The Return of Ta-Nehisi Coates - A decade after “The Case for Reparations,” he is ready to take on Israel, Palestine, and the American media

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
55,628
Reputation
8,224
Daps
157,096

1/2
@scottwoodssays
"Dokoupil’s lead-in has a lot of things wrapped up in it – his Jewishness, his feelings, his knee-jerk Zionist defense mechanisms – but what’s also present is a very white, very American thing: his white supremacy."

I had words for this.

Ta-Nehisi Coates versus the limit of unimaginative whiteness



2/2
@VioletWspeaks
@tonydokoupil 's arrogance and condensing tone are only matched by his wife @KatyTurNBC. I appreciate curious journalists, not those who use the time trying to show us just how smart they think they are.




To post tweets in this format, more info here: https://www.thecoli.com/threads/tips-and-tricks-for-posting-the-coli-megathread.984734/post-52211196
 

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
55,628
Reputation
8,224
Daps
157,096

ta-nehisicoates-scaled-1.jpg


1 Oct 2024


Ta-Nehisi Coates versus the limit of unimaginative whiteness​


I stopped watching CBS Mornings years ago because whenever it deigned to report on a serious news subject, it regularly treated that subject with such insincerity that I spent all of my precious pre-work mornings screaming at my television. So color me surprised when I saw the show trending for an interview the trifecta of hosts did with Ta-Nehisi Coates about his new book, The Message, in which they attempt to contend with several deep subjects at length.

Well, “trifecta of hosts” is generous. While four people were sitting on the stage, the interview largely consisted of host Tony Dokoupil taking Coates to task for having the nerve to suggest that the narrative of a put-upon Israel defending itself from terrorists might not be entirely accurate. Also, “contend with several deep subjects” is also a bit of a misnomer. After a seemingly noble attempt by co-host Nate Burleson to get Coates to speak on the subject of writing – the engine that sparked the creation of the book – the subject mostly came down to Palestine. No one other than Dokoupil and Coates speaks for five minutes, after which Gayle King sputters her way into the moment in a fluffy attempt to wrap things up. All of this I found to be drenched in irony, as Dokoupil kicks off his portion of the interview with a stunningly racist opening.

As co-host Burleson would say in his capacity as a sports commentator in any other given hour of the day, let’s look at the tape:

At the 1:27 mark Dokoupil practically leaps out of his chair to inquire of Coates what the hell he thought he was doing writing about Israel in anything other than a sympathetic manner:

“Ta-Nehisi, I want to dive into Palestine section of the book. It’s the largest section of the book. And I have to say, when I when I read the book…I imagine if I took your name out of it – took away the awards and the acclaim, took the cover off the book, the publishing house goes away – the content of that section would not be out of place in the backpack of an extremist. And so then I found myself wondering, why does Ta-Nehisi Coates – who I’ve known for a long time; read his work for a long time; very talented, smart guy – leave out so much? Why leave out that Israel is surrounded by countries that want to eliminate it? Why leave out that Israel deals with terror groups that want to eliminate it? Why not detail anything of the First and the Second Intifada, the cafe bombings, the bus bombings, the little kids blown to bits and is it because you just don’t believe that Israel in any condition has a right to exist?”

This is one of those questions that isn’t a question, no matter how many ways you ask it. Dokoupil’s lead-in has a lot of things wrapped up in it – his Jewishness, his feelings, his knee-jerk Zionist defense mechanisms – but what’s also present is a very white, very American thing: his white supremacy.

The racism on display is too clear to be subtle, but if you’re not paying attention it might get by you because it’s swathed in Israel/Palestine cover. Dokoupil drives his offense with several, now very common to the point of eye-rolling tactics: he tugs at the purse strings by pointing out white largesse while simultaneously framing Coates as unserious; he attempts to discredit Coates; he name drops their prior relationship; and finally, he decimates all nuance around the subject with reductive, binary challenge.

I imagine if I took your name out of it – took away the awards and the acclaim, took the cover off the book, the publishing house goes away – “

Purse strings tug/unserious.

“… the content of that section would not be out of place in the backpack of an extremist.”

Attempt to discredit, in this case as one would a zealot.

And so then I found myself wondering, why does Ta-Nehisi Coates – who I’ve known for a long time; read his work for a long time; very talented, smart guy…”

Name drops prior relationship. (Which is interesting because if they were actual friends they probably wouldn’t be having this conversation for the first time on national television. Or at least shouldn’t.)

Why leave out that Israel is surrounded by countries that want to eliminate it? Why leave out that Israel deals with terror groups that want to eliminate it? Why not detail anything of the First and the Second Intifada, the cafe bombings, the bus bombings, the little kids blown to bits and is it because you just don’t believe that Israel in any condition has a right to exist?”

Decimation of nuance with a false binary challenge kicker.

Dokoupil is essentially saying, “You usually say things I like, but now you aren’t. The entertainment political and media industries of this country have conferred many successes and opportunities upon you. Why are you biting the hand that feeds you? We didn’t give you all of these wins to turn around and be criticized. Why aren’t you being a good Black person?” It is a very paternalistic vibe that Black folks are quite familiar with. At the very least I know I wasn’t the only one yelling at a CBS Mornings segment in the last 24 hours.

