diamond and Silk, says the Artist and Activist, stoop to “stereotypical images of black women.” An Artist And Activist certainly would know!
Two well dressed, articulate women? One of whom appears to favor cabernet sauvignon in a tall-stemmed wine glass? Against a backdrop of a well appointed home? That’s the kind of stereotype we like here at the Manor.
Undeterred, the Artist And Activist describes the two women as “a modern-day minstrel show.”
Mammy, can ya hear me callin’?
Education
Blaska Policy Werkes 
History repeats itself…Black folk who think for themselves and come to conclusions different than the plantation overseers (aka Democrats) and they’re ruthlessly hunted down and made to pay for their “uppity” thought crimes. In the name of diversity, no doubt.
LikeLike
One of the comments at Althouse’s site hit the nail on the head: were these two Black Women to be ripping Trump, et al, they’d be outta this freakin’ WORLD popular & making a continuous never-ending loop of rounds on the Lefty talk & morning network shows.
Lefties (most, not all) see intolerance and hatred as proper…so long as that intolerance and hatred are aimed at the “right” people. And when entrenched ideology and non-participating protected class members freely choosing their world view are neck-n-neck, alas, it is the latter that must pull over.
Ah Lefty; so MUCH hypocrisy, so little time!
The Gotch
LikeLike
Bias? ‘Bout what?
Why not select an important topic….say probability of WW3 as the tail wags the dog?
Specifically, what evidence is there that Gas Attack in Syria was real?
Seems to me it was faked. Check this analysis –> http://washingtonsblog.com/2018/04/trump-urged-to-seek-evidence-before-attacking-syria.html and consider how the Saudis want Assad destroyed by any means necessary. Who funds the White Helmets? What objective data formed the FACTUAL basis of Trumps missiles to Syria?
Bias? Heck, there isn’t even decent Journalism, 101. All the US journalists whom I have read about the attack have uncritically accepted Trump’s snap judgment as gospel. Hello? .Surely folks remember Saddam’s WMD’s, The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution; “The Maine,” Jayson Blair’s creative work for the NYTimes; Alex Haley, and any of Billary’s claims about anyeverything.
LikeLike
Looks like your giving away all the “tricks” you use Dave. I do wish these two women well; but, I must get back to watching Hannity do back-flips over being named Cohen’s secret client. The hits just keep on comin’.
LikeLike
Dang! Two days ago it was legal have a lawyer. Last week there was even an attorney-client privilege, if you can believe.
Those were the days.
LikeLike
They should have done all their business in Pruitt’s sound-proof, bullet-proof phone booth. Hope they built that thing on high ground because the swamp is rising.
LikeLike
“Looks like your giving away all the “tricks” you use Dave. I do wish these two women well; but, I must get back to watching Hannity do back-flips over being named Cohen’s secret client. The hits just keep on comin’.”
Hey Ritchie; why are you hating on Hannity?
What has he ever done to you?
Why are you so gleeful?
LikeLike
@Batman;
“Hey Ritchie; why are you hating on Hannity?”
That a rhetorical question?
Hannity has committed the one unpardonable sin in LaLaLoonyLeftyLand: he doesn’t support the narrative, which is to say, he doesn’t make pre-approved selections exclusively from the Lefty World View Cafeteria. Dealbreaker!
RIP Barbara Bush; a class act from start to finish!
The Gotch
LikeLike