Globalised Racism?

Anything newsworthy. Or newsworthy for being spectacularly un-newsworthy.
Forum rules
RTFA is assumed - do not reply unless you've read the linked article.
Karjalan
Legendary
Posts:4622
Joined:24 May 2007, 17:01
Location:New Fucking Zealand
Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Karjalan » 11 Jan 2010, 16:22

Where did I state my opinion on global warming? And then use a sole piece of evidence to back it up and ignore all other arguments?

Well I realize the analogy is a little broad and upon writing it I was only thinking of one specific example. A US senator who made up his mind on Global Warming before/without doing background reading or any prior information and then used one piece of "evidence" to back up his claim (that some state's had recorded the coldest winter on record that year) even though his argument ironically goes against what he is trying to say. I personally have no opinion on global warming, maybe it's happening, maybe not, I've watched movies/documentaries and read about it... and the only thing I can ascertain from what I've read is that the world is getting warmer... but not necessarily for the reasons suggested by global warmacists, i.e. that it's happened before pre man.... and that Al Gore invented the internet.
"2+2 is 4"
Barney, the Dinosaur

Mitra
Legendary
Posts:2002
Joined:22 Aug 2006, 14:11
Location:Perth W.A.

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Mitra » 11 Jan 2010, 21:26

Karjalan wrote:
Johnnyrico wrote:Australian advertisers have no fucking clue about what there doing, not even suprised with this non-sense to be honest.
Hmmm I can't really fault the Australian advertisers. If this exact scene happened with the Pakistani crowd during this current test series... no one would care.... I saw the add come on live while the windies were here and didn't even slightly suspect racism. Apparently they did a survey and even after seeing the American report on it being racist, 80ish% still couldn't see what was so racist about it.
It just leads the question... does every country have to pay attention to every OTHER countries racist stereotypes, so as not to offend them with a product that is not intended to be seen by that country etc.

To me it falls under the same scenario as that danish dude that made a comic about the prophet Mohammed.... Should you're right to express yourself in you're own country (according to your countries laws/social norms) even if it would be found offensive to others?

The sterotype "black people <3 fried chicken" is pretty much solely an American one... so why should an add for a sponsor of a sports team, that is not widely viewed or played in America, in a situation where it would never be seen in America (unless KFC Aus wanted to advertise in the US for some odd reason) have to change it?


The effect of the secondary audience was discussed by Julian Morrow of Chaser fame in the Andrew Ollie Media Lecture 2009 and i quote...
Taste and decency debates in the broader community were easier to dismiss when technology was less advanced. Controversial content was hard to access, or re-access, so it was easy to argue that public debate was grounded in ignorance.
It’s useful here, indeed I think it’s important, to distinguish between what I call the primary audience and the secondary audience.

The primary audience is mainly people who want to watch a show or at least chose to for some reason or other. They come to content through the platforms of the original broadcaster, whether it’s TV or radio, or the various catch-up technologies. The primary audience at least approximates in some way the target audience for content.

By contrast, the secondary audience come to access controversial content because it’s controversial. The secondary audience is often tends to be the very opposite of the target audience.

Today, thanks to widespread broadband access and social media applications, in particular YouTube and Twitter, the secondary audience is now much bigger and much closer than it has ever been before ... it’s now easy for them to access controversial content online. And one of the problems with giving people the ability to make up their own minds is that they do.

Thanks to high speed internet, content which is noteworthy in any way– whether its cute, inspirations, original, or involves cats - spreads like wildfire, sometimes around the world. The effect of anything can be instantly magnified by an avalanche - of YouTube postings, streams from media websites, forwarded emails, reTweets – all of which pile almost instantaneously on top of good old-fashioned cultural ripple effects like the watercooler, the schoolyard, or the B.O. infested taxi.

It means we’ve built the fastest most complex, high-tech cross-platform global echo chamber in history. And the impact on “debates”, for want of a more accurate expression, about taste and decency is profound.

The dividing line between the primary audience and the secondary audience, where outrage blossoms, can often be observed via the timing of complaints. I first noticed it after The Chaser’s Eulogy Song aired on ABC TV. The song was a deliberately provocative, but in my view satirically accurate song about the affection we tend to grant to even unsavoury celebrities posthumously (a human trait, I might say, that I hope to be the beneficiary of, though I’m in no rush). When I came in to work the morning after the Eulogy Song, the production office voicemail had 9 complaints on it. But when the song was picked up by talkback radio mid-morning, the phone went beserk, and by lunch there were hundreds of abusive complaints, many of which proudly declared that they hadn’t actually heard the song.

