A better discussion I had elsewhere on this:
All you state is correct, I'm more rolling my eyes at the journalist who being an AP story was trying I'd think to make it as neutral dry as possible, chose to lead off the story not by any political issue but by defining the candidates' political alignments based on race, gender, and who they have sex with.
So this race was a win for the Black Party, the Women Party, and the Heterosexual Party. The parties of the whites, Hispanics, Asians, men, dogs, polygamists, homosexuals, bisexuals all have to go back to the drawing board to see what they can do for the next election. Yea, I’d agree with that. Either out of laziness (because explaining policies is hard) or perhaps the average reader prefers characters over candidates with policy positions, it does seem like the media has this problem. I do think the first black lady mayor is an interesting part of her candidacy, but giving us a rundown of all the candidates skin tone and sexual orientation in the lead off is a bit much.[/quote]
[/quote]As long as electing openly gay politicians remains as rare as it is, it will remain newsworthy when they run. As long as black women in public office remain rare, it will remain newsworthy when they run. I am not a huge fan of it, but it's really hard to get around the fact that it's newsworthy.
