So much outrage. My 40-year-old, black, liberal ass thought the article was interesting. /shrug
If you actually thought the article was interesting I have no idea what to tell you. I almost choked on my sandwich reading it, I was laughing so hard. If your idea of interesting is reading what basically amounts to a NotTheOnion style phrases in between what essentially is a profile fluff piece then more power to you. I kinda agree in a way, I need more laughter in my life.
I'm sure the subject of this piece does- and while I don't think it's a particularly compelling piece, I think it's off base to consider it in a vacuum without the other three parts of the piece that we know are coming. How does what THIS guy believe compare and contrast to the Black experience- not a hypothetical one, but an actual 17 year old Black Boy? 32 year old Woman? Non Binary Individual?
I'll reserve judgement on the merit of the piece until it's complete. As for the criticism that the editor/author chose to compliment the kid as unusually intelligent, courageous, what have you- this kid from middle of nowhere red state land willingly chose to be the cover story of a left leaning publication whose readership hates Trump and everyone who voted for him. He had to know the reaction wouldn't have been sympathetic no matter what month it ran in. For a 17 year old, yeah that takes some balls even IF the kid is a bit of a tone deaf idiot.
If National Review, Washington Times, or American Conservative came knocking on my door to profile me on the Black Liberal Experience I'd run the other way as fast as I could. Kudos to this kid for giving Esquire a shot to profile him honestly.
as for those reading the articles- "many of the subscribers" are left leaning coastal elites who would sooner call this kid out as a Trump loving asshole as most of this thread is long before they identify with him. Because that's who subscribes to Esquire. That magazine spends absolutely NO time pandering to the interests of flyover country and doesn't bother disguising that they aren't it's audience.
If you "don't like to read" spotlight articles, then subscribing to a magazine that does long form fiction and cultural spotlight articles would be a bit bewildering, wouldn't it? Esquire isn't Maxim.
First, your defense of Esquire's werid decision does make sense on the surface. After all, magazines work like that, and not many here considered that they don't publish in February at all. But deciding to put the bland Trump supporter on the cover of the March issue as the first in a series of other pieces, when you know that subscribers will get their issue in February? It still doesn't look right to me, the editors had to have known the optics on this sort of thing and it looks like a calculated move for controversy, especially when they're holding the other profile pieces in their hand.
I'm also curious to your answer to the, what appears to be, an article trying to defend Weinstein on the same cover. Is this a 'typical' Esquire article?
Second, 'costal liberal elites' don't exactly agree with PoC issues (BLM) or trans issues or really anything past their own personal comfort meter of surface level identity politics. Plus there's been a recent push back on said identity politics even in the Democratic sphere. Got friends up in SV who can tell you that.
And as to your final point, I find it hard to agree with you that the kid is brave for doing a profile piece that portrays him in such a positive light. Assuming of course the woman who wrote this piece actually means what they say and aren't doing some sort of 4th dimensional satire piece on everyone. Also, and I don't mean this to sound as harsh as it does, he doesn't sound intelligent enough to know Esquire and their readership before accepting. But I'm just going off the article so who knows...
