No Biggie | Letters | Chicago Reader

No Biggie 

Sign up for our newsletters Subscribe

Dear Editor:

As a longtime Reader reader and personals watcher, I'd be remiss in not calling you on this one: If a legitimate representation is 600-plus ads per issue, does your full-page Reader Matches ad (February 20, Section One, page 19) reflect truth in advertising? Of the 29-ad sampling (based on your advertised 645 singles), the following racial breakdown surfaces: 20 whites, 1 Asian, 7 "undeclareds" (4 of whom are described as gay), 1 black bisexual. Are two-thirds of Reader advertisers in fact white heterosexuals? Why are no lesbians represented in the sampling, whereas four gay males are? (Admittedly, two of the ads are not only racially unlabeled but obscure in terms of preference.)

Dedicated ax grinders might jump at yet another opportunity to yell "Rampant racism," but a genuinely concerned observer (that would be me) chooses to ask, Did your editors/quality controllers drop the ball here?

Given the big picture--Iraq, human cloning, effects of White House hanky-panky, and the like--this is no biggie. On the other hand, I didn't have a date over the weekend, so I had time to ponder this journalistic tempest in a teapot.

Loretta Faber

N. Sheridan

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Agenda Teaser

Performing Arts
Manic Mondays Frances Cocktail Lounge
November 20

Tabbed Event Search

Popular Stories