Hey, @nytimes, why is a story on the white birthrate dropping a “top story”?

I mean, I know why, but first things, first. Have a look at this screencap I took of the NYTimes daily “top headlines” newsletter I got this morning:

A story on Caucasian births accounting for less than half of the births in the US is the TOP story in the newsletter. Meanwhile, here’s where the the story ends up on NYTimes.com:

Also it’s a top story…but why? Well, it’s because fear sells. And the NYT thinks we are racist and afraid of being overrun by nonwhites. Why else would they use the term “white” instead of “caucasian” in the headline? There is even more fear-mongering in the subtitle that suggests the entire identity of the nation will change thanks to fewer whites being born.

First off, there will still be mostly rich white people running things. Secondly, why is this news? This trend has been going on for a while now. I remember, years ago, seeing John Gibson on Fox News “reporting” on this and encouraging white folks to have more babies.

Because, clearly, what the world needs is more white people >_<</p>

If we're supposed to ever move beyond racism, stories like this need to stop being the top headline. The NYTimes is being racist and encouraging racism and the classic "fear of the other" in it's caucasian readers. The somewhat sad truth is, America's racial identity doesn't matter all that much since it's still largely white people at the top. And really, non-caucasians are no less corruptible than caucasians, so even if the current ethnicity balance in Washington were different, the country's identity still wouldn't change. We'd just have African-Americans and Latinos ordering drone strikes in foreign countries and cutting health care spending...Oh and PLENTY of white people on TV and in our movies.

So, it's a real shame that the NYT is resorting to such tactics just to get more eyes on their articles. Sure, ethnicity stats in America should be a story they cover, but a "top story"? I don't think so.

Incidentally, hey, NYT, do you mind not putting literal asses on either side of your masthead? Kinda lowers my respect for you as a newsource. Plus they're just distracting. At least they're all caucasian asses. >_<</p>

Oh and does anyone else find a clothing line called “Bonobos” a little racist? Especially with a black guy in their ad? I mean, Bonobos are a kind of monkey. I seem to recall it being racist to call African-Americans “monkeys”.

Ah well. Just another day on Bizarro Earth…

from a post at thepete.com