The good news is, Coates knows what to do with this. He is a long-time journalist, so he knows what this is. He’s also not an armchair writer; he’s on the ground with the subjects he speaks about.

Over and over Dokoupil uses what has become very basic, day-one Zionist defenses (assuming you started the clock 359 days ago and not several generations back). They are “questions” that are easily discounted once you sprinkle a little context on them. It doesn’t take much, and Coates knows just how to season his responses. He flips the questions. He turns reductive arguments into macro truths. Coates suggests we don’t have to interrogate the question of whether or not Israel has a right to exist when it clearly does, and that rights has nothing to do with it. He blows Dokoupil’s suggestion that he might have a problem with a Jewish state by clarifying that his issue isn’t with Jews, but ethnocracies and apartheid. Like most Zionists, Dokoupil isn’t interested in unpacking those clarifications because he knows at least one of two things: that things like ethnocracies and apartheid are bad, which means he would have to admit that Israel is doing a bad thing, thus losing the argument; or that he can’t publicly dig into what he actually believes because his objective façade will implode under the weight of his support for such heinous systems. Dokoupil does not offer a response to Coates’ real world anecdotes about lived injustice or the simple statement that “either apartheid is right or it’s wrong” because what would anyone look like in 2024 saying “apartheid is good?” Pointing out the apartheid predating October 7, 2023 moves the goalposts beyond Israel’s ability to justify their actions. Coates rope-a-doped him.

All in all, it’s a jaw-droppingly racist moment that transforms into a clinic about, not how to deal with white supremacy, but how not to deal with it. We don’t have to waste time educating someone who is smart enough to ask the kinds of questions that Dokoupil was asking. His problem isn’t that he doesn’t know what Coates is talking about; it’s that he thinks what he feels and wants is more important than what Coates feels and wants, or Palestinians for that matter. And in this interview, on this otherwise typically annoying morning display of power pandering and capital worship, his unstoppable whiteness met an immovable force called realness. Not simply truth, but the display of that truth imposed in such a way as to reveal the whiteness in its naked, uncaring form.

I wanted to dig into whether or not Coates’ book was actually doing any of the things that Dokoupil suggested, but his assertions had almost nothing to do with the content of Coates’ book. I have it in hand and can tell you that I can see why Dokoupil struggled with it. The section on Palestine is measured, fair and not saying any of the things he suggests. As a rule, Coates only wants to talk about what he’s talking about, not what he isn’t, and that’s true for his books as well. This interview shows that simple value in action, and in real-time, no edits, no do-overs. It is a value we should all endeavor to employ when dismantling oppressive systems and the narratives that fuel them.
 

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
55,628
Reputation
8,224
Daps
157,096


1/10
@mehdirhasan
Me: "What were you thinking in that moment?"

TNC: "I was in a fight...it took me a moment...but the answers to the questions were right there at hand."

Ta-Nehisi Coates, to me, about *that* awful CBS/Tony Dokoupil intv on his Palestine book.

Full intv: Ta-Nehisi Coates Talks to Mehdi About Israel, Palestine, and Apartheid



https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1842594046537093120/vid/avc1/1280x720/iNRdgOgo0zAdUwHv.mp4

2/10
@mehdirhasan


[Quoted tweet]
"Biden's a Zionist... he basically said to a Jewish audience, we know you wouldn't be safe without Israel. Hold up, that's YOUR job Joe! So are you saying that you're not going to protect Jewish Americans?”

Ta-Nehisi Coates to me.

Watch full interview: zeteo.com/p/ta-nehisi-coates…


https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1842594013620109312/vid/avc1/1280x720/lGUX6e1NGZFWM1jb.mp4

3/10
@DrWest_235
"I just think we need more Palestinians telling the story."

This is the most effective way to rehumanize the Palestinian people who have been reduced to inanimate statistics in the Western media.



4/10
@intel_jakal
TNC handled that situation with such grace and dignity. I immediately became a massive fan.
The world needs more TNC's.



5/10
@FAWADBAHAWAL
Sounds like Coates was ready for the fight, standing firm with the truth in hand. When you're speaking on Palestine, the truth always finds its way through the noise!



6/10
@KaaroMaachi
What Israel is doing in the occupied territories is self-defense, while what others are doing in defending their own country is considered extremism, right?



7/10
@bigdog02302
Just think if Palestinians were the ones who occupied Israelis and put them in concentration camps wait didn’t nazi’s do that tell me again why Palestinians are to blame and made to pay the price of their genocide it was white ppl that killed 6 million Jews and white ppl that killed over a million muslims for Israelis safety



8/10
@mns
Hahah



9/10
@bigdog02302
How can the genocide of the Jews be any different from the genocide of Palestinians and Muslims as a whole we have committed,stood by and watched the atrocities of the Middle East for 50+ years why would anyone think it would change when slavery still exists



10/10
@RBrookman34
Why is it “awful” for an interviewer to challenge an author on the arguments stated in his book? Coates took on a controversial topic. He took one side of it and did not address or even mention alternative perspectives, including the security concerns animating the policies to which he objects.




