Ad hominem.
I want everyone here to look that up. Rather than earnestly debating with OP, many of you have stooped to ad hominem.
Ad hominem against his source, without even addressing the point itself.
Ad hominem against OP, claiming racism without, again, addressing the point.
Ad hominem against people who prefer not to support agendas, whether they be left or right, with their capital, their only economic voting power, rather than attempting to understand why one would feel that way.
Ad hominem is the tool for the deliberately disingenuous and intellectually lazy, (you know.... politicians

), and I know that my beloved Gaf is better than that. It's ok to not agree on things, hell I think it's productive even, but let's try to address the point, rather than the source; it's simply a more direct, honest, and efficient means of debate.
Or you can all just keep yelling at each other and pushing for more division, hell I don't know, go nuts. I do know that the story that OP noted is absolute dog shit, I mean it just is, for me at least. If you like it, that's cool too, but OP is not a racist, (for those of you asserting as much, grow up), for simply sharing information about aspects of the writing that many of us would want to know before making a purchase and thus unwittingly supporting a product that we wouldn't have had we known otherwise, as the story does sound polarizing at the very least, and I think that's being kind.
Thanks for trying to keep us informed OP. Ignore the people who try to paint you as a culture warrior or rabble rouser for doing so, and remember whose modus operandi it was to suppress all criticism, fair or not, by declaring it all dissent against the state.....or should I say dissent against the party?