TNC sighs:
That a person who would use journalism to render whole geographies as cartoons, would journey to friendlier environs and pull the same vapid trick should be expected. If your work doesn't actually acknowledge people as full human beings, there's no real reason–short of naked racism–why you wouldn't deploy the white toothless hoarder as a weapon, with the same zeal that you would deploy the black layabouts and drag-behind.
Dreher agrees. Joyner argues that these interviews are not statistically significant:
It’s doubtless true that there are a lot of ignorant racists in Mississippi. Or, for that matter, anywhere. Similarly, some percentage of those collecting government assistance are doubtless slimeballs who are too lazy to work and have no shame at living off those who do. But sticking a camera in their faces to record the fact doesn’t shed much light on how representative they are of the population we’re attempting to understand. Instead, these examples reinforce existing biases, doing much more harm than good.
Harold Pollack drives Joyner's point home:
Suppose you went over to the welfare office last Thursday and surveyed every current recipient of Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). Many of these TANF recipients would have been long-term recipients. Why? Because the people who only needed a little help left the welfare rolls before you had the chance to meet them. The stock or cross-section of TANF recipients you met yesterday was a very different, more needy group than you would have found, had you specifically surveyed every low-income single mom who signed up for TANF that same day.
The Dish 