What is not being focused on in this increasingly popular and misleading “expose” (one clueless website poster claimed it was evidence of racism on Yahoo!’s part), is that it is two different news organizations using the different terminologies, which complicates the matter. The AFP said one thing. The AP said something else. The media is not a monolith. The AP doesn’t consult the AFP prior to captioning their photos. Competing businesses usually don’t engage in such behaviour. The individual responsible for this “expose” is intentionally misleading folks.
Now, if you can find the AFP claiming “looting” of groceries when the person is not white, then you’ve got something on them. So long as the AFP labels all individuals involved in the taking of groceries as “finding”, as they did in this story, then they are being consistent.
By the same token, if you can find a report by the AP of a white “finder” of groceries, you’ve also got them. So long as the AP labels all individuals involved in the taking of groceries as “looters” then they are being consistent.
This is a typical case of two different news organizations using different terminology for the same act. That is nothing new. Hell, Reuters and the AP can’t even agree on a common usage for “terrorist.” For what it is worth, I consider all “finding” of goods on someone else’s property to be looting. Of course, if you are hungry, sometimes you’ve got to do what you’ve got to do and pay your debt later. I’m not saying its not theft, but I do understand it. Its perfectly forgiveable and understandable. TVs, VCRs and DVDs, however, are not necessary for one’s survival. You ain’t gonna starve without them. And please spare me the bullshit bartering argument. That’s an excuse to steal electronics and expensive sneakers.
UPDATE: Much to the chagrin of those recklessly and arrogantly screaming “racism” from the rooftops, the photographer who captioned the AP photo has explained that he used the word “find” due to the fact that the food in the photo was floating down the street and not inside a store. In other words, the individuals in the photo grabbed onto it as it floated by. It had nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with location.
It’s pretty damned hard to loot a streaming river of raw sewage, human decay and chemical toxicity as it flows down the street.
But the racialists and opportunists will continue to assert otherwise. Anything to perpetuate hatred and discontent on the basis of skin color. There is plenty of authentic racism in this world without needing to manufacture evidence, distort the truth or manipulate people’s emotions.
They don’t tell you the whole truth, because they don’t want you to think for yourself. And you go along willingly. Fuck that thinking stuff.
Other bloggers:
Casey Lartigue: Katrina Looting Ad Campaign
Radley Balko: Context…
New Orleans racial makeup is more than 73% non-white. I prefer to think that the whites are looting while the rest are “acquiring”. I am in total agreement that water and food is an unnecessary evil that must be acquired. I have no idea what the intentions are of those who are taking non food items. I suppose one might be thinking of it as wampum i.e.. currency for down the road to “get out of dodge” since there really isn’t any electricity to be found. In any case, it is extreme to be exercising more acquisition than that of sheer sustenance.