Are Politics Skin-Deep? Liberal Voters See Obama as Lighter Skinned

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Researchers are making the case that a person’s political views cause them to see with a tinted perspective. Scientists showed undergraduate students a series of digitally darkened or lightened photos of President Barack Obama last fall, and asked them which photos best represented him as a person. The results were striking: while self-described liberals tended to pick the digitally lightened photos of the president, self-described conservative students more frequently picked the darkened images. The more one agrees with a politician, in other words, the lighter his skin tone seems; the less you agree, the darker it becomes [Newsweek]. The study will be published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

According to lead researcher Eugene Caruso, they found that the degree to which someone saw a lightened photo as being representative of Obama was related to whether he voted for him a week later. That was true even after the researchers controlled for political views and measures of bias against blacks [NPR]. Caruso says their results indicate that the degree to which you see eye to eye with someone politically can alter your physical perception of them.

By controlling for bias against blacks, the study seems to indicate that race isn’t the issue, but simply how light or dark a person is, though it isn’t totally clear on that point. It also seems to buy in to the claim that Hillary Clinton artificially darkened an image of Obama, which wasn’t terribly widely believed. Anyway, the research’s most practical finding seems to be that devious political hacks don’t need to play games with candidates’ pictures because the voters are doing it themselves [Politico].

To see if their finding applied to politically ambiguous and unknown candidates, Caruso ran a similar experiment using altered photos of a fake candidate running for a board of education position. They also found that people shown darkened photos were less likely to say the would vote for the candidate, even if they agreed with them on roughly half of the issues. The researchers would like to see how the results of their Obama photo experiment would compare to a similar experiment with a conservative biracial candidate.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/...ighter-skinned/

[Pooky 3,878]

Researchers are making the case that a person’s political views cause them to see with a tinted perspective. Scientists showed undergraduate students a series of digitally darkened or lightened photos of President Barack Obama last fall, and asked them which photos best represented him as a person. The results were striking: while self-described liberals tended to pick the digitally lightened photos of the president, self-described conservative students more frequently picked the darkened images. The more one agrees with a politician, in other words, the lighter his skin tone seems; the less you agree, the darker it becomes [Newsweek]. The study will be published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

According to lead researcher Eugene Caruso, they found that the degree to which someone saw a lightened photo as being representative of Obama was related to whether he voted for him a week later. That was true even after the researchers controlled for political views and measures of bias against blacks [NPR]. Caruso says their results indicate that the degree to which you see eye to eye with someone politically can alter your physical perception of them.

By controlling for bias against blacks, the study seems to indicate that race isn’t the issue, but simply how light or dark a person is, though it isn’t totally clear on that point. It also seems to buy in to the claim that Hillary Clinton artificially darkened an image of Obama, which wasn’t terribly widely believed. Anyway, the research’s most practical finding seems to be that devious political hacks don’t need to play games with candidates’ pictures because the voters are doing it themselves [Politico].

To see if their finding applied to politically ambiguous and unknown candidates, Caruso ran a similar experiment using altered photos of a fake candidate running for a board of education position. They also found that people shown darkened photos were less likely to say the would vote for the candidate, even if they agreed with them on roughly half of the issues. The researchers would like to see how the results of their Obama photo experiment would compare to a similar experiment with a conservative biracial candidate.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/...ighter-skinned/

The way I read this is that both sides of the equation, Obama supporters and opponents, are unconsciously racist. Remarkable.

[HAL 9000 96]

Well there's something President Obama and Sammy Sosa have in common perhaps?

Not.

[Scott & Lai 12]

I just don't get the whole obsession over skin tone...

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I just don't get the whole obsession over skin tone...

That's because you are like VJ's very own Buddha.

[nowhereman 1]

I just don't get the whole obsession over skin tone...

Me either, but to me the middle pic looks the most accurate (left pic Obama is in the sun & right pic he's in the shade). Moderates FTW!

[HAL 9000 96]

[scandal 951]

The "darkened" one on the right shows him in a professional suit and tie in front of the Capitol.

The "lightened" one on the left shows him in shirtsleeves and open color with a microphone - he looks more like an entertainment figure than a serious professional to be entrusted with weighty issues.