To post tweets in this format, more info here: https://www.thecoli.com/threads/tips-and-tricks-for-posting-the-coli-megathread.984734/post-52211196
 

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
55,628
Reputation
8,224
Daps
157,096





1/11
@DylanByers
SCOOP / THREAD @PuckNews: CBS NEWS has been roiling after a CBS Mornings interview in which anchor Tony Dokoupil pressed Ta-Nehisi Coates over his pro-Palestinian framing of Israel-Palestine conflict. The interview was celebrated by many—"tense and substantive," per WaPo—but angered some at CBS who felt Dokoupil brought his own bias (1/5)



2/11
@DylanByers
This morning, on October 7, CBS News leaders Wendy McMahon & Adrienne Roark told staff that the interview did not meet editorial standards for impartiality, though they declined to elaborate on how or why. When they tried to move on, CBS News chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford criticized the leaders for their decision, saying the following... (2/5)



3/11
@DylanByers
Crawford: "I don't even understand how Tony's interview failed to meet our editorial standards... I thought our commitment was to truth. When someone comes on our air with a one-sided account of very complex situation—which Coates himself acknowledges that he has—it's my understanding that as a journalist we are obligated to challenge that worldview, so that our viewers can have access to the truth and can have a more balanced account..." (3/5)



4/11
@DylanByers
Crawford: "... And that is what Tony did. He challenged Coates' one-sided worldview, Coates got to respond. It was civil... I don't see how we can say that it failed to meet our editorial standards.... Tony prevented a one-sided account from being broadcast on our network about a deeply complex situation that completely was devoid of history or fact. As journalists, that's what we have an obligation to do." (4/5)



5/11
@DylanByers
Full details and backstory on this ongoing CBS News drama in my next edition of IN THE ROOM, at @PuckNews. Subscriber here: In the Room (5/5)



6/11
@JackBauerAD
Since when do they care about expressing bias?



GZTi9xMbsAAMyfm.jpg


7/11
@nbullsa
"Tony prevented a one-sided account from being broadcast on our network about a deeply complex situation that completely was devoid of history or fact."

Calling Coates' comments "deeply devoid of history or fact" is fairly outrageous in my opinion.



8/11
@terryfahn
This is so patently absurd.



9/11
@Ronin1021
Why don't people take the Media seriously anymore?



10/11
@chicatrixy
I thought Paramount was broke and needed to cut billions in costs but they’re paying for a DEI grifter because some snowflakes got triggered at the truth. No wonder these morons lose so much money every year.



11/11
@koekkler
So CBS is concerned about the feelings of the racist anti-Semite Coates?!




To post tweets in this format, more info here: https://www.thecoli.com/threads/tips-and-tricks-for-posting-the-coli-megathread.984734/post-52211196
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,838
Reppin
the ether



That Jan Crawford defense is pathetic. The interviewer's OPENING STATEMENT on the issue said that Coates's book belonged in an extremist's backpack and then he implied Coates thought Israel had no right to exist. That's not a remotely objective opening question, it's a classic "Poisoning the Well" approach. At the very least, he could have asked Coates a real question and then pushed back if he felt the answer showed bias, but he didn't even give Coates a chance to define his own position. CBS can decide for themselves whether they want their interviewers to be objective or not, but claiming the interviewer was objective is ridiculous.
 

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,018
Reputation
4,716
Daps
66,840
That Jan Crawford defense is pathetic. The interviewer's OPENING STATEMENT on the issue said that Coates's book belonged in an extremist's backpack and then he implied Coates thought Israel had no right to exist. That's not a remotely objective opening question, it's a classic "Poisoning the Well" approach. At the very least, he could have asked Coates a real question and then pushed back if he felt the answer showed bias, but he didn't even give Coates a chance to define his own position. CBS can decide for themselves whether they want their interviewers to be objective or not, but claiming the interviewer was objective is ridiculous.
Jan Crawford also pretends that there is no one with that opinion on CBS when it’s the majority opinion.
 

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
62,580
Reputation
5,952
Daps
165,152
That Jan Crawford defense is pathetic. The interviewer's OPENING STATEMENT on the issue said that Coates's book belonged in an extremist's backpack and then he implied Coates thought Israel had no right to exist. That's not a remotely objective opening question, it's a classic "Poisoning the Well" approach. At the very least, he could have asked Coates a real question and then pushed back if he felt the answer showed bias, but he didn't even give Coates a chance to define his own position. CBS can decide for themselves whether they want their interviewers to be objective or not, but claiming the interviewer was objective is ridiculous.
He called him anti-Jewish, but thats okay with Crawford. :scust:
 

WIA20XX

Superstar
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
6,127
Reputation
2,919
Daps
19,402
The most insufferable neo-liberal, Ezra Klein, interviews TNC

 
  • Haha
Reactions: NZA
Top