This was a pleasant surprise. Right before taking Spuds out for his afternoon jaunt, I read the jaw-dropping story that Chicago’s Democratic Mayor Lori Lightfoot had announced via a spokewoman that she would now grant interviews only to “journalists of color.” This was such flagrant bias and racism by Lightfoot that journalists were reluctant to believe it. But it was and is true.
As I strolled with my over-enthusiastic dog, trying to keep him from leaping to greet strangers, eating cicadas and pulling me over in his joy in being alive, I mused, “Now, if Hispanic and black reporters have any integrity at all—which is in question, since journalists in general lack integrity today—they will reject Lightfoot’s blatant discrimination, and make it clear that she will either grant interviews irrespective of race and ethnicity, or Chicago’s reporters will not interview her or anyone speaking for her at all.”
All news organizations, local and national, also have an ethical obligation to emphatically condemn Lightfoot’s divisive and un-American policy. I also wondered, as I tried to stop Spuds from rolling in the grass like Teri Garr rolling in the hay in “Young Frankenstein” (“Roll, roll, roll…”), how did the United States end up with so many unethical, incompetent mayors? New York City, Portland, Minneapolis, Washington, D.C., Seattle, Chicago, Atlanta—it’s like a horror movie.”
Then I returned to find this report: Gregory Pratt, a distinguished reporter with the Chicago Tribune and of Hispanic descent, revealed on Twitter that he told the mayor’s office to cancel his Wednesday interview today with Lightfoot if her new policy was in force. He wrote, “I am a Latino reporter @chicagotribune whose interview request was granted for today. However, I asked the mayor’s office to lift its condition on others and when they said no, we respectfully canceled. Politicians don’t get to choose who covers them.”
Let’s see how many of his colleagues have similarly functioning ethics alarms.
Meanwhile, what is to be done with Lightfoot and the other anti-white racists who represent the Democratic Party? Do Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, all members of the eeeevil race, have the courage to tell a bigoted black female mayor that she’s a disgrace to the party, her city and the nation? A Presidential slap-down would be particularly apt.
11 thoughts on “Ethics Hero: Chicago Tribune Reporter Gregory Pratt”
The fact that there was not an immediate backlash from progressives proves they live in fear of reprisal or are racists themselves
I am in shock: this blatant unconstitutional act by an elected official should be parried by other elected officials, if they have any integrity, honor, or understanding of the US Constitution. It is fine and right for others of the press to fight back, but if other elected officials don’t take Chicago’s mayor to task, we’ve lost the fight.
Pratt’s response is particularly apt. On the one side, yes, she is racist in her position; on the other side, she is an elected official who is accountable to the general public. Pratt us right to reject that position and should rightfully be insulted that his ethnicity is the deciding factor as to whether he gets an interview.
In slight contrast, if Spike Lee, LeBron James, or some other non-elected public figure wants to be a racist ass to the press (btw, don’t think of pulling that in the NFL, because they want to be in the press every day of the year), be my guest. The market will do its thing. Elected officials, however, are OBLIGATED to be accountable to EVERYONE.
” Do Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, all members of the eeeevil race, have the courage to tell a bigoted black female mayor that she’s a disgrace to the party, her city and the nation? ”
To ask this question is to answer it.
I’m sure she’ll get plenty of support from people like Squad members, athletes, and celebrities. And more than a few academics. I’m sure Joy Reid and Chris Cuomo will say “You go girl.”
She is a horrible mayor from any angle. This is just a way for her to have to answer fewer tough questions. She assumes (probably correctly) that most non-white journalists are more likely to be on her team, politically.
I do not believe a single major city in the US has an objectively good mayor right now.
Trump would have skewered her and then it would have become a thing.
God; I miss that magnificent bastard.
While it does not change the ethics involved, the statement that Lightfoot “now would grant interviews only to ‘journalists of color’” needs clarification. Lightfoot said in her statement (not clearly enough) and her communications director reiterated that this was a one-day thing. It still is wrong.
The National Association of Hispanic Journalists said it “does not condone restricting press access based on a journalist’s race/ethnicity,” and at the same time called for “equity in newsrooms and news coverage.” The usage of ‘equity’ in this context means that racial and ethnic representation in newsrooms would mirror that representation in the general population. There is an apparent contradiction there, saying race does not matter for access but it does matter for the composition of the newsroom.
The National Association of Black Journalists said it “does not support excluding any bona fide journalists from one-on-one interviews with newsmakers, even if it is for one day and in support of activism.” They likewise called for greater “Black and Brown representation” within media newsrooms.
Lightfoot’s action is both racist and a recognition of an unfortunate reality. It is racist to expect news coverage to differ based on the race of the reporter, since a fundamental tenet of journalism is to report the facts. Yet, it is the case that most journalists bring a point of view to their reporting and in fact do slant news based on their own background and political beliefs.
I will not hold my breath waiting for prominent Democrats to denounce this wrong-headed political theater.
She really is an astounding idiot. What is the point, other than showcasing bigotry, of announcing discrimiation like for “one day only”? Why not just pick the “journalists of color” you want to interviewed by on that day, and otherwise shut up? “I’m going to act on my anti-white bigotry just for today!” still shows an anti-white bigot.
What I was thinking a few minutes ago, before reading your comment, was that the ethics actually was worse that I thought at first, since it’s now the added rationalization of ‘It’s just this one time, so what’s the harm?’