B.E. article on APhiA Arizona Boycott.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

The bill is widely called the Arizona Anti-Immigration Bill. It may be more accurate to call it an anti-illegal immigration bill, but it's not outside the national conversation for the author to use such terminology in this article.

I would expect the "average American" to probably call it the anti-immigration bill, but as a journalist for a prestigious publication, he should get his facts straight.

Perhaps because he wasn't speaking to "me," I had a different take. What I got from the article was that the author was saying everyone should be concerned. Then, he spoke out of his own experience (i.e. a person with Afro-Caribbean ties).

I am concerned. I just don't feel that as an American Black this is an issue that impacts me directly. Thus, I will not be out there protesting the bill.

While I understand and appreciate what boycotters are trying to do, on the other hand, why punish the business owners who do not support the bill? I think it would have been a great move for Alpha Phi Alpha (among others) to have found an Arizona-based business that was vocal about opposing the bill and then given that person/company all their business.

This would have been a better option.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

I would expect the "average American" to probably call it the anti-immigration bill, but as a journalist for a prestigious publication, he should get his facts straight.

I should have been more specific. I was referring to journalists representing outlets including the Wall Street Journal and CNN.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I should have been more specific. I was referring to journalists representing outlets including the Wall Street Journal and CNN.

Same expectation would apply. That is the problem - you (general you) should be able to rely on these publications for accuracy. I guess not.....