Readers React on Twitter to “Being White in Philly”
Hi All. Tom McGrath, Philly Mag editor, here. I’ll be taking your questions about our race piece. Fire away. -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q1 RT@speakpatrice “How do you launch a frank discussion about race under a cloak of anonymity?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A1 We wanted people to speak frankly about race, and one way to do that was not to print their full names. Candor was important.
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q2 RT@mattrepino@phillymag You say that whites aren’t engaged on the issue of race but your annon sources seemed to be. Can you explain?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 2 We deliberately chose a neighborhood where race was likely to be an issue. But many whites in Philly would prefer not to discuss race
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 3 RT @mattrepino@phillymag Why Fairmount? Why not Fishtown, Northeast, etc?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 3 There are probably a number of neighborhoods we could have done it in. Fairmount is the one the writer chose -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 3 RT @byjenamiller.@phillymag But people weren’t anonymous in the Steve Volk piece you compared this to.
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 3 I don’t think we printed full names in that story, either. ButI don’t think there’s as much fear of speaking out in that piece -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 4 RT@badkittysays@phillymag Do you understand your article perpetuated stereotypes?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 4 – Yes, I realize that could be a consequence. But there are also facts in the piece that few people want to address.
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 4 1/3 of blacks in Philly live in poverty. Large dropout rate. -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 5 RT @allikatz@phillymag The writer conflates race w/class – two different issues – why wasn’t that addressed?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 5 It was addressed in the first section of the piece, where Huber makes clear he’s largely writing about the underclass. -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 6 MT @sionnan@phillymag Youhave repeatedly mentioned the city’s reluctance to discuss race. What, exactly, is this conclusion based on?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 6 If there are candid discussions happening, I haven’t heard many. COuld be wrong, but can you give me evidence otherwise? -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 7 RT @mf_greatest@phillymag what do you plan to do about the lack of racial diversity on your staff?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A7 It’s an issue for us and many magazines. I’m open to pitches from writers of color, and clearly need to do more to make it happen -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 8RT @mf_greatest@phillymag do you recognize that the piece was decidedly ahistorical in its chronicling of black life in the city?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 8 Wasn’t attempting to do a story on the history of race in Philly. This had a transparent POV: what what people in one place think -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 9 MT @charingball@phillymag The stereotyping in that piece is very common & known. So what new insight into how Whites see Black ?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A9 There are a range of views from white people in the story – from blatant bigotry to empathy. We wanted to show that. Also….
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 9 …not sure that pretending that people DON’T think certain things is helpful. Without candor, there can’t be a conversation -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 10 @metissejazz@phillymag A monologue of white privilege, guilt, victim-blaming is not a conversation. Who’s the (imaginary) interlocutor
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 10 It’s the start of a conversation, not necessarily the end. – TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 11 Q @mandialyse@phillymag Can you do a story about what ppl think of race without considering how & why they got there?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 11 Not meant to be an exhaustive analysis of race. One POV, as we stated -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 12 RT @ssscorvus@taramurtha @phillymag you know what’s really lacking in media these days are stories told from white povs. Lol!
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 12 Not sure there are many stories directly about race told from a white POV
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 13 MT @sitswithpasta.@phillymag your writer would have heard a far wider range of opinions had he travelled to multiple neighborhoods.
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 13 Yes. The story was already long (as people have mentioned) – TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Question for you: Does every story about race need to include full context and every point of view? Do we require that on other stories?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 15 RT @brewniversal@phillymag you say this is the start of a conversation, what’s the next step?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A15 We’re publishing reactions from our own writers this week on @thephillypost. We’ll see where it leads. Other pubs can engage too
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 16 @erika_owens@phillymag if this is supposed to be the start of a conversation, how do your defensive answers here model that response?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 16 Just defending why and how we did the story. I encourage conversation.
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 17 @harrisonfinberg@phillymag on a scale of 1-10, how desperate for attention is your publication ?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 17 um, 7?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q18 RT @michael_donovan@phillymag “black” does not exclusively equal “underclass” and it’s a shame that it’s hard not to take that message
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 18 Agreed, we could have done a better job being clearer on that. IT’s in the piece, but obviously people aren’t seeing it that way -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q19 RT @alexrolfe@phillymag why do you think that racists in Fairmount needed a major platform for their views?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A19 Not all the views were racist. But those views do exist. So why not put them in the open where they can be examined? -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 20 RT @maurycompsonI think there are two types of white people. Those that like Todd Rundgren and those that don’t. Was that a factor?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 20 Yes. Like Todd.
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q20 @mf_greatest@phillymag if the author wanted to do this piece it should’ve been an essay. Trying to “report” this story was a fail
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 20 Why? What was wrong with reporting it? -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
q21 MT @alexrolfe@phillymag what conversation were you trying to start? Like what’s the question that this piece endeavors to answer?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 21 As the piece says, “Philly remains a largely segregated city” Why is that?
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
Q 22 RT@joelchoffmann@phillymag Will you host a diversity forum and open it to the public?#BeingWhiteinPhilly
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
A 22 we hadn’t planned anything, but it’s something we’ll think about. – TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
MT @MF_Greatest@JeremyMyers43yeah but whites have gotta stop acting like race is a minority problem. U SHOULD be part of these discussions
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013
thanks for your time and your questions, folks. I’m signing off. -TM
— Philly Mag (@phillymag) March 4, 2013