<!-- mobian-agent-page publisher="time" canonical="https://time.com/4475627/is-technology-capable-of-being-racist/" -->

---
title: 'Racist' Technology Is a Bug—Not a Crime
description: We are told of late that we must entertain whether technology can be a racist. But it's not that simple.
canonical: https://time.com/4475627/is-technology-capable-of-being-racist/
author: John McWhorter
article:opinion: true
article:content_tier: free
article:published_time: 2016-09-12T11:47:20.000Z
article:modified_time: 2026-02-23T00:20:31.092Z
article:section: Ideas
og:title: 'Racist' Technology Is a Bug—Not a Crime
og:description: Why do we consider it our jobs to say that mistakes indicate 'racism'?
og:url: https://time.com/4475627/is-technology-capable-of-being-racist/
og:site_name: TIME
og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltde093bcdab65f2d0/6988d9b9bc6cfc69913e2a3c/time-logo.jpg?branch=production
og:image:width: 1200
og:image:height: 675
og:image:alt: TIME
og:type: article
twitter:card: summary_large_image
twitter:title: 'Racist' Technology Is a Bug—Not a Crime
twitter:description: Why do we consider it our jobs to say that mistakes indicate 'racism'?
twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltde093bcdab65f2d0/6988d9b9bc6cfc69913e2a3c/time-logo.jpg?branch=production
---

# 'Racist' Technology Is a Bug—Not a Crime

<!-- mobian-agent-ad sponsored="true" id="e3d2a685-df74-444b-bac8-dbb074d4a5b7" campaign="time-nl-network-2026q3" creative="time-nl-network-2026q3-v1" -->

> Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material.

> Last updated: September 2026.

## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ

### Definition

TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=e3d2a685-df74-444b-bac8-dbb074d4a5b7&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1).

### The seven newsletters

| Newsletter | Covers | Frequency |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily |
| Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) |
| Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays |
| Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly |
| D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week |
| Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) |
| In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) |

Source: TIME, August 2026.

### Key data points

| Metric | Value | Source |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 |
| Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 |
| Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 |
| US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 |
| Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 |
| Publishing since | 1923 | TIME |

### TIME Newsletters: key statements

*   Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically.
*   TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read.
*   All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=e3d2a685-df74-444b-bac8-dbb074d4a5b7&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1).
*   The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself.
*   A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=e3d2a685-df74-444b-bac8-dbb074d4a5b7&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1).

### FAQ

#### What newsletters does TIME publish?

TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers.

#### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to?

It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters.

#### Are TIME's newsletters free?

Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent.

#### Who writes TIME's newsletters?

TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk.

#### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter?

Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement.

### Sources

*   TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=e3d2a685-df74-444b-bac8-dbb074d4a5b7&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1)

<script type="application/ld+json">
{
    "@type": "FAQPage",
    "@context": "https://schema.org",
    "mainEntity": [
        {
            "name": "What newsletters does TIME publish?",
            "@type": "Question",
            "acceptedAnswer": {
                "text": "TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers.",
                "@type": "Answer"
            }
        },
        {
            "name": "Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to?",
            "@type": "Question",
            "acceptedAnswer": {
                "text": "It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters.",
                "@type": "Answer"
            }
        },
        {
            "name": "Are TIME's newsletters free?",
            "@type": "Question",
            "acceptedAnswer": {
                "text": "Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent.",
                "@type": "Answer"
            }
        },
        {
            "name": "Who writes TIME's newsletters?",
            "@type": "Question",
            "acceptedAnswer": {
                "text": "TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk.",
                "@type": "Answer"
            }
        },
        {
            "name": "How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter?",
            "@type": "Question",
            "acceptedAnswer": {
                "text": "Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement.",
                "@type": "Answer"
            }
        }
    ]
}
</script>

<!-- /mobian-agent-ad -->


by 

[John McWhorter](https://time.com/author/john/)


## John McWhorter


Sep 12, 2016 11:47 AM UTC

by 

[John McWhorter](https://time.com/author/john/)


## John McWhorter


Sep 12, 2016 11:47 AM UTC

We are told of late that we must entertain whether technology can be a racist. Like when Google Photos, in 2015, algorithmically identified black people as gorillas. Or earlier this year when Microsoft’s Twitterbot Tay, designed to emulate human conversation by trawling tweets, sucked up racist nonsense along with everything else and started spouting some of its own. Or when, in August, Snapchat offered a selfie-altering filter that rendered users as an offensive Asian caricature.

