[New York Times Via Brooklyn Vegan]As anyone who glanced at the free-for-all slug out that took place in our comments section last Friday will tell you, the issue of race in rock music can be a touchy subject. It's a complex issue that touches on a variety of themes including white guilt, racial stereotypes and accusations of novelty. The fact that a number of rock bands with black members have found critical and commercial success recently has begun to change people's perception vis-a-vis race and music though, which makes the article that the New York Times published yesterday all the more incendiary. I realize it's the responsibility of the press to report on changes in our culture, but for my money this article accomplishes little more than pointing out how "different" and "outsider" black rock artists and fans are. It also needlessly draws attention to a blatantly segregational term like "blipster." Read the article and leave your thoughts in the comments below.

while i think the article approaches this subject the wrong way, the internets is misinterpreting the message here. i think the most important thing to take from this article is not that there's this fringe group of black people immersed in white culture, but that the black community is beginning to reject the notion that there is a definitive way to "act black" and taking an interest in aspects of "white culture" does not make them less black.ignoring the 800 pound elephant in the room doesn't make it go away.however, i do agree that terms like blipster are totally unnecessary.