If I'm reading the abstract correctly, they showed two identical photographs to the test subjects, one of which had been manipulated and Obama supporters more often chose the lighter version as being undoctored.
IOW: Without accounting for the accuracy of their picks, it was surmised that Obama supporters saw him more light-skinned than those who opposed him.
I guess this might be as accurate or perhaps a little more than the Harvard Implicit Test, but without reading the entire survey, I'm still left with a few questions.
On the Essence cover with Michelle, Malia and Sasha his skin was definitely darkened. But it's a black magazine so that would probably be the reason why.
@Lana Leigh loves Meryl Streep: I think this may be more of a lighting issue, because Malia looks darker too. Black magazines, particularly Essence, usually attempt to display the array of colors that encompass "black". That's one of the few things that I still like about Essence. I could venture to say that they don't have a clear objective in making Obama look one way or another; darker would exactly make him more relatable to black people. Especially if one considers that black people are just as susceptible to "shade-ism" as whites.
@Lana Leigh loves Meryl Streep: Are you sure that this isn't just lighting? I'm black, and I've seen a whole lot of pictures in our family photo album where my family is a variety of shades.
Also, kids who play in the sun get darker. I could pop outside for an hour when I was little and come back in a shade or two darker. I seriously doubt that essence darkened skin tones.
@thesciencegirl: Maybe they feel that if he's darker then black women will be more drawn to him. I'm not sure, I'm not in marketing but I wouldn't put it passed them. I remember when I first saw it I thought he looked so unnatural, so I figured maybe they darkened him.
We seemed to be more upset that people are darkened so they appear "menacing" and "sinister" than the idea that a darker or darkened person is more "menacing" and "sinister." There is something terribly wrong with this focus.
These perceptions aren't only insidious, but have real ramifications on people's (or rather African-American) lives, particularly when it comes to access, job prospects and even in criminal sentencing.
I came across this finding on Wiki and downloaded the original article "The Skin Color Paradox and the American Racial Order": " In criminal sentencing, medium to dark-skinned African Americans are likely to receive sentences 2.6 longer than those of whites or light-skinned African Americans, and when a white victim is involved, those with more "black" features are likely to receive a much more severe punishment, reinforcing the idea that those of lighter complexion are of more "value." "
I think Ben Smith's first point is the most salient: why did the study not account for the race of the participants? Controlling for "racial attitudes" is not the same thing as accounting for race. Am I supposed to believe that Obama detractors of all races darken his likeness? Really?
@ronniedobbs: racism without racists -- I see it so often. We say things like "People show bias" when a real analysis of the data would tell us which people show that bias.
@ronniedobbs: Because we know *which* people would be shown to have more of these racial biases (starts with a w ends with an e). To clue in those people still in the dark: it's not minorities doing this.
I don't doubt their conclusions, but it makes me tetchy that they used three different photos. I get that they had to, but I kind of wish they'd gotten another sample group and switched which photos were darkened and lightened, as well.
But I don't think it would change the outcome. I just prefer reducing variables as much as possible, especially with something subjective like "most representative."
@shoroko: They used darkened and lightened version of each photo (so the same photo was directly compared) -- read the methods section of the PNAS article. The photos pictured are just examples.
Really? This is news? The politics of skin tone have been parsed to death both inside and outside the black community.
I don't know if I speak for other African Americans, but I'm feeling over-exposed since Obama became president and I don't like it.
I have suffered through a national debate on why my haur is so nappy, I have suffered through a national debate on why black women are least likely to get married and why black women are the least desirable people in the world of online dating (on NPR with the summation being: it's physical, other men are just not as attracted to black women), I am now asked to suffer through yet another debate on why my lighter skin may give me an advantage over my fellow African Americans cause someone determined that dark = bad, lighter = good.
I just don't see how all of this is going to change the dynamics of the situation on the ground. Black unemployment is currently at 35 % and my black president is telling me that a rising tide will lift all boats. Really, bruh? Cause it looks like a lot of black folks boats have holes in them.
So, excuse me if I'm not too worried about what it means if you show my photo to some white folks and they like me slightly moreso than a dark skin African American. I'm not worried about all that, what I want to know is can we get some jobs?
@AtelierCeleste: Yeah, I just had a white dude come up to me at the drug store and tell me he "liked my extensions". I'm like, what the fuck. We can't have any secrets anymore? Now, folks that have no vested reason to be in my business are acting like they're an authority on all things black. Reading a magazine or watching a movie does not make you an authority on anything. Actually working to undermine systemic racism will have a much better impact. But no, white dude, I do not want to talk to you about my hair.
HONESTLY. And please, don't get me started on Chris Rock's mess of a 'documentary' (more like a mockumentary).
I'm totally like, what do these 'academics' want black women to do? Are they trying to talk me onto the ledge?
This post should be about the Washington Post article today that examined the 35% unemployment in the black community and how young black men are back living with their mothers, taking government offered programs to teach them a trade, unable to find jobs even after training and are seriously considering going back into the drug game because they can't afford to feed their daughters (why do these men always have daughters? I don't know).
It seems as though Obama's presidency has made it an acceptable field day for white folks to just come all out in the open with their thinly veiled racism under the guise of academic studies.
Really? What is constructive about pointing out that 51% of black women have never been married? that we are the least desirable, least searched for people in the world of online dating? How are these studies useful? It's as if they're saying, yeah, Michelle is the First Lady, but don't get it twisted, you're still at the bottom of every imaginable totem pole.
I like Latoya's posts, in general, but I honestly don't know why she would devote time and effort to analyzing this foolishness. This is subliminal psychological racism. Nothing more.
I would add, too, that the lightening or darkening of an image does not only reflect the feelings of the person(s) doing the alteration, but also their perceptions of what that would mean to their audience. When Obama's opponents darken an image of him, they, I assume, figure that it would make their audience react negatively to the photo due to their own racism.
And we moderates are clearly just oblivious - I didn't realize those three pictures were an example, with a scale from lighter on the left to darker on the right, until I started reading the linked article.
But then, I'm color blind. I don't see race. People tell me I'm white and I believe them because I own a lot of Jimmy Buffett albums.
"But does this study prove anything we didn't learn during the OJ Simpson trial?"
Like that the media are assholes? Nope.
But, OJ is an asshole too.
Latoya, it's interesting that you bring up the sinister interpretation from a cloaked or shadowed figure. I would have never picked up on this simply because it is, as you said, too entangled in race.
Tim Gunn is so classy. It's refreshing to see a genuinely kind, intelligent, articulate person in a role of power in any sector of pop culture. I also want him to be my uncle.
11/24/09
Are we really still in
this much denial, as a country?
Still?
11/24/09
IOW: Without accounting for the accuracy of their picks, it was surmised that Obama supporters saw him more light-skinned than those who opposed him.
I guess this might be as accurate or perhaps a little more than the Harvard Implicit Test, but without reading the entire survey, I'm still left with a few questions.
11/24/09
On the Essence cover with Michelle, Malia and Sasha his skin was definitely darkened. But it's a black magazine so that would probably be the reason why.
11/24/09
11/24/09
Also, kids who play in the sun get darker. I could pop outside for an hour when I was little and come back in a shade or two darker. I seriously doubt that essence darkened skin tones.
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
I came across this finding on Wiki and downloaded the original article "The Skin Color Paradox and the American Racial Order": " In criminal sentencing, medium to dark-skinned African Americans are likely to receive sentences 2.6 longer than those of whites or light-skinned African Americans, and when a white victim is involved, those with more "black" features are likely to receive a much more severe punishment, reinforcing the idea that those of lighter complexion are of more "value." "
Disgusting.
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
But I don't think it would change the outcome. I just prefer reducing variables as much as possible, especially with something subjective like "most representative."
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
I don't know if I speak for other African Americans, but I'm feeling over-exposed since Obama became president and I don't like it.
I have suffered through a national debate on why my haur is so nappy, I have suffered through a national debate on why black women are least likely to get married and why black women are the least desirable people in the world of online dating (on NPR with the summation being: it's physical, other men are just not as attracted to black women), I am now asked to suffer through yet another debate on why my lighter skin may give me an advantage over my fellow African Americans cause someone determined that dark = bad, lighter = good.
I just don't see how all of this is going to change the dynamics of the situation on the ground. Black unemployment is currently at 35 % and my black president is telling me that a rising tide will lift all boats. Really, bruh? Cause it looks like a lot of black folks boats have holes in them.
So, excuse me if I'm not too worried about what it means if you show my photo to some white folks and they like me slightly moreso than a dark skin African American. I'm not worried about all that, what I want to know is can we get some jobs?
11/24/09
11/24/09
HONESTLY. And please, don't get me started on Chris Rock's mess of a 'documentary' (more like a mockumentary).
I'm totally like, what do these 'academics' want black women to do? Are they trying to talk me onto the ledge?
This post should be about the Washington Post article today that examined the 35% unemployment in the black community and how young black men are back living with their mothers, taking government offered programs to teach them a trade, unable to find jobs even after training and are seriously considering going back into the drug game because they can't afford to feed their daughters (why do these men always have daughters? I don't know).
It seems as though Obama's presidency has made it an acceptable field day for white folks to just come all out in the open with their thinly veiled racism under the guise of academic studies.
Really? What is constructive about pointing out that 51% of black women have never been married? that we are the least desirable, least searched for people in the world of online dating? How are these studies useful? It's as if they're saying, yeah, Michelle is the First Lady, but don't get it twisted, you're still at the bottom of every imaginable totem pole.
I like Latoya's posts, in general, but I honestly don't know why she would devote time and effort to analyzing this foolishness. This is subliminal psychological racism. Nothing more.
11/24/09
11/24/09
But then, I'm color blind. I don't see race. People tell me I'm white and I believe them because I own a lot of Jimmy Buffett albums.
11/24/09
@rodmanstreet:
11/24/09
Like that the media are assholes? Nope.
But, OJ is an asshole too.
Latoya, it's interesting that you bring up the sinister interpretation from a cloaked or shadowed figure. I would have never picked up on this simply because it is, as you said, too entangled in race.
11/24/09
11/24/09
09/05/09