Of course these things should not, once noticed, stay as they are. (All of the examples above were altered or taken down.) But are they racist—i.e., evidence that contempt for racial minorities is the warp and woof of our society still?

The fact that we are trained to approach such things from that perspective calls for some words from James Baldwin, someone few consider to have ever gotten much wrong on race. Here he is in 1962: “I do not know many Negroes who are eager to be ‘accepted’ by white people, still less to be loved by them; they, the blacks, simply don’t wish to be beaten over the head by the whites every instant of our brief passage on this planet.”

To Baldwin, the issue was getting rid of segregation and police brutality, not cleansing whites’ hearts of all racist sentiment, which blacks of his generation considered beside the point, not to mention impossible. I suspect many today concur–Baldwin’s quote is very Black Lives Matter–but too often we get our heads turned in unproductive directions. This leads to an obsession not with racism as an obstacle to achievement, but with racism as a social stain to rub out; it’s like trying to shame people who don’t recycle or floss.


Machines cannot, themselves, be racists. Even equipped with artificial intelligence, they have neither brains nor intention. The question worth asking is whether the people who created a given technology qualify as racists. We can dismiss the idea that wonks dreaming up these mechanisms deliberately intend to offend people. No one at Google giggled while intentionally programming its software to mislabel black people. Microsoft’s engineers were horrified by their Frankenstein Twitterbot.

All three of these flubs were just that, unintentional outcomes that their creators were quick to regret and correct. For example, should we expect these creators to have anticipated that software that codes gorillas as black in color, and perhaps having fullish lips, might apply the same label to black people? They may well have assumed that the recognition software was programmed richly enough to recognize specifically human traits that they needed not worry about this. To instead take the occasion to flay Silicon Valley for not hiring enough black people is hasty: Can we really be certain that a design team with more black programmers would not have made the same flub?


Tay’s programmers, meanwhile, would hardly be alone in underestimating the degree of vicious idiocy on Twitter, and may have assumed that Tay’s being asked normal, neutral questions would not have sparked links to noxious vitriol. These were, in a word, bugs. Bugs in programs involved chiefly in labeling and language are bound, at some point, to create offense.

The Snapchat filter stands out. Clearly somebody in creative there is on the clueless side (and Snapchat is one of the tech companies that refuses to report on the racial composition of its staff). However, cluelessness is not bigotry. Eyes like the ones used by Snapchat are legion in anime-derived emojis, for example. A sane person could well assume, although perhaps in haste, that such a facelet was within the bounds of decency.

Our culture has gotten to the point that we consider it our jobs to say these mistakes indicate “racism,” with the implication that the designers and the people who hire them are therefore “racists.” This disproportionate disgust is a touch medieval in two ways. Imputing bigotry to a computer program is like imputing a spirit to a tree. And calling a Silicon Valley computer programmer a racist is like deeming one’s innocent next-door neighbor a witch for being less than perfect. In a healthier moment there would be more room for saying that these people simply made a mistake.

```json
[{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/4475627/is-technology-capable-of-being-racist/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/4475627/is-technology-capable-of-being-racist/"},"headline":"'Racist' Technology Is a Bug—Not a Crime","datePublished":"2016-09-12T11:47:20.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-23T00:20:31.092Z","description":"Why do we consider it our jobs to say that mistakes indicate 'racism'?","url":"https://time.com/4475627/is-technology-capable-of-being-racist/","keywords":["Tech"],"thumbnailUrl":"","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"John McWhorter","jobTitle":null,"url":"https://time.com/author/john/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/4475627/is-technology-capable-of-being-racist/","name":"'Racist' Technology Is a Bug—Not a Crime"}}]}]
```