Here at my blog, overtime, I’ve accumulated a number of criticisms of the sensationalist, perpetuator of stereotypes and paid hero antagonist Gustavo Arellano.
Arellano likes to think of himself as a “voice of the voiceless.” He’ll pretend to champion the causes of gays, immigrants and the people of Santa Ana in general. But the hero antagonist is not like these people that he pretends to champion. He’s not struggling like immigrants, instead, he’s sitting pretty at the OC Weekly. He certainly doesn’t speak their language as well as they do. He’s supposedly the guy to turn to when it comes to things Mexican. Ask a Mexican? This “Mexican” went on the Colbert Report television show and revealed his ineptitude with the Spanish language by mispronouncing the word paciencia. Simply put, he is not like them no matter how hard he tries to be el tipo buena onda.
How can he ask for people to think of “occupying Harrah,” that is, occupying the proposed site of construction for One Broadway Plaza and yet be a returning customer at the Santora, specifically Memphis? What is this “call” if not sensationalism? And what is it if not a contradiction? These properties, the Santora and the proposed One Broadway Plaza, are owned and managed by Mike Harrah’s companies. He knows this better than anybody.
The hero antagonist is no different than another sensationalist, Carlos Mencia, who uses derogatory language to get and keep attention, words like “wab,” “beaner” etc. I hate these words and have always hated them. If it’s not his handlers at the OC Weekly who ask him to pour on the sensationalism and racist slurs, then the sensationalism and racism comes from his own twisted mind.
What does José González Solorio, another Santa Ana Sentinel voice have to say?
Exploiting the intricacies of an already marginalized ‘minority’ group for personal gain
Doing it with a premeditated sensationalist slant that is continually inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory, that tends to employ the use of remote facts or occurrences to substitute for the development of an argument, whose tactics bear negligible difference from those of your everyday, run-of-the-mill supermarket tabloid, and whose brand of journalism cumulatively merits a reader’s yellow stamp of disapproval, rendering it more show than substance.
Maintaining a trademark grin of self-satisfaction about it all the while
Selected articles for further debunking: