This article is beyond messed up:
Some key quotes from this amazing piece of news media:
"Predujice lingers, but there’s evidence it’s becoming a thing of the past."
"For at least four decades now, it’s been socially unacceptable to be overtly racist."
"People may be more willing to vote for a minority now because the country is doing so badly."
Really? Overt racism has been socially unacceptable since 1968? And more importantly, what about the underlying implications of that statement in realtion to the title of the article? That overt racism is the only legitimate problem. That because people may be more inclined now to hide their racism than they were before the civil rights movement, that racism is less of a problem. That the prejudice millions of people hold on the inside that influences their every day actions doesn't matter if they don't say it out loud. That private and public racism aren't the same thing and don't share similar importance. What the heck?
And the "thing of the past comment," I mean... what is there to say? It's funny, right? Well, kind of.
The last quote. I mean, shit, the last quote. That one is actually a quote by someone they interviewed for the article which the journalist uses to back up their own claims, not to discuss or question. Even the choice to include it in this article is messed up. I know it's the christian science monitor, but people read this shit.