What's that smell again?

If you wanted evidence of how the Mail confuses immigration with race, here it is

I will be offering a more considered view about this issue, but for now here's a short observation.

Often, the Mail gets accused of deliberately conflating immigration with race in a dog-whistling fashion. Recently, Sunder Katwala pointed out that the paper had suggested that the children and grandchildren of immigrants should be counted as immigrants despite being born in the country and wrote a fantastic letter to Paul Dacre about it. He also wrote to Phil Woolas, who replied.

The Mail has covered Woolas' reply (without mentioning its role in the original letter, natch). 'Immigration minister attacks statistics chiefs for publishing 'sinister' race numbers' is the current headline, but an earlier link to the article in the comments over at Liberal Conspiracy suggests that it originally had the word 'immigration' in the headline rather than 'race'.

Except the numbers don't measure race. They measure immigration.

At the end of 'The smell of racism and the Mail', I gave a short list of things that make me wonder if the paper is racist. Here's a new one. What about when the paper pretends immigration figures it disapproves of actually measure race, and it has previously reported these figures as being too high? Is it obliquely saying that there are too many ethnic minorities for its liking?

What's that smell?

**UPDATE**The headline has changed again now, as the article has beome one of many calling for Woolas' resignation. God, he's such a cock.

No comments: