Who's the racist?

The more we explore into racism and the media, the more I find myself questioning the source of this 'racism'. As it has been noted numerous times, in most cases it is not the result of outrightly racist media personell, but rather, unbeknown to them, it is the result of deeply embedded racist ideology which reflects in the discourse in such media. 

However, I am not so sure that this analysis takes into consideration some other very important factors. Oftentimes, I will argue, the apparent racism is not inherent within the representation. Rather, it is a result of the spectator's existing ideological beliefs reflecting on to the representation. Thus, their interpretation is fueled by preconceived conceptions that have the capability to turn a representation which, if viewed outside of this expectation of racism, contains no racial discourses. Of course, I would not suggest that we take an ahistorical view when thinking about race and the media--but I do think at times this expectation imposes upon representations an unfair reading that may, in fact, be unjustified.


The example I want to draw from for the purposes of my argument is the recent debate over an episode of The Daily Show, which featured Jon Stewart satirically mocking Tim Pawlenty and Herman Cain. 


Link: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-9-2011/c--k-blocked-roundup---tim-pawlenty---herman-cain 


The debate was centered around the way in which Jon Stewart made fun of Herman Cain. In short, Stewart was called a racist for the way he mocked Cain, and by some commentators his skit was likened to an 'Amos 'n' Andy' routine. 


I find this to be extremely problematic. It is not clear that Stewart was being racist whatsoever. It is not clear that Stewart attempted to speak in a manner similar to Cain for the purposes of mocking how he speaks (as a Black man). As you can see in the video, he clearly makes fun of Tim Pawlenty first, likewise also impersonating/exaggerating his way of speech. He has also made fun of many other people, of varying races. However, as soon as Stewart does the exact same thing to a Black man, he is accused of being racist. I find it to be more telling of the reader who interprets this as 'racist' than of Jon Stewart. To find it racist that Stewart simply impersonates a Black man and makes remarks about how this man does not like to read (as Cain gave a speech about his thoughts on shortening bills), is to impose one's own ideas about people's ideas onto the representation and then infer from that that it is racist. Furthermore, to reduce the very negative effects of the 'Amos 'n' Andy routine' to what Stewart did is to be ignorant of the real destructiveness of the sitcom. I would also like to note that to find the dialect in which Stewart spoke as he mocked Cain as having racist undertones is to be of the belief that such an accent is 'incorrect' or inferior to another, more 'correct' accent--which in itself is a racist presupposition! Clearly Cain DOES speak with a certain accent (as does every other human being), but it is only 'racist' to replicate his accent (because he is Black). 


As you can see, it is not clear cut. But what I am trying to show is that often it is the reader herself who imposes ideas onto representations when those ideas aren't inherently there. 


I challenge you to be more cynical and less liberal when it comes to accusations of racism. Ask yourself: are there truly racist undertones or am I projecting my own views onto it?