Michael Arrington is right (about one thing)
money.cnn.com
money.cnn.com
If the answer is because of discrimination, then I would argue that creating an accelerator for these minorities is just as discriminating, is it not? If it's not discrimination then, well, my assertion about it being discrimination still holds.
CNN doesn't pass the smell test. Media in the USA is all at the tabloid level these days, and the whole purpose of covering NewMe (as opposed to a non-racially oriented incubator) is to be able to pay the race card. That's why Arrington was sandbagged.
It's kind of a sad statement about the state of news media that things like Startup School, Y-Combinator, etc, are not worthy of this kind of coverage in their own right. We've had a revolution in starting businesses in the last 10 years.
But, there's no conflict in a radically better way of making the world a better place.
However, charges of racism? Ratings gold, right?
You're suggesting that no one should cover NewMe because it is focused on minorities. And if anyone does cover NewMe, it's entirely intended to garner ratings and not at all intended to promote discussion of minorities.
Firstly, prove it.
Secondly, is it then never acceptable to discuss minorities? Or, under what circumstances is it acceptable to discuss minorities? If they should never be discussed, how is that not intentionally turning a blind eye to things that actually exist in the world?
I think there are many other, quite legitimate, reasons to cover NewMe. It is unfortunate that CNN didn't cover them for the wonder that is inherent in bringing new companies into the world.
CNN's reason for covering NewMe is obviously because NewMe is focused on minority-led businesses and CNN wanted to do a piece on minority-led businesses. It would be irrational for CNN to do a piece on minority-led businesses and either exclude NewMe and/or focus on Y-Combinator.
You've failed to demonstrate in any way how CNN creating a piece on minority-led businesses is inherently bad. You've certainly failed to demonstrate that CNN did that for the "whole purpose" (your words) of playing the race card.
Discussing race is not playing the race card, sorry.
So, carry on, it's obvious that the discussion you're having has no need of my participation, nor would it be affected by it.
Besides himself in the title of that post, I mean.