Wouldn’t the majority of people with colostomy bags still have arseholes? Just unable to use them.
English media thinly veiled racism
- Thread starter Berbaclass
- Start date
that's a misquote from Morgan Freeman
Can I ask you a genuine question?
Do you believe that non-white people in this country are sometimes treated negatively because of their skin colour, without it being outright and explicit racism?
If we stop saying 'racism' it will magically stop? Does it work for other things. Maybe we should just get rid of the police and the courts. They're always banging on about negative stuff.
You can't be engaging with that nonsense. All it does is makes the absurd into a 'debate'. Stop replying to him and it will stop, like racism.
Ah, the freeze peach hero shtick. It never gets old, does it? In this instance, it also features a version of "I have black friends" in the form of a "quotation" from a black person, which apparently is such a powerful argument that needed repeating
Threads like these are great for people expressing/exposing themselves though.... Always the same arguements and rhetoric
We even got a rehash of the Morgan Freeman quote.... Unironically
We even got a rehash of the Morgan Freeman quote.... Unironically
Christ alive, log out mate.
International Women's Day, when's International Men's Day then?!?
Embarrassing post.
to be fair he has a point people shouldn't be allowed to just bring Sterling into it without repercussion
I’m aghast as to why this is seen as the media being in any way racist. Making it into an agenda is just wrong.
i just looked at the report and saw a picture of an England footballer.
Why do people jump to seeing Saka been singled out and mention his skin colour?
Perhaps I’m naive but can’t we just stop reading between the lines and coming up with agendas.
i just looked at the report and saw a picture of an England footballer.
Why do people jump to seeing Saka been singled out and mention his skin colour?
Perhaps I’m naive but can’t we just stop reading between the lines and coming up with agendas.
I'm still waiting for straight pride goddammit!
Ah, you can't come to any conclusions from one article. There are patterns, and it comes up a lot. If you don't agree, then fine, but to refute the claims you will have to go a bit deeper than you just did.
I don't think you understand what racism is. Do you think that a white footballers' partnership to fight racism againt white footballers is needed?
No? Why do you think?
This is as dumb an argument as when rednecks in the American South try to score points by asking “why are there no all white colleges if there’s all black ones?”
Black Lives Matter? What about white lives, don’t they matter?
And that
And just how do you go a bit deeper? It's just a picture with no racial implications. If it was Kane or Rice holding the paper plane the by-line would of been exactly the same. It was too good a pun (or not) for the journo to turn down. Why does it make it racist?
What you're basically saying is if there's a headline showing a negative comment against a non white player then it has to be treated as racist unless proven otherwise which obviously sets for a very dangerous precedent.
I wonder, if tested, if it would be statistically significant or not? I honestly don't have a clue. From a one-off first glance it seems like two examples which suggest something, when there's millions of others that would perhaps suggest the opposite.
That's not even close to what I'm saying. I said you can't examine any one story and draw any conclusions.
To answer your question, you go deeper by examination of other stories in the past and the language used. Young black players have been described as extravagant when buying homes for family members but white players were presented as being more wholesome doing the same thing. Again, isolated it may be nothing.
Crafty v Sneaky.
https://www.wbur.org/onlyagame/2020/06/26/racial-stereotypes-sports-broadcast-bias
You can't go deeper into any one story, like I said. These trends are best studied to be acknowledged or dismissed over large data samples.
The outrage and reflex kickback at the suggestion is worrying. Surely any broad sample investigation is worth it.
The other explanation is that minorities are over-sensitive and linking this coverage to the real life continuous and often documented racism is just nonsense or at best a coincidence.
This argument was really useful at the time.
Useful to weed out the absolute half wits with zero understanding of context.
Hoping you've written it as satire though.
Yep, some people really lack perspective when it comes to these things.
What story? It’s a picture of an England footballer, who happens to be black. Just like a number of pictures were used of players who are white. Given the proportion of non-white players in the England side is higher than in previous sides, a trend which is likely going to continue, then yes, you are going to find more pictures and more stories of non-white players - some of which are undoubtedly going to be used in coverage that’s negative. Beckham, Gascoigne, Rooney, Southgate, Maguire, Sterling, Grealish, Ashley Cole, Neville etc are all players who have fallen foul of the press before. It’s what the press do.
