A recent front-page Washington Post article is being criticized for having a "double standard" on race due to its decision to single out a black business leader for his opposition to new environmental regulations even though he is far from alone in the business community.
The headline of a Washington Post article last week wrote that that a "black business group" led by Harry Alford was an unlikely source of criticism for new proposals by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that attempt to address smog.
Khalil Abdullah, writing for the New America Media, raises the question of why the Post believes that the "hue" of Alford's skin has anything to do his position on environmental policy.
"Mr. Alford, as the leader of a business group, has every right to join his industry partners in protesting what he views as bad policy. The hue of his skin has nothing to do with that," writes Abdullah, who used to be the managing editor of the Washington Afro Newspaper.
Abdullah argues in his piece that the only thing that makes Alford, who has been a consistent critic of environmental regulations for decades, an "unlikely" opponent to the EPA is that he is black.
The piece chronicles Mr. Alford’s campaign against new EPA rules to restrict ground-ozone emissions, or smog. Alford contends that the rules would undermine businesses and hamper employment, especially minority employment, in the process.
In and of itself, that hardly seems worthy of a front-page profile, particularly since other business groups raised similar objections and since the article itself acknowledged that Mr. Alford was "a veteran of multiple campaigns to quash regulations…."
So what makes Mr. Alford, a self-professed conservative, worthy of such coverage? The hue of his skin? "In smog battle, industry gets help from unlikely source: black business group," blared the headline to the article by Joby Warrick.
Presumably, what made the National Black Chamber of Commerce’s support of industry so "unlikely" was not that it is business chamber. No, it is that this business chamber happens to represent African-American members.
Abdullah points out that Alford is not alone in his criticism. The event Alford used to speak out against the EPA regulations was co-hosted by his group, the National Black Chamber of Commerce, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
It is unclear to Abdullah, why U.S. Chamber of Commerce president Thomas J. Donohue was spared a Post profile on his "unlikely" position on EPA regulations.
"Why doesn’t it question Mr. Donohue’s position? Because Mr. Donohue is the head of a business chamber, and heads of business chambers protect the interests of their members against policies they view as hostile to business," writes Abdullah.
Just like Alford is the head of a business chamber. The only difference, Abdullah points out, is that Alford's chamber "happens to represent African-American members."
"The absurd and offensive implication here is that it is somehow odd that an African-American business group would support the interests of businesses," writes Abdullah. "The Washington Post thus demonstrates a kind of twisted double standard."