Jemele and Mike

I wouldn't watch her enough to tell you whether she did, although I doubt she stopped delivering the news. But like Dick, I don't want or need to hear this line of "how can I care about the Blake Bortles of the world when there are real problems?"

Telling her audience that she's having trouble caring about a sports event affects her credibility in reporting on the event.

 

I don't think she cares what you think.

Also, it's a really bad look for a bunch of white guys to sit around deriding a young black woman for professing to be upset to the point of distraction by a race-baiting president.

 

Eagerly anticipating Whitlock's take: "Jemele Hill is not really a black woman."

 

I'm not particularly affected by what's a "bad look." That's code for "don't be politically incorrect now, boys."

 

Actually, it's code for "what you're saying is ignorant."

 

To be ignorant would be to ignore something. We're obviously not ignoring this chickenshit. Fail. But I'm sure they patted you on the head at sensitivity class.

 

This is a silly point ... you're saying that it'd be "a bad look" for a white guy at a Starbucks to get irritated by a young black barista who can't be bothered to take his order because she's so upset by who's in the White House.

 

So because she's black she is granted a force field in which her simpleton meatball opinions Shalt Not Be Subject to Challenge?

That's such condescending, paternalistic tripe and a fucking insult to the army of thoughtful black reporters, columnists, and thinkers out there - Jamelle Bouie, Rachel Khadzi Ghansah, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Eugene Robinson, fucking Bomani Jones, fucking Barack Obama - who would be interested to know that when you've heard one Negro's opinion, you've heard 'em all.

 

From Curtis's piece
Jemele Hill on the Fight for the Future of ESPN

Today, the topic was where free agent Gordon Hayward should sign.

“What is it — Miami, Boston?” Hill asked.

“Honestly, that feels like an easy choice to me,” Smith said.

“That it’s definitely Boston?”

“Yeah …”

“Sheeet,” Hill said. She smiled. The debate was on. “You’ve been to Miami, right?”

“More than I need to,” Smith said.

“Miami will always be in the recruiting game. Because Miami.”

“That’s a whack-ass reason to sign somewhere.”

“Brother living in Utah for four years,” Hill said. “That’s all I’m saying.”

“Boston is a thriving metropolis,” Smith said with a touch of civic pride. Before coming to ESPN, he was a reporter at the Globe.

Hill said: “Last thing I need is Boston on my back …” She was once suspended by ESPN for comparing rooting for the Celtics to having sympathy for Hitler.

A joke had popped into Hill’s head, and she was deciding whether to use it.

She did: “We’re talking about white dudes. That’s a different experience. [Boston] might be like Miami for them.”

“Precisely,” Smith said. “That’s mecca right there! Shit’s lit!”

An hour later, on SportsCenter, Hill and Smith rebooted their debate for the cameras. Smith said, “Boston is a thriving metropolis,” and Hill repeated that she didn’t need a few million angry Bostonians on her back. But I noticed they never used the joke that cracked them up in the green room.
​

Now if a white columnist had said, "We're talking about black dudes. That's a different experience. Atlanta might be like Boston for them," what would the response have been? People would have said that's raycess. I don't think either one necessarily is, though. I think they're both largely accurate. Sure, they traffic along the lines of cliches -- white dudes would feel at home in Boston, black guys would feel more at home in Atlanta -- but it's a reflection of something that is largely true.

BTW, Smith said "lit," and "lit" is queer and overused.

 

Post your CV or STFU.

 

Nope. That's an awful analogy. I'm saying that it would be a bad look for a white guy at a Starbucks to get irritated by a young black barista who told a reporter during non-working hours that it's hard to focus on work sometimes when you're upset by a race-baiting president.