From a New York Times article on the resignation of the schools chancellor in Washington, D.C., Michelle Rhee: "Replacing Ms. Rhee, who is Korean-American, with Ms. Henderson, who is black, is expected to ease racial tensions."
This "is expected" formulation is a classic of journalistic laziness. Who expects this? The article doesn't say. The reporters? The editors of the Times? If someone actually said it in a quote — "Getting that Korean-American out of there and getting a black person in there will really ease racial tensions" — you might think the person was a bigot. Is the idea that blacks in Washington are all a bunch of bigots who can't accept the idea of a Korean-American schools chancellor? And that caving to that bigotry is a good way to ease racial tensions, because the non-blacks in Washington will be thrilled to go along with it? There's no further explanation in the Times article, which makes the sentence as it appears seem just bizarre. Maybe the Times should force the resignation of its Asian-American reporters or editors and replace them with blacks "to ease racial tensions."
