Is there anything wrong with this Pro Football Weekly cover?

[SF_Express]

Well, is there?

http://jimromenesko.com/2012/02/23/controversial-new-pro-football-weekly-cover/

 

[LongTimeListener]

Sounds like it captured the story, which did/does involve race in part, particularly with what sounds like the article they did on black quarterbacks and the Cam Newton reaction. Seems like everybody's OK with the idea of talking about race until anyone actually talks about race.

Mike Freeman overreact to something? Get out!

 

[mpcincal]

As soon as I saw Freeman instigated this, I knew it was overblown.

 

[BTExpress]

About 98.6% of people will voice their opinion without reading the article in full and seeing how everything fits (or doesn't fit) contextually.

Ain't gonna do it.

 

[Versatile]

I like it a lot. Everything about it: headline, design, photos chosen, even the publisher's explanation. I'd obviously have to read the stories to determine the merits, but I don't find it offensive at all.

Well done, Pro Football Weekly, even if you haven't been up to your former standards since Joel Buchsbaum's death.

 

[Dick Whitman]

No.

If it weren't Freeman, I would say that this sounds like a case of newsies becoming upset when the Toy Department ventures outside of fun and games. Know thy place, etc., etc. But it was Freeman, a sports person. He should know better.

 

[PCLoadLetter]

Without reading it...

If the story is, as the publisher says, about race, then it seems totally appropriate.

 

[SF_Express]

My take, and I have a peripheral interest obviously, is: 1) It might not be overtly racist, but it's pretty lazy and 2) do we really need more black vs. white quarterback stories at this point? (My opinion: No.)

 

[CentralIllinoisan]

Love it. The white QB has a black jersey, the black QB has a white jersey, the terms are on top of the color of jersey, illustrating that is really should not matter the race of a QB. The story addresses race, as per the editor. It's a bit on the envelope-pushing side, but not gratuitously.

 

[Versatile]

My take, and I have a peripheral interest obviously, is: 1) It might not be overtly racist, but it's pretty lazy and 2) do we really need more black vs. white quarterback stories at this point? (My opinion: No.)

Lazy? I don't think this is lazy at all. It pulls readers in and gets people talking about it, which is rare for Pro Football Weekly in the past decade or so. And we have no idea what the quality of that story might be. (Unless you've read it.) It sounds like it was more than just a column. Either way, you promote the stories you have. Can't blame the designer and headline writer for the content that they likely didn't have much to do with assigning.

 

[JimmyHoward33]

Finding a picture of Luck in an all black uni....and RG3 in an all white uni....is definitely not lazy. Purely from a design POV I love that, and I love the contrast.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Let's turn it around, SF: Do you think Freeman was in the right for calling them out having only seen the cover and with no idea of the accompanying story?

 

[SF_Express]

My take, and I have a peripheral interest obviously, is: 1) It might not be overtly racist, but it's pretty lazy and 2) do we really need more black vs. white quarterback stories at this point? (My opinion: No.)

Lazy? I don't think this is lazy at all. It pulls readers in and gets people talking about it, which is rare for Pro Football Weekly in the past decade or so. And we have no idea what the quality of that story might be. (Unless you've read it.) It sounds like it was more than just a column. Either way, you promote the stories you have. Can't blame the designer and headline writer for the content that they likely didn't have much to do with assigning.

Well, I don't know. Would be we talking about the story if somebody hadn't raised these questions? "Wow, provocative cover on Pro Football Weekly." Or are we talking about it because of the questions.

And LTL, if someone finds it questionable on its face, does it matter what the story says? Absurd example: Did it really matter what the Jeremy Lin story said once it said "Chink in the armor"?

Freeman thought it was questionable on its face.

At this point, I respectfully withdraw from the discussion.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Well, that is an absurd example. The words "black and white" just do not carry a racist connotation. Maybe they can be read as involving race, but they are not by themselves offensive.

 

[Versatile]

It's difficult for us to put ourselves in a scenario where we come across that cover detached from anyone else's biases. But I do think that I would have at least had a laugh at the clever photo play and very likely opened the magazine to read the stories associated with the cover. That's a success.

Freeman isn't the type to interject race into everything. But he was mislabeling this as racist, particularly since, according to its publisher, the magazine includes an intelligent discourse on the role of race in scouting quarterbacks.

I think we can really harm the discussion of race in America by mistaking that discussion for racism. Jeremy Lin's race absolutely is a part of his fame. And the debate between Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin does involve our perceptions of black quarterbacks.

 

[imjustagirl]

Mike Freeman is an embarrassment to journalism, and to whatever it is he does.

Almost to the human race, but I won't be that mean.

 

[H.L. Mencken]

If only it were as simple as "Degree from Delaware" and "No Degree from Delaware" I'm sure Mike would be less upset.

 

[MightyMouse]

Black vs. white QBs seems to be an ongoing and relevant debate. I don't see the problem with putting it in print, especially when you have two quarterbacks projected to be drafted in the top 5, and one is black and the other is white.

 

[clintrichardson]

This is more of a side point, but I'm confused by the PFW editor's proud comment that "last year we refused to drink the Kool – Aid in our scouting report on Cam Newton." Newton had one of the great rookie seasons for a quarterback ever. The editor may have seen positive views on Newton as "Kool-Aid" a year ago, but to continue to describe it that way today, in light of how Newton performed, is mighty strange, to say the least.

 

[1HPGrad]

People who want to see racism will see it.
Sometimes it's real, but it's always real to them.