It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


ESPN The Magazine editor-in-chief discusses ‘white Vick’ picture

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 08:24 AM

ESPN The Magazine editor Chad Millman released a statement Friday about his decision to illustrate a column on the importance of Michael Vick's(notes) race with a Photoshopped image that imagined how a white Vick would look.

Millman neither defended nor rationalized the choice. He barely offered an explanation for the decision to use the picture and the headline "What if Michael Vick were white?" instead stating that the image best represented the scope of the story:

Well I think this whole story is dumb but do you think photoshopping Vicks image is in bad taste. I personally feel it fits the stupid story well.

posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 09:27 AM
reply to post by kro32

Did you read the actual article? The author of the article stated that race is a non issue. To quote:

But after his arrest for dogfighting, so many people asked: Would a white football player have gotten nearly two years in prison for what Vick did to dogs?

This question makes me cringe. It is so facile, naive, shortsighted and flawed that it is meaningless. Whiteness comes with great advantages, but it's not a get-out-of-every-crime-free card. Killing dogs is a heinous crime that disgusts and frightens many Americans. I'm certain white privilege would not be enough to rescue a white NFL star caught killing dogs.
Actual ESPN Article
End quote.

So, it concludes that while a white middle class Vick might not have been exposed to dog fighting at an early age, the question is pointless, and white or black we would have viewed the crime the same way. It goes on to talk about his redemption, and says that we should move on from the issue.

So, let me ask you: Did you read the ESPN article, or the Yahoo article? While the photoshop was a dumb idea, the article showed how Vick has helped pave the way for other black QBs in the NFL. Alas, in a county where white guilt reigns, our President is half black, instead of half white, your reaction will probably be the most common.
And for the record, when I read the Autobiography of Malcom X in highschool, I broke the nose of a kid who used the N word. For years I carried an attitude of shame towards white america for their treatment of other races. In the end, I realized that nothing can change the past, and that people of African descent didnt want my sympathy. In fact, they viewed my sympathy as an insincered patronization.
edit on 27-8-2011 by steppenwolf86 because: added link

posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 09:28 AM
it's just a ploy to drive traffic to the site. controversy sells

posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 09:41 AM
Of course I read the article and I still think it's a dumb story and an even dumber way to bring attention to a dumb story. This was the topic of the thread.

posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 09:57 AM
Really? It is hard to know it would have made a difference. I think it would have. Big Ben raped a girl, and got coverage for a week. Is dog fighting worse than rape?

That is not to say dog fighting is not terrible, but I think if Tom Brady had been caught dog fighting he would not have been locked up. It is all speculation over the past, and unimportant now.

My friend said something about it that rings true. Any man who would kill a dog has a sickness in his heart. I don't hate him I just feel sorry him.
edit on 27-8-2011 by stephinrazin because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 09:58 AM
Okay, but you linked the Yahoo story, not the ESPN article. Other than the picture, which I agree is stupid, what is your problem with the article? I think it was well written and had a valid point in advising us to move on, and that the media should focus on Vicks play on the field. What do you find stupid about that?

Also, I remember the Rothlesburger story being in the news for a huge amount of time. He got off because rape is hard to prove, and Vick was convicted because there were dead dogs, a kennel, and a fighting pit in a house that he owned. He was not sent to jail because he was black, he was sent to jail because the evidence was conclusive.

The whole point of the article is that discussion on whether or not Tom Brady would have done time over dogfighting is pointless, because as far as we know, he is not involved in anything like that. It has NOTHING to do with the color of his skin. Same with Big Ben.
edit on 27-8-2011 by steppenwolf86 because: added response

edit on 27-8-2011 by steppenwolf86 because: added response

top topics

log in