Want proof that 2006 is not 1972 all over again? That's today's left is not yesterday's? I'll now offer myself as exhibit A:
A former student of mine sent me this link to the TSA homepage. The key is the "this is who we are" image in the middle.
Could this image possibly be any more stupid? Could it possibly be any more stereotypical? Or utterly irrelevant to the mission of the agency?
Yes, I am in fact liberal. But no, I don't particularly care about diversity at the TSA. I care about security. Perhaps this bizarre cast of characters are in fact a crack squad of anti-terrorist experts, but somehow I doubt it. I mean, good lord... this is the TSA we're talking about here. Shouldn't their goal, both here on the web and out in the real world, be to inspire confidence in the American public?
Now for the record, yes, of course, security and diversity can in fact coexist. In fact, I would argue that diversity can in fact help to make us as a nation more secure (more on that another time). But this is just plain stupid. This image is about diversity and nothing more. And for the record, no, diversity is not one of the missions of the TSA.
Can these people do anything right?
1 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Want Proof? I'll Give You Proof!.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blog.alexwhalen.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2328
A reader remonstrates: What the hell does the race and gender of the employees of the TSA have to do with their ability/inability to keep the public secure? He's referring to this post from a few days back. Since he's clearly attempting to attack me wi... Read More
Subscribe to this blog's feed
I am not sure exactly what is the point of your comment. Why do assume that a picture that reflects a range of Americans will not reassure the public about security. Would you feel safer if the picture was only white men? would that make you feel safer? What the hell does the race and gender of the employees of the TSA have to do with their ability/inability to keep the public secure? In 1972 you would have seen a picture of all white men and I guess you still secretly pine for the days when your white daddy could keep you safe! Get over it, and stop assuming that because you see a picture of a dicerse group of people that those people are incapable of doing their jobs and have only been chosen for PR reasons. THe only reason to assume this is your racism and sexism.
Actually, I think you've unintentionally made my point for me. You ask:
What the hell does the race and gender of the employees of the TSA have to do with their ability/inability to keep the public secure?
That's the point I was trying to make. I could care less what race or ethnicity the people in the photo are. As far as I'm concerned, on an individual basis I think neither of those have anything to do with your ability to protect and serve our nation. As a group, yes, I think diversity is a plus, and in fact said so in my original post. But clearly we can both agree that diversity isn't the point of the TSA. To quote myself:
"Now for the record, yes, of course, security and diversity can in fact coexist. In fact, I would argue that diversity can in fact help to make us as a nation more secure (more on that another time). But this is just plain stupid. This image is about diversity and nothing more. And for the record, no, diversity is not one of the missions of the TSA."
But go take a look at that picture again. That's a photo created by the TSA for us in its public relations. It's not racism or sexism that leads me to that conclusion. It's logic.
It's not an accidental collection of people. It's a group that was organized for the express purpose of taking a specific photo for a specific use. There's absolutely nothing about it that says candid or authentic. So the conclusion, and the only conclusion, is that someone at the TSA thought it was important to make sure they completed some checklist of ethnic groups and races.
My question is why? Playing Noah's Ark with PR photos doesn't help make the nation safer. Its dumb, its offensive, and its a waste of time and money. And c'mon, I'm sorry... but including a one-armed man in the photo is simply gratuitous.
What's the alternative? How about this:
Bring together the 5 or 10 best employees from throughout the entire department. Perhaps it could be a collection of the most innovative employees, or maybe the ones who have been deemed by managers to have done the most good. Then, put them in the the picture as an example of America's best and brightest. Let their skills, rather than their skin color, be what qualifies them for inclusion in the picture. Do that, and my guess is you'll end up with a diverse cast of characters. But rather than an artificial one, it'll be genuine, a real reflection of the strength of diversity in action.
"...not by the color of the skin but by the content of their character..." right?