NYT’s Nikole Hannah-Jones blasts ‘racialized’ coverage of Ukraine war
New Post
February 28, 2022
Nikole Hannah-Jones slammed media outlets for “racializing” coverage of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. She also claimed that the coverage of the Russian invasion of Ukraine was based on the skin color of the fleeing Ukrainians
The creator of the New York Times’ controversial 1619 Project is injecting race into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — claiming incessant media coverage of the war is tied to the skin color of the tyrannized Ukrainians.
Nikole Hannah-Jones, 45, retweeted a post Sunday claiming the “supremacy around the media coverage of [the war] isn’t even subtle” while sharing a clip of an Al Jazeera report citing the “prosperous middle class” in Ukraine who were desperately trying to board a train to escape the war-ravaged country.
“What if I told you Europe is not a continent by definition, but a geopolitical fiction to separate it from Asia and so the alarm about a European, or civilized, or First World nation being invaded is a dog whistle to tell us we should care because they are like us,” Hannah-Jones tweeted Sunday to her 671,000 followers.
Hannah-Jones, whose 1619 Project claims America and its institutions were founded on preserving slavery and white supremacy, then suggested the rampant media coverage of the war was directly linked to Ukrainians’ skin color.
“To be clear: We should care about Ukraine,” the Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times Magazine reporter continued. “But not because it is European, or the people appear white, or they are ‘civilized’ and not ‘impoverished.’ All people deserve to be free and to be welcome when their countries are at war.”
Hannah-Jones started sharing her take earlier Sunday while quoting a tweet citing alleged instances of “insidious racism” in the media coverage of the war, including a BBC News report highlighting the “European people with blond hair and blue eyes” being killed by Russia’s all-out assault.
“Every journalist covering Ukraine should really, really look internally,” Hannah-Jones tweeted. “This is why I saw we should stop pretending we have objectivity and in instead acknowledge our biases so that we can report against them. Many of us see the racialized analysis and language.”
In a follow-up tweet, Hannah-Jones continued: “And honestly, these admissions of shock that this is happening in a European country are ahistorical and also serve to justify the lack of sympathy for other invasions, other occupations and other refugee crisis involving peoples not considered white.”
Hannah-Jones also shared video of a reporter in Poland noting that the “unthinkable” had happened in Europe rather than in a “developing” Third World nation.
A message seeking further comment from Hannah-Jones was not immediately returned early Monday.
Shadi Hamid, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank, chided Hannah-Jones for sharing her criticism of the alleged implicit media bias.
“Imagine seeing what’s happening to Ukraine and thinking that it would [be] insightful to tweet, ‘Well, actually, Europe’s not a continent,’” Hamid tweeted late Sunday.
“I’m sure since you all regurgitate each other’s faux outrage in your clout chasing that you didn’t read the next tweet in the thread and that you’re going to pretend not to know I was critiquing media coverage,” Hannah-Jones shot back.
Undaunted, Hamid said it was “absurd” for Hannah-Jones to claim Europe isn’t a continent.
“And also pretty insensitive considering Ukrainians are dying,” Hamid said.
Some other media observers, however, did side with Hannah-Jones.
“The thread she wrote was totally on point,” one reply read. “And some of the ‘oh but these are civilized white refugees’ from the mainstream media has been grotesque.”
Another amateur media critic said he agreed with Hannah-Jones’ take on the coverage of the conflict, now in its fifth day.
“Here’s another way to look at it … if Russia invaded Kazakstan [sic] or Mongolia, would there be this outpouring of support, or even attention?” he asked. “Would that change how Americans looked at what was happening?”
No comments:
Post a Comment