Reply #5: TNR can piss up a rope

[IrateCitizen]

The reason they don't like Burns' work is that it pulls absolutely no punches when displaying the reality of race relations during this period in history, and how that legacy still affects us today.

Burns' sin to the editors of TNR was that he told the story from more of a BLACK point of view as opposed to a WHITE point of view. The difference between these persepectives of American History during this time frame is immense, and both sides should be aired in order to gain a better understanding of what true effects and legacy our racial bigotry and hypocrisy in America has created. Seeing as how most historical accounts already trend toward the "white" perspective, Burns, in reality, is only attempting to balance the scale with a portrayal from the "black" perspective.

TNR appears to be upset that the piece was not "balanced" enough -- that since it was about Johnson, it portrayed the times through more "black" eyes than "white". However, I find it extremely difficult to believe that the editors of TNR would be howling quite so loudly had Burns done a series that told history strictly through "white" eyes. It is only when something tells a story through other-than-white eyes that "balance" is insisted upon.