In a fawning softball interview with New Republic editor Jamil Smith on NBC’s web-based Meet the Press feature Press Pass, moderator Chuck Todd urged the liberal journalist to justify racially divisive reporting: “So let me start with this idea of why we should, in the media, report on identity politics essentially. Why does it matter?”
Smith proclaimed: “Identity politics matters because I feel like it intersects with every bit of public policy....You know, policies to combat gender bias, policies to combat racism. Well, actually all of these things are intertwined. And so, we need to really think about race in a new way if we're going to really effectively address these problems.”
Todd eventually followed up with a gentle counter argument: “What do you say to the critique that’s gonna come from some corners that says, ‘You know what, you guys in the media spend so much time on identity politics that it reinforces divides’?” Smith interjected: “Yeah, that’s a common argument.” Todd seemed to almost apologize for even asking it: “You know, that old meme. Right, it's an old argument. What do you – what's your response?”
Smith denounced such thinking:
I'd say that we're ignoring the real dividers here when we talk about those kinds of things. I think that if we say people who are just talking about race, talking about gender, talking about all those topics at once, are in fact actually causing racism and sexism, I think we've really got it wrong. I think that, that is a classic tactic by people who are interested in preserving the status quo, number one, but also people who simply don't understand the topics at hand. And I think what we need to do as journalists is really keep bringing those issues to people in a more constructive way so that people can understand why, you know, that talking about race is not racist.
Todd then invited Smith to instruct the press on how to cover racial topics: “How do you feel like big media is covering race these days?” Smith argued:
I feel like they're starting to get it. I feel like big media is understanding that people want to talk about these issues and people want to understand them not just simply in a “this black man got shot on the street by a cop” story that comes every day on the news, but they want to understand the underlying issues beneath that. They want to understand why a police department in a town like Ferguson would have tanks and attack its own people that are simply seeking to demonstrate for their own rights. They want to understand what's lying beneath all of that.
Later in the interview, Todd touted Black Lives Matter as “the fastest growing social justice movement that we've seen in the modern era.” Smith declared: “I would agree with that. I think it’s certainly, you know, we've seen what Occupy [Wall Street] did to change the conversation with regards to financial crimes and improprieties on Wall Street. I think Black Lives Matter has done the same but on an issue that is a fundamental American dilemma...”
Todd gave Smith the opportunity defend the radical left-wing protesters for attacking former Maryland Governor and Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley: “Explain why Martin O'Malley had to apologize for saying ‘all lives matter.’” Smith lectured:
So here's why “all lives matter” is a problem. “All lives matter” is said in response to black lives matter, but it never was really said before. Nobody was saying “all lives matter” before. Nobody was saying “white lives matter” before. We already knew that all lives matter. We already knew that white lives matter. But we have to reinforce, apparently, judging by what we've seen with structural racism and also the more publicized police violence that we've seen, we have to reinforce to the American public that black lives matter. And I don't think anyone should have their feelings hurt by that.
Wrapping up the friendly exchange, Todd wondered who Smith would most want to interview. Smith answered: “I would love to talk to the President...the ways in which he weaves the different, you know, aspects of his job in terms of identities and all the identities that are affected by his job. How does he weave that into his policy? How does he weave that into his daily life?”
Smith continued:
I'm more interested in talking to him after he’s president because I think...that's going to be the more interesting Barack Obama. I think he's gonna actually, you know, to show us, you know, he's still going to be a young man. I think he's going to show us a lot about what – you know, how much community organizing still means in his life and I think that it's going to be something to see quite frankly.
Todd predicted: “I think his post-presidency is going to be focused on these issues....I don't want to say it's a regret, but I think there is a little bit of regret in him to tackle it the way he maybe in his dreams thought he could.”
Smith agreed: “I certainly hope so....It's part of a limitation of being a black man in the White House. I think still six years in, we've learned that, you know, that’s what comes with the job.”
Here are excerpts of the Press Pass exchange, aired August 23 on the local Washington D.C. NBC affiliate WRC-4:
11:31 AM ET
CHUCK TODD: In this week's Press Pass, a look at the debate around race, gender, and how these identities intersect with politics and how we in the media cover them. Joining me now is Jamil Smith, the senior editor at The New Republic and he’s the creator of the new podcast Intersection, which is attempting to dissect these tough issues. Jamil, welcome to Press Pass.
JAMIL SMITH: Thank you.TODD: So let me start with this idea of why we should, in the media, report on identity politics essentially. Why does it matter?
SMITH: Identity politics matters because I feel like it intersects with every bit of public policy. You see in the problem that intersectionality tries to confront, a lot of policy that's geared just to a single identity. You know, policies to combat gender bias, policies to combat racism. Well, actually all of these things are intertwined. And so, we need to really think about race in a new way if we're going to really effectively address these problems.
(...)
TODD: What do you say to the critique that’s gonna come from some corners that says, “You know what, you guys in the media spend so much time on identity politics that it reinforces divides”?
SMITH: Yeah, that’s a common argument.
TODD: You know, that old meme. Right, it's an old argument. What do you – what's your response?
SMITH: I'd say that we're ignoring the real dividers here when we talk about those kinds of things. I think that if we say people who are just talking about race, talking about gender, talking about all those topics at once, are in fact actually causing racism and sexism, I think we've really got it wrong. I think that, that is a classic tactic by people who are interested in preserving the status quo, number one, but also people who simply don't understand the topics at hand. And I think what we need to do as journalists is really keep bringing those issues to people in a more constructive way so that people can understand why, you know, that talking about race is not racist.
TODD: How would you – before you were at New Republic, you were here at MSNBC. At NBC News you worked on a couple of individual shows that in themselves – sort of point-of-view shows, but for the most part you saw an observation, you were a big part of the newsroom. How do you feel like big media is covering race these days?
SMITH: I feel like they're starting to get it. I feel like big media is understanding that people want to talk about these issues and people want to understand them not just simply in a “this black man got shot on the street by a cop” story that comes every day on the news, but they want to understand the underlying issues beneath that. They want to understand why a police department in a town like Ferguson would have tanks and attack its own people that are simply seeking to demonstrate for their own rights. They want to understand what's lying beneath all of that.
(...)
TODD: Let's go to the Black Lives Matter movement. It has probably been the fastest growing social justice movement that we've seen in the modern era. Would you agree with that?
SMITH: I would agree with that. I think it’s certainly, you know, we've seen what Occupy [Wall Street] did to change the conversation with regards to financial crimes and improprieties on Wall Street. I think Black Lives Matter has done the same but on an issue that is a fundamental American dilemma and not just something that’s a little bit smaller, like financial improprieties.
(...)
TODD: Okay. Explain why Martin O'Malley had to apologize for saying “all lives matter.”
SMITH: So here's why “all lives matter” is a problem. “All lives matter” is said in response to black lives matter, but it never was really said before. Nobody was saying “all lives matter” before. Nobody was saying “white lives matter” before. We already knew that all lives matter. We already knew that white lives matter. But we have to reinforce, apparently, judging by what we've seen with structural racism and also the more publicized police violence that we've seen, we have to reinforce to the American public that black lives matter. And I don't think anyone should have their feelings hurt by that. I think people need to understand that there is an implicit “too,” t-o-o, after black lives matter. It shouldn’t have to be said, but I just think that people really are getting a little bit too much caught up in their feelings about what, you know, that message says and not really listening to the policies and the real message behind the movement.
(...)
