While it is certainly old news to anyone that cared enough to pay attention to the story, the Henry Louis Gates fiasco bears discussion. The incident that led to all the mess was certainly unfortunate for everyone involved, but it did illustrate an important lesson: There doesn't always have to be a "right" and "wrong" side of an issue/argument.

A brief recap:

-Dr. Gates, an esteemed Harvard professor that is African-American returns to his home in Cambridge, Massachusetts after a trip overseas.
-Upon arrival, he and his driver struggle to get the door unlocked/open. It is apparently jammed.
-While they (both African-American) try to pry the house door open, a neighbor sees this happening and calls 911 in fear that the house is being robbed.
-Two police officers arrive on the scene and begin questioning Gates as if a robbery had been attempted. Gates explains the scenario and cause for confusion.
-Gates is highly agitated and becomes "disorderly" with the officers, so he's arrested and taken into custody by Officer Crowley (white), with assistance from Officer Lashley (black).
-Boom!

In the end, all charges were dropped and President Obama made a hasty remark about the police officer(s) responded "stupidly". (Incidentally, how that little faux pas hasn't been further scrutinized, the world may never know.) Regardless, it basically was portrayed as a clear-cut example of racial profiling since among the two men trying to open the door and the two police officers, three were black and one was white. If only it could have been all one race or another, this would have never been a story.

Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist or anything, but the media really has taken this story and made it into something it is not. This is easy to assess because the story was nothing to start with, so making it into anything is, by default, making it into something it is not. By presenting this as actual "news", it has made people think they have to have an opinion on it and ultimately take a side. Once everyone chooses sides, it is their duty to defend their position and spit vitriol at the opposing side. Then the media can report on that. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Could it possibly be that there is not a "right" or "wrong" side to this story? Maybe Dr. Gates is partially innocent and partially guilty? After all, he was never charged with breaking into his own house (obviously). He was charged with disorderly conduct because he became very aggressive and hostile toward the police officers, both white and black. That's usually what happens when you are aggressive and hostile toward a police officer, regardless of your race or theirs. Officer Crowley can also be held to blame for not being more rational, given the circumstances. He acknowledged that it was Dr. Gates' house during the proceedings, so he had a basis for why Dr. Gates would be so frustrated in such circumstance. Ultimately it doesn't really matter who did what first or to what extent. Among two grown men, one an internationally-esteemed scholar and the other a civil servant, it is sad that the outcome was what it was. It doesn't really say much for society, especially in the cradle of higher learning of this country.

Almost on cue in response to the actions of a couple of grown men that know better, President Obama made his now-famous offer to have a beer with Gates and Crowley. Of course, this was just what the media needed. Was this a new and exciting way to resolve conflict from the brilliant leader? Or was it a lame attempt at appearing harmonious and cool at the same time? Again, couldn't the answer be "neither" and it not really matter either way? Will the Obama/Gates/Crowley beer summit stop a violent act from happening? Will it make anyone legitimately feel better about themselves? Unfortunately, the answer has to be "no" to both questions. But did it give the media something to talk about once they were tired of talking about the incident that led to it? Absolutely.


Geez, hopefully nobody noticed that Gates' beer was darker than the others.