Why does it need to be about colour? I think a lot of this is perpetuated by confirmation bias and echo chambers. If you want to make it about colour, then it’s easy to spin that narrative, but I think it’s disingenuous and undermines efforts to tackle genuine instances of racism.
I'm not spinning anything. I'm repeatedly saying you need a broad sample to prove anything either way. Seems odd that irks you.
Would you prefer it's just dismissed?
I do think that there’s an argument to be made that amplifying specious accusations of racism (such as the one in the OP) do harm the broader struggle. The next time a footballer experiences genuine racism at the hands of the UK press (which won’t be long coming!) it will be easier to dismiss along the lines of the boy who cries wolf. “Remember that fuss about Saka and the paper airplane? This is just more of the same”. The fact that this specific example turns out to not be legitimate racism doesn’t mean racism in the press doesn’t exist but making a fuss about it does (very slightly) undermine the fight to expose it.
The poster you relied to was making a specific point about Saka, playing for England on a Friday night and your reply was basically saying if he can't give a better explanation than he did then it could be construed as racism which more than a few have pointed out that for them there’s no doubt that it is which taken as a single unit absolutely has no merit.
Maybe it's worth pointing out than 8 of the English team that finished the game were non white so the law of averages point to at least one player being single out. The by line could very well of been of Toney holding his head in his hands after missing a half decent opportunity to equalise. Would that have been deemed racist as well? Where does it start and where does it stop?
No it wasn't what I was basically saying.
This is literally what I said regarding the thread topic.
One of the articles posted had an image of Saka with the words Black Ice surrounded by it. It wasn't just the airplane image with shitty based puns.
That sounds incredibly weird. Can’t find it in this thread. Can you post the image?
EDIT: Although “Black Ice” is presumably a shitty pun on Iceland and the England team “crashing” to defeat. It would be outrageous if it was a reference to skin colour. But extremely unlikely.
Ah. So Stones is the subject of the “Black Ice” headline. The Saka image is a rehash of their “Plane Awful” pun.
Yeah it’s perhaps the placement of the headline and Saka’s picture that could be seen as problematic at first glance.
That's the thing, it's just another example of papers not thinking.
Also black ice is not black it's just really treacherous and underhand by virtue of being colourless, not like good old honest white ice. Which makes Christmas lovely.
There are lots of interesting articles about the origins of using 'black' or 'dark' in a negative way and if they have racist origins. So deeply interwoven sometimes. Other times probably not in any way connected to race.
Basically if we agree racism exists, we would have to examine how it manifests.
There are lots of interesting articles about the origins of using 'black' or 'dark' in a negative way and if they have racist origins. So deeply interwoven sometimes. Other times probably not in any way connected to race.
Basically if we agree racism exists, we would have to examine how it manifests.
So either the press were a) being racist or b) are so unaware of their institutionalised racism that it never occurred to them that choosing to criticise and use the image of only black players, at least one of who didn't do anything wrong or even play a major part in the game, was a terrible idea/optic.
Either way it might not be the KKK lighting crosses on Mainoo's Dad's lawn but it is, at best, a ludicrously and casually clumsy and mildly racist failure to read the room.
Either way it might not be the KKK lighting crosses on Mainoo's Dad's lawn but it is, at best, a ludicrously and casually clumsy and mildly racist failure to read the room.
Just to qualify for those who are looking for a distinction in levels of criticism. It’s not that black players shouldn’t be critiqued or are necessarily blamed more than their white contemporaries. It’s the language used when taking shots.
There’s a lot of stereotypical language and negative references that tend to appear to smear a culture rather than an individual. Nobody is naïve enough to say we all don’t see colour it’s just the prejudices some associate with said different cultures can create a divide rather than harmony.
There’s a lot of stereotypical language and negative references that tend to appear to smear a culture rather than an individual. Nobody is naïve enough to say we all don’t see colour it’s just the prejudices some associate with said different cultures can create a divide rather than harmony.
Do us a favour Matt and Vanish!
Totally, the papers are a great source of accidental inappropriate content.
Yep, it's both ingrained and subtle but also very hard to ascertain whether it's malicious in any isolated incident.
Maybe your words, "but to refute the claims you will have to go a bit deeper than you just did." In laymans terms could be construed to mean, to prove the claims aren't racist you will have to give a better explanation than you just did?
That was my initial take on it when I first read them anyway.