Boston Herald: "Fade to Blacko"?

Posted: June 27th, 2009
at 9:38am by orangemenace

Categories: life,celebrity,not ninja-worthy,fo' real?,real life news,health

Comments: 6 comments


6 Responses to 'Boston Herald: "Fade to Blacko"?'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Boston Herald: "Fade to Blacko"?'.

  1. “I’m not going to say that trying to be witty by combining ‘fade to black’ and ‘wacko jacko’ is itself definitely racist, as that would be a little overly sensitive, I think – but it’s definitely pretty ignorant and in poor taste. That said, it was the cover of the Boston Herald – which means it probably should be read as a racist remark.”

    I’m not sure I understand your point: you suggest the Herald cover should be interpreted as “a racist remark” while initially claiming that such an interpretation is “a little overly sensitive,” We are living in a post-Journalism era anyway (see Washington Post “Pay to Play” scandal), and The Boston Globe as we once knew is and has been dead for some time. If your larger point is that we need multiple media voices, I concur wholeheartedly. But taking aim at Boston Herald is not the way to achieve GENUINE media diversity. And isn’t interesting that the Boston Herald’s long-term outlook is more viable than that of the Globe/Times money pit?

    Boston Patriot

    3 Jul 09 at 1:25 am


  2. I would agree with this commenter if not for the fact that the heralds “long term outlook” is more like a soap opera than anything else. It’s like arguing that because reality tv makes money it’s more informationally viable than 60 minutes…


    3 Jul 09 at 12:45 pm


  3. And “fade to blacko” is definitely racial. Maybe not racist.


    3 Jul 09 at 12:46 pm


  4. Well, my point was simply that the source changes the context within which a comment is made. Sorry if that was less than explicit – my fault.

    So, essentially, supporters of the Herald in comments I had been reading around the interwebs were suggesting that taking this comment as ‘racist’, or at the least ‘racially insensitive’ was going overboard, would possibly be correct – except that we’re talking about the Boston Herald, which I believe lacks the editorial leadership required to prevent racists who work there from publishing remarks/headlines like this. So, if not for a history [in my opinion, obviously] of publishing some racist bullshit, the Herald may have been able to apologize for simply being ‘in poor taste’ – but instead, the headline comes across as racist.

    And, for the record, ‘taking aim’ at the Herald has nothing to do with encouraging [or not] media diversity. That whole statement just sounds like some Right Wing bullshit someone spouts to squash a dissenting opinion. “Oh, critiquing the Herald means that you don’t believe in media diversity or freedom of the press” – I never said they shouldn’t exist, did I? No – I merely implied that if they were the only local newspaper that Boston would probably end up significantly more retahded in all matters of news and politricks.

    And as for the viability of the two papers – content has nothing to do with it, which is the real issue here. The Globe isn’t going to go under because nobody reads it. The NY Times over extended themselves, and the Globe was getting screwed by it’s own workers, essentially. So now there’s a possibility that the Herald being better as a business means it’ll be the only game in town, which is sad – especially if you’re looking “to achieve GENUINE media diversity”.


    3 Jul 09 at 2:56 pm


  5. i just want to know who the idiot editor is who actually let this get published.


    12 Jul 09 at 10:58 pm


  6. Kevin Convey is the editor, send him an email:


    13 Jul 09 at 1:57 pm



Leave a Reply