New York Times Gift Guide for 'People of Color'

Now, it's unclear to me, after reading a statement issued by the Times to answer critics of the guide, what exactly the paper hoped to gain by producing a section that seems blatantly racist at worst or incredibly naive at best. Was this a case of good intentions gone awry? Why assume that everyone who is not Anglo-European is a "person of color"? Why go back to segregation, however stylish it may sound when labeled something else? Back to water fountains for coloreds? That's the slippery slope.

The Times's statement, issued by chief spokeswoman Diane McNulty after a blog attacking the guide appeared on the Web site the NYTPicker, said, in part: "Our online gift guides are intended to offer holiday gift ideas for a wide variety of audiences and interests, with Times writers and editors making smart, informed choices that might appeal to those different audiences. The 'Of Color' guide is in keeping with that philosophy, with the efforts of the diverse Times staff to directly address minority readers with our content." Ms. McNulty was apparently alluding to the fact that the "Of Color" guide was written by a black member of the Times staff.

But did it occur to anyone involved in the project that the Times would never produce anything labeled for whites, and that to do so would create ripples, if not swells, of shock and awe among the publication's progressive audience? Are we to think for one second that the gifts listed in the other guides are of no interest to "people of color," or the other way around? You see the problem, don't you? You start branding people and things by race and ethnicity, and there's nothing but trouble ahead.

So here it is.