My all time favourite voicemail complaint by the way was from an old woman who said in her message that our show was, and I quote, “filth – fucking filth”.

The most dramatic example of outrage in the secondary audience is Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand in the UK. On 18 October 2008 they aired a tasteless but forgettable pre- recorded phone prank on BBC Radio 2. There were 2 complaints about it the next day. But when, 8 days later, the incident was reported in The Mail on Sunday, there were 1585 complaints the next day, sparking a media frenzy. Within 2 days there were 27,000 complaints.

I’ve got no doubt the sheer scale and intensity of these controversies now derives from how easy it is for controversial material to be accessed by the secondary audience. Email and the web also make it much easier to formalise a complaint as well.

By the way, the Make a Realistic Wish sketch tops the ABC complaints charts for 2009, with 4300 complaints. But to put this in perspective, while it’s in the ABC’s Hottest 100 of all time, it garnered roughly the same number of complaints as the decision in 2005 to cease production of George Negus Tonight. And both of them are more than a thousand behind the the most complained about thing the ABC’s ever done, the axing of The Glass House, which led to 5606 complaints.

I also note that in 2008, there were 2645 complaints about the introduction of ABC1 and 2 watermarks on ABCTV shows. So if there’s one bit of advice I’d give the ABC from all this, it’s that the ABC should never introduce new watermarks that offend community standards – that who really would melt the switchboards.

But is all this just a question of niche content versus “community standards”? I’m not convinced it’s a simple as that, which is something I’ll come back to.

For the moment though, it’s worth observing that while media technology is fanning the flames of taste and decency outrage, it also renders it impossible for censorship – which used to the goal of outrage - to be meaningfully carried out.
Karjalan wrote: To me, thinking of it as a "racist" add is a racist act in of itself. Racism is a mindset, it's largely down to personal perception.
Example? Lets say you are racist towards Asians (in general) or subscribe to the "Asian's can't drive" theory.. You drive down a long stretch of road and pass 100 cars. 50 are White drivers, 50 are Asian. You see 10 really bad white drivers, but you disregard them, you see 49 really good Asian drivers and disregard them... you see ONE bad one and all of a sudden "oh bloody Asian drivers" etc.etc.... I don't know what it's called, but it's when you exclusively use one minor piece of information to support your claims as "proven", yet you completely ignore any counter arguments. Makes me think of the hardcore anti-global warming people.
I believe the word you are looking for is Selection Bias where the bias of the researcher influences the results because the evidence/sample they choose to use ruins the validity of the experiment.


also.... you don't accept the Anthropogenic nature of global warming???
"Life is no Nintendo game / But you lied again / Now you get to watch her leave / Out the window / Guess that's why they call it window pane" -Eminem 'Love the way you lie' - Award for Excellence in Puns in the medium of Rap 2010

Karjalan
Legendary
Posts:4622
Joined:24 May 2007, 17:01
Location:New Fucking Zealand

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Karjalan » 11 Jan 2010, 22:48

First off... I had to look up Anthropogenic >.<.... Second, when I say "maybe it's happening maybe it's not" I mean like... the end of the world. I know man is having a big impact, and I know it's increasing the temperature, but I don't really think or worry about it. It would be good if we could cut back on emissions and lower our harmful impact on the world..... but I don't concern myself with the whole issue.
"2+2 is 4"
Barney, the Dinosaur

User avatar
Vampirial
Legendary
Posts:1790
Joined:16 Mar 2007, 08:54
Location:Brisbane

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Vampirial » 12 Jan 2010, 10:06

While on racism it kind of reminds me of the India/Australia debate at the moment. A few Indians get attacked and suddenly omg Australia is racist and getting protests from the Indian community (specifically in there country). On the news it said the guy who was killed last week didn't have his mobile or wallet stolen after being stabbed, so suddenly the indian community jumped up and down with racism. I don't mean to say that it can't be racism but plenty of people are murdered without their personal effects stolen are we now to say all are racially motivated? Just kind of pisses me off a little that people aren't even waiting for offical police investigations for all we know he slept with some guys g/f who decided killing was good revenge.....

While I don't doubt that people in general can be very racist towards one another it often seems that the race card is pulled with little to no evidence first being given, and if a crime were racially motivated does that necessarily mean the whole country is racist? Hell no. But try and tell the majority that. "White" people can be just as shocked and horriffied by hate crimes as anyone else - I think its kind of racist personally to slump us all as being racist when its a small minority that would be willing to kill people because of skin colour.
Caught a lite sneeze
Dreamed a little dream
Made my own pretty hate machine

User avatar
Johnnyrico
Legendary
Posts:5412
Joined:31 Aug 2007, 13:50

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Johnnyrico » 12 Jan 2010, 20:05

It is my experience that Australia is in fact a racist nation.
So, to spite them, i plan on sleeping with all their women - one (or two) at a time.

