Yesterday an editorial article in ESPN’s magazine and on their website caused a stir for photoshopping Michael Vick’s face to make him white (he still looks like an asshole to me)
After a few hours of the white-faced Vick picture being posted, ESPN took the it down and replaced it with a regular picture of the Eagles quarterback.
The article was actually very well written (by Touré, who works for MSNBC, and Fuse) and discussed how Michael Vick might not be in the situation he is in if hewere white, not because a white man wouldn’t receive criticism for animal abuse but because it probably wouldn’t have allowed him to be be exposed to dogfighting in the first place.
Touré was not involved in the title “What If Michael Vick Was White?” Or the ridiculous photo option which was an obvious ploy for attention… One that worked, because here I am talking about it.
Blame it on the editor of ESPN The Magazine, Chad Millman, he ran the picture, and the headline, here is the replaced photo, and then the original one:
“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.”
[wise words, from Touré, proving in his text that the picture depicted is the opposite of the point he was trying to make]