Skulduggery of Last Week Riles Reader
The Skulduggery of the Week in the Oct. 4 editions of Park Cities People and Preston Hollow People was about a phone theft at NorthPark. In case you’ve forgotten, here’s what it said:
IF HE DIDN’T, HE DOES NOW
At 11:45 a.m. on Sept. 24, a driver asked to borrow a man’s $400 iPhone 5 outside NorthPark Center, and the man was hesitant. But he handed over the phone when a passenger asked, “Is that what you think of black people?” He never got the phone back.
A Preston Hollow reader, who is black, was mighty upset over this. “It is difficult enough living in a world where color is all ‘some’ people see,” he wrote, “and for you to accent and promote this bias and stereotype in this way is utterly disgusting.” He also said I made the point that the victim “may not have thought highly or respectfully of the black guy or people in general.”
I told him I featured this crime because of the irony — I didn’t make that point; the black thieves did. I added that I didn’t see this Skulduggery as an indictment of all black people; rather, it was an indictment of those two scumbags in that car.
Well, he wasn’t satisfied with that answer. Are you? Or do you agree that what we published was wrong?
Your title is where you went wrong — the squib itself reported something ironic. The title implied that this one event should have taught the victim that negative stereotypes were correct.
The other reader may have been the only one to complain to you, but I can attest that he wasn’t the only one to see a problem.
I think the bottom line is to never- ever- hand your phone to a stranger, regardless of race,creed, color, sexual orientation, etc, etc, especially one in a car. Dont leave them on a table in a resturaunt when you go to the bar or restroom and dont leave them visible in your purse at Highland Park High either.
Agree with Uppercase Matt’s thoughts on the title item.
I didn’t mean to imply with that headline that the victim *should* buy into negative stereotypes. What I meant was that this particular victim probably will buy into them from now on, having been burned by these creeps who took advantage of his “white guilt.”
I got/get what you were meaning; just understand how someone could take that headline differently.
Our government sucks and is broke, US soldiers are returning from war disabled, destroyed and depressed, kids are getting shot up in schools and child abuse is rampant. And then there’s Miley Cyrus. What is the big deal about a silly off-color pun (see what I did there) about a crime. The suspect himself furthers a negative stereotype about blacks. perspective people. I like you, Dan. Go kick ass and take names.
Was it an Obamaphone?
If not, I guess it is now………The criminal obviously felt entitled to it……
Way to keep it classy, t-Bone.
PS:
“The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices “Obama Phones,” as the e-mail author does. This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.”
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-phone/
Ronald Reagan started the free phone program which was designed to give poor people land lines. Cell phones was added recently. But does it really matter who added Cell phones? Cell phones are a luxury period! Instead of arguing over who started what, you should demand that the Government stop paying for cell phones. If Obama didn’t add Cell phones, he is no better than those who did by allowing it to continue.
I am no fan of President Obama’s policies, but bringing in “Obamaphone” into this blog piece is like a child trying to jam a square peg into a round hole. Just like blaming President Bush for everything under the sun; so dumb. If you are going to segue into some political snark at least do it with some finesse or even a little bit of wit.
“Instead of arguing over who started what, you should demand that the Government stop paying for cell phones.”
SafeLink is run by a subsidiary of América Móvil, the world’s fourth largest wireless company in terms of subscribers, but it is not paid for directly by the company. Nor is it paid for with “tax payer money,” as the e-mail claims. Rather, it is funded through the Universal Service Fund, which is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company, an independent, not-for-profit corporation set up by the Federal Communications Commission.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-phone/