Suck on that assholes.
Mews wrote:No Rico, it's a rhetorical question.
8?

Karjalan
Legendary
Posts:4622
Joined:24 May 2007, 17:01
Location:New Fucking Zealand

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Karjalan » 13 Jan 2010, 09:07

Johnnyrico wrote:It is my experience that Australia is in fact a racist nation.
So, to spite them, i plan on sleeping with all their women - one (or two) at a time.

Suck on that assholes.
Lol reminds me of a line from "Don't Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood."

I agree at what you're saying sat.It seems like there is a basic level of racism that's everywhere... and TBH I don't know that you would call it Racsim in the traditional sense "like hating all of one race" as opposed to the mentality that "they're (any immigrant) stealing our jobs, don't speak out language" etc... like hating on all races. More like excessive national pride. I mean it's still racist, but not in the traditional sense.


I found the chaser article an interesting read Mitra. I didn't get to see the clip myself, but I did see the media/public winge fest afterwards... I don't know how far they may have overstepped a boundary, but I find the complaints numbers a bit ironic.
"2+2 is 4"
Barney, the Dinosaur

User avatar
Derathius
Epic
Posts:1062
Joined:26 Oct 2006, 22:52
Location:Western Australia

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Derathius » 13 Jan 2010, 20:35

I just want to know if the good old folks from the U.S. even know that it was a cricket game... (Just kidding).

I personally think they should re-run the advertisement surrounded by English cricket team supporters and see what they say.

The Hey, Hey, It's Saturday black-face routine was blown out of proportion in my opinion too...

All in all Australia is quite a racist country. Hell it grew up on racism to be perfectly straightforward.

This is an excerpt from Wikipedia on the Immigration Restriction Act of 1901. All this started becoming more relaxed in 1947. I use the term relaxed loosely. Click for source.
Early drafts of the Act explicitly banned non-Europeans from migrating to Australia but objections from the British government, which feared that such a measure would offend British subjects in India and Britain's allies in Japan, caused the Barton government to remove this wording. Instead, a "dictation test" was introduced as a device for excluding unwanted immigrants. Immigration officials were given the power to exclude any person who failed to pass a 50-word dictation test. At first this was to be in any European language, but was later changed to include any language.
Basically the way this worked was you came in and they didn't like your original country of origin you had to say 50 words in a selected languange. If you got that they would ask for 50 words in another language. So on and so forth until the person couldn't accomplish the task and was sent packing.

Racism in all its bullshit is only a one way street. We hear alot of "white people" doing this to "such coloured person" but in my experience coloured people are also capable of great acts of racial violence. Because the bulk population of Australia is white you will always hear that white people did such and such to this ethnic group. (Please don't take anything the wrong way folks).

Growing up in the north of Western Australia has hindered my view of many indiginous Australians. I was beaten up as a kid at school alot because I was one of the few white kids attending said school. You walk down the street in many of the towns I grew up in and you get called "white c**t, white this, white that," yet the moment you turn to them and say "black <insert insult here>" they're quick to cry racism. Even after all my negative experiences growing up with Indiginous Australians I still try to judge each individually... There are many elders and community leaders who I have much respect for up north and families who I was friends with.

Reading alot of what I've just written I think I've digressed very far off topic and will quit whilst I'm ahead.
Last edited by Derathius on 14 Jan 2010, 07:44, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Mitra
Legendary
Posts:2002
Joined:22 Aug 2006, 14:11
Location:Perth W.A.

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Mitra » 13 Jan 2010, 21:31

Yeah dera, the Immigration test isn't that bad, anymore. thankfully.

But in terms of acceptable behaviour, Talking in a different language while in the company/presence of anyone who doesn't speak the language is exceptionally rude in my opinion. tourists who may have only 1 person fluent excepted
"Life is no Nintendo game / But you lied again / Now you get to watch her leave / Out the window / Guess that's why they call it window pane" -Eminem 'Love the way you lie' - Award for Excellence in Puns in the medium of Rap 2010

User avatar
Derathius
Epic
Posts:1062
Joined:26 Oct 2006, 22:52
Location:Western Australia

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Derathius » 13 Jan 2010, 21:48

Mitra wrote:Yeah dera, the Immigration test isn't that bad, anymore. thankfully.

