Regular readers of this blog already know that there is no colorblindness within the mainstream media, just as there is no gender-blindness. When a “person of color” is shown, it is because the producers specifically wanted a “person of color”. Though they like to claim that chance plays a role in their racial choices, they are clearly lying.
Nevertheless, we might entertain the thought that, though their racial selections were deliberate, they still play only a secondary role. In other words, we might believe that the organization in question is primarily interested in selling you their product – but they also have a secondary goal of infusing you with multiracial piety (or of avoiding trouble).
With the full understanding that each organization is different, and not all leftists are the same, I submit that there are times when the primary goal is to infuse us with multiracial piety, and the apparent primary goal is actually only secondary.
If we pay attention to cases where we know, for a fact, that the organization in question is sincere about their apparent primary goal, we can learn from them. For example, in a recent Oregonian article about violence against gays, we are treated to the following example of the billboards they put up:
Notice that there are five couples depicted – but not one of them is mixed race. Of course, it is possible that these just happen to be the couples that volunteered to have their pictures shown. But it is also possible that the Cascade AIDS project, which is responsible for putting up the billboards, did not want race to be a distraction from the important message they wanted to convey: Do not attack gays! It’s dangerous; if their blood gets on you, you could get AIDS! (just kidding).
Government agencies are required (I’m fairly certain) to depict the “right” racial mix in their publications. So we cannot learn anything from them that we don’t already know. But we can certainly learn from cases where there is a choice. There is also a possibility that gay organizations are not as worried about depicting blacks or Hispanics because they are less fearful of attacks from the left. But then we would have to assume that gay organizations only include “people of color” out of fear, that they do not actually accept the multiracial agenda. I do not think this is the case.
Am I suggesting that all the companies, that show blacks or Hispanics on their billboards, are not primarily interested in profit? Not at all. Merely showing “people of color” on billboards is not a hot button issue; they can easily promote their (secondary) multiracial agenda without much risk to the bottom line. Very few people get upset over this. Mixed-race couples are a hot button issue. So if they are depicted, there is a very good reason for it. By paying attention to where they are not depicted, we can gain some insight as to true motivation.