Normal
0

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui>

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }

/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:SimSun;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;
mso-font-alt:宋体;
mso-font-charset:134;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@SimSun";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;
mso-font-charset:134;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:justify;
text-justify:inter-ideograph;
mso-pagination:none;
font-size:10.5pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun;
mso-font-kerning:1.0pt;
mso-ansi-language:EN-US;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
–>

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Instead of writing a substantive, useful post about China law or business, I think I'll continue complaining about unimportant stuff. It's a theme with me today.

I'm already quite tired of this kind of thing. Here's what is apparently a serious Op/Ed piece from a Harvard sociology professor commenting about Hillary Clinton's recent, now infamous "3 am phone call" ad. Surprise! The ad was really all about race:

I have spent my life studying the pictures and symbols of racism and slavery, and when I saw the Clinton ad’s central image — innocent sleeping children and a mother in the middle of the night at risk of mortal danger — it brought to my mind scenes from the past. I couldn’t help but think of D. W. Griffith’s “Birth of a Nation,” the racist movie epic that helped revive the Ku Klux Klan, with its portrayal of black men lurking in the bushes around white society. The danger implicit in the phone ad — as I see it — is that the person answering the phone might be a black man, someone who could not be trusted to protect us from this threat.

 

The ad could easily have removed its racist sub-message by including images of a black child, mother or father — or by stating that the danger was external terrorism. Instead, the child on whom the camera first focuses is blond. Two other sleeping children, presumably in another bed, are not blond, but they are dimly lighted, leaving them ambiguous. Still it is obvious that they are not black — both, in fact, seem vaguely Latino.

I think this would be better piece for The Onion, 'cause it's pretty funny satire. As a serious article, however, well . . . I'll let a guy at Ad Age explain:

Dear sir, I invite you to step away from the advanced degree and go serve yourself a mug of reality. And the New York Times? I expect this sort of dunderheaded overly analytical cluelessness from academia. Those guys do have to churn out some high-grade ridiculousness to justify their existences. But there's no reason for the paper of record to indulge this sort of thinking.

Yeah, what he said.