But in terms of acceptable behaviour, Talking in a different language while in the company/presence of anyone who doesn't speak the language is exceptionally rude in my opinion. tourists who may have only 1 person fluent excepted
I can agree with this to a point. A few Thai women work for the same company I do and they tend to talk to each other alot in Thai. It mostly doesn't bother me (hell I get one of them to teach me to swear in Thai), except when I can see it bothering other people. I understand that they may be missing their homeland and culture but it makes it hard when such mannerisms aren't really the same over in Thailand. Because different cultures have different views on "polite behaviour" it makes it harder for them to understand a few of my colleges requests. They generally apologise and talk english but they tend to revert to Thai after a short period of time without realising.

I tend to be quite laid back at work so it doesn't bug me as much as it may other people :P
Image

Mitra
Legendary
Posts:2002
Joined:22 Aug 2006, 14:11
Location:Perth W.A.

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Mitra » 13 Jan 2010, 23:35

it's very frustrating when your hung over and they're in the kitchen with you and all you want to do is cook your damn fryup.

also given that they came here and were studying english, it just irritates me.
"Life is no Nintendo game / But you lied again / Now you get to watch her leave / Out the window / Guess that's why they call it window pane" -Eminem 'Love the way you lie' - Award for Excellence in Puns in the medium of Rap 2010

User avatar
Derathius
Epic
Posts:1062
Joined:26 Oct 2006, 22:52
Location:Western Australia

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Derathius » 13 Jan 2010, 23:42

Mitra wrote:it's very frustrating when your hung over and they're in the kitchen with you and all you want to do is cook your damn fryup.
Waking up is frustrating with a hangover. Hearing a language you cannot understand is probably alot worse when you have a hangover.
Image

Mitra
Legendary
Posts:2002
Joined:22 Aug 2006, 14:11
Location:Perth W.A.

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Mitra » 14 Jan 2010, 01:59

you'd think I'd be used to it after 20 years of exposure to it though...

anyway. this is a bit aside the original point.

conversing in a language not everyone can speak = bad manners not racism.
"Life is no Nintendo game / But you lied again / Now you get to watch her leave / Out the window / Guess that's why they call it window pane" -Eminem 'Love the way you lie' - Award for Excellence in Puns in the medium of Rap 2010

User avatar
Philondra
Legendary
Posts:3216
Joined:13 Sep 2007, 17:14
Location:Tokyo, Japan

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Philondra » 14 Jan 2010, 10:57

I can completely understand both points of view. I mentioned this in guild the other day, but for the benefit of those who weren't there, WOW is pretty much the only time in my daily life that I get to speak my native language. Sometimes you really just want to be able to converse without having to worry (to an extreme degree) if what you actually said is really what you meant to say. The problem actually gets *worse* the closer you are to native-level competency, because people don't expect you to make many mistakes so they tend to take even blunders (except very obvious ones) at face value ><

User avatar
Cartollomew
I has a monocle (Site Admin)
Posts:8805
Joined:22 Aug 2006, 12:11
Location:Perth

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Cartollomew » 18 Jan 2010, 00:55

The (very slight) difference between the examples cited by Morrow and the KFC ad is that the primary audience is a lot less targeted with advertising than with shows - people didn't tune in to watch the KFC ad.

Advertising has to be much more sensitive to this kind of BS than regular programming.

But the point is definitely applicable in this case - I'd almost say that this is less a question of racism and more one of cultural differences. For example, certain ads would be culturally unsuitable for certain audiences - they can cause offense without there ever being a question of racism or some other hot-button issue (and as Morrow points out, offense caused would be largely inconsequential... unless it ruined the reputation of the company advertised or something). With reference to the Hey Hey debacle - blackface is still a serious cultural taboo in the US, it is almost an irrelevance in Australia. Ergo, it's a cultural issue, not one of racism.

As a final aside, I find it pretty funny that the yanks can't make the distinction between a black person from the West Indies - to whom, I presume, the fried chicken stereotype is inapplicable - and an African American.

The guy was surrounded by people from the West Indies - that's hardly the deep south.
Who do you think you are? If you'd stopped winning, you could have been the Biggest Loser, if you gave up, you could have been a Survivor, if you'd stopped reading Orwell, you could have been on Big Brother!

User avatar
Philondra
Legendary
Posts:3216
Joined:13 Sep 2007, 17:14
Location:Tokyo, Japan

Re: Globalised Racism?

Post by Philondra » 18 Jan 2010, 11:07

Well, most Americans have difficulty really understanding that the rest of the world does not think like them or have the same cultural background, even though they know it to be the case in an academic sense. One of the American girls that I know here has difficulty wrapping her head around the fact that not all black people are African Americans (in fact, the majority are Nigerian, but she has this mental block against calling black people anything other than African-Americans)

Post Reply