Or an editor might say, I don't care if it's racist, we are speaking to a particular audience, as kb points out above.

I really don't see the issue with this if it is indeed the case. Free speech is free speech. If you want to push out racist content (because it sells), then so what? If there is an actual problem with racism, I could understand. But this is literally a matter of "the character isn't as dark skinned as the artist would like".

ummmm.... romantic context - whiter? crime context - darker

No. Bright lights, certain colored lights, etc. Along with being in shadows, having things color-shifted for effect (the whole scene, not just the character). And so on. If a character needs to be lighter, they need to be lighter. If a character needs to be darker, they need to be darker. It's purely a shading/color thing.

The editor's "problem" with the art itself could be that the depiction of the character didn't fit her preconceived stereotype

Or it could be a simple matter of "making a slightly lighter tone for the skin blends well with the rest of the colors on the page, leading to more sales". With a darker skinned character needing the rest of the page to be edited to blend nicely.

Is hubski racist because the background is white and green (for my theme)? No. But if the background was black, he overall theme wouldn't work as well, from purely a colors/contrast standpoint.

And I'm fairly certain with other colors this happens to.

The artist saw the story from his point of view. The editor saw it differently. It's a racial thing, but I could be wrong.

I didn't see it as a racial thing in the slightest. I saw it as "these colors are inaccurate and don't blend well, please brighten them up". Unless, of course, this was a book wide change (every single panel/page), along with future changes to the character being made permanent (that particular skin tone change, rather than just the blending on a few pages).

Again, it might be a racial issue. Sure. But if it is, first, who cares? It's media. Fiction. And second, if it's what sells, it's what sells.

I'm pretty sure "Politically Correct Human" isn't a top seller.

Either way, like most racial/gender things, it's a non-issue that's blown out of proportion for media coverage.

Kafke has a point. I'm not the only professional I know that leaves little unfinished nuggets in my "finished" work so that the overzealous producer can point at something and tell me to fix it. It's a rare creative overseer that can say "yep, you nailed it, invoice me" without insisting you tweak something.

At the same time, a non-clueless supervisor looking for make-work would look anywhere other than "how brown is Wolverine's girlfriend." BUT cluelessness happens.

Here's the shitty thing: Calling out cluelessness as racism (or calling out racism as racism) in a public forum like this will not diminish the cluelessness or racism. It will make the caller-out-of-racism radioactive to the point where not only will he or she never been hired again, it will taint the relationship between the supervisor and whoever recommended the caller-out-of-racism. Given a choice between "I want to be a better person" and "I don't have time to deal with this shit" "don't have time" will always win.

You are the master of your own destiny in a gig economy. Cartoons like this will ensure that you have a much higher profile amongst minority artists, minority-friendly companies and egalitarian-minded publishers.

I'm sure they exist somewhere.