I think that the subconscious is going to be affected by those factors far more than the nuanced differences in skin tone. Those photos don't make for a fair line up.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

He still has big ears in all three.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

He's still stupid in all three.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

He's still stupid in all three.

He'd beat Bernie Goldberg with an IQ test any day. That guy is as dumb as a rock.

[_Simpson_ 250]

So does this mean that American as a whole is still significantly racist because those who voted for him seen him as more white than black and those who didnt seen him as more black than white.

He campaigned and was presented as a black man so when voting I think that the subconscious was very aware of his color and voted for him anyways. I am very skeptical of this study but Sharpton is loving the hell out of this, job security.

[scandal 951]

So does this mean that American as a whole is still significantly racist because those who voted for him seen him as more white than black and those who didnt seen him as more black than white.

Despite the rolleyes, I'll answer this one seriously. I don't think America is necessarily 'racist', but I do think that people factor race into their views whether consciously or unconsciously. And yes, I think that's true of left and right, 'liberal' and 'conservative'.

Is that racist? Perhaps. I associate the word with a pejorative slant - consciously stereotyping a group, and acting on that stereotype.

He campaigned and was presented as a black man so when voting I think that the subconscious was very aware of his color and voted for him anyways. I am very skeptical of this study but Sharpton is loving the hell out of this, job security.

Actually, I don't think he campaigned as a black man at all. He very pointedly noted throughout his campaign that he was the child of a black father and a white mother, and was raised by white grandparents. He doesn't deny his racial ancestry, but rather his appeal was to Americans to move beyond the politics of race and into an era that is trying to be color blind. He's not naive enough to think we are color blind (see comments above), but he consciously stayed away from the overtly black politics of Jesse Jackson and Sharpton.

By the way - congrats on your Week11 win.

[_Simpson_ 250]

So does this mean that American as a whole is still significantly racist because those who voted for him seen him as more white than black and those who didnt seen him as more black than white.

Despite the rolleyes, I'll answer this one seriously. I don't think America is necessarily 'racist', but I do think that people factor race into their views whether consciously or unconsciously. And yes, I think that's true of left and right, 'liberal' and 'conservative'.

Is that racist? Perhaps. I associate the word with a pejorative slant - consciously stereotyping a group, and acting on that stereotype.

He campaigned and was presented as a black man so when voting I think that the subconscious was very aware of his color and voted for him anyways. I am very skeptical of this study but Sharpton is loving the hell out of this, job security.

Actually, I don't think he campaigned as a black man at all. He very pointedly noted throughout his campaign that he was the child of a black father and a white mother, and was raised by white grandparents. He doesn't deny his racial ancestry, but rather his appeal was to Americans to move beyond the politics of race and into an era that is trying to be color blind. He's not naive enough to think we are color blind (see comments above), but he consciously stayed away from the overtly black politics of Jesse Jackson and Sharpton.

By the way - congrats on your Week11 win.

Thanks, I got lucky. One of the few good weeks I have had

You are right, he didnt really campaign as a black man. What I should of said was that he was presented as a black man running for president. I remember early in the primaries when Hillary was talking about how this is a huge primary because we had a woman and a black man running. The media made a big deal that we had a black man running for president and when he did win it was obvious from Inauguration Day that this country seen him as a black man. I just have a hard time thinking that people didnt see him as a black man running for president.

[scandal 951]

Thanks, I got lucky. One of the few good weeks I have had

You are right, he didnt really campaign as a black man. What I should of said was that he was presented as a black man running for president. I remember early in the primaries when Hillary was talking about how this is a huge primary because we had a woman and a black man running. The media made a big deal that we had a black man running for president and when he did win it was obvious from Inauguration Day that this country seen him as a black man. I just have a hard time thinking that people didnt see him as a black man running for president.

Well, I'm joining you down in the cellar. Do you realize that aside from Seminole (who doesn't count since he hasn't completed a roster all season), we're the only guys below .500? Pathetic, man.

Obama is black. It's true. It's obvious. It was a factor in his election. It is a factor in his Presidency. I for one think it was a historic moment for this country to see beyond race and vote for the candidate they approved of. Now, he must govern. Many here think he's done a lousy job. Many think he's handling the pressures pretty well, myself included. It's about par for the course for any presidency at this stage. Honeymoon is definitely over.