National Geographic acknowledges decades-long coverage was racist

The Telegraph ^ | March 13, 2018 | Mark Molloy

[Navy Patriot]

ational Geographic has admitted its past reporting on different cultures around the world was racist.

The US magazine acknowledged in an editorial that for decades its “coverage was racist”, adding that the only way to rise above its past was to “acknowledge it”.

For its upcoming issue, dedicated solely to race and how it “defines, separates, and unites us”, the magazine asked a preeminent historian to examine the publication’s own history.

[Navy Patriot]

ROTFLOL

[Red Badger]

So, I guess they’ll recall all those issues with bare breasted native women?..................

[rlmorel]

They want to call themselves racist? Have at it.

It is their idiot embrace of man-caused Global Warming that made me vow never to pick up their magazine again, even if I am stuck in a dentist office waiting for a root canal.

[Navy Patriot]

I guess they’ll recall all those issues with bare breasted native women?...

From my cold dead hand ...

[Steely Tom]

The US magazine acknowledged in an editorial that for decades its “coverage was racist”, adding that the only way to rise above its past was to “acknowledge it”.…

…and accuse their readers of being racists for having read their magazine.

[oldbill]

“So, I guess they’ll recall all those issues with bare breasted native women?..................”

Too late for that.
The only fair thing to do now is to publish pictures of bare-breasted white women, until the numbers of such photos equals the past number of bare-breasted non-white women.

[robroys woman]

No more naked African chicks? I remember that as a kid.

It’s kinda comical how so many today want to deny how the world works and thinks they can ignore human nature. Good luck with that.

[IYAS9YAS]

It is their idiot embrace of man-caused Global Warming that made me vow never to pick up their magazine again,

That, and the unbelievable stench that their Earth-saving-greenie-weenie ink gave off when the magazine arrived. We banned them from our house in the early 2000s for that reason alone. Couldn't pick it up to read it for a month until the smell dissipated.

[elcid1970]

I recall those bare breasted native women very well. Most beautiful were Balinese & Polynesian gals.

;^)

[shelterguy]

Don’t go bashing on them nekkd natives. As a yute that’s all we had. Of course the Sears catlaog, too.

[FirstFlaBn]

NG covered sh*thole countries before sh*thole countries were cool.

[elcid1970]

The main difference between Nat Geo and Playboy is that brown breasts are less sinful than white ones.

;^)

[MeganC]

This is a smart move on the part of NG:

It’ll give them an excuse to devote more coverage to Global Warming.

[FirstFlaBn]

If it gets hot, hot, hot as NG fervently believes, won’t that necessitate more bare breasted wimmen (especially those at whiter northen latitudes)?

[ilovesarah2012]

Taught a lot of us the importance of a bra.

[bk1000]

Naked white women=pornography
Naked black women=anthropology.

[robroys woman]

Taught a lot of us the importance of a bra.

---

HA! I forgot about that!

And you’re right. :)

[DannyTN]

LOL This ought to be good. What specifically are they saying was racist?

• Topless tribal women were overwhelming of color?
• No white tribal news coverage?
• Coverage of tribes unbalanced with coverage of modern man?
• Something to do with fossils?
• Out of Africa coverage?
• There are so many possibilities.....

[JimSEA]

National Geographic has committed the sin of showing the earth as it is.

[MNDude]

They had topless Polynesian girls??