Opinion: Keith Woods, NPR's vice president for newsroom training and diversity, argues that journalists should not be using the term "racist" to describe President Trump's tweets. Here's why ⬇️
NPR's vice president for newsroom training and diversity argues that journalists should not be using the term "racist" to describe Trump's tweets. "Leave the moral labeling to the people affected," Keith Woods says.
the problem with this argument is it's not making a case for facts vs opinion, but consensus vs controversy. Some people disagree that x is racist, so you can't say it because it's an opinion. But if there is consensus that x is racist, it's fine to label.
ngl just kinda appalled by the fact he felt he had to use the term "cesspool" twice to defend this bad take
In which NPR's vice president for newsroom training and diversity uses the value-free ideal and fact/value distinction to argue that journalists can't call racist acts racist
This, from an NPR executive, gets it right.
ICYMI: NPR's VP of Newsroom Diversity & Training #KeithWoods tells MSM to can the “Trump is racist” label: “What's at stake is journalism's embattled claim to be the source of credible news.” MSM credibility? Alas. That ship may have already sailed...
Hear, hear! I strongly agree with on this one. Opinion: Report On Racism, But Ditch The Labels It's not our role to label the President's tweets "racist", "sexist" or anything else.
This title is something ... at a basic level, the title says don’t label a thing as “racism”, after just having labeled it as “racism” 🤔