• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Racist, or just a joke?

Should ESPN have fired the writer?

  • Total voters
    35
I have some experience in journalism, so I'm familiar with how headlines work. Editors and reporters really want headlines that are attention-grabbing, which is something i just hate (unless you are in the tabloid business). Just tell us what the **** is going on, no embellishment. What the heck is wrong with "Knicks win streak snapped at 7?"
 
Kali said:
But then would it not open others to be able to slip in some so called fun racist humor now and again? As a company ESPN has to take a strong stand and in this case they did the right thing. That saying stand for something or fall for anything comes to mind. If you let one racist comment like this goes with just a warning and to not do it again? You set a bad example and risk the chance of folks thinking that they can "get away with it" at least once.

They did the right thing and have no doubt they did it to cover their own ass over outrage. But at least they did do the right thing.
Click to expand...
I see what you mean, but I never said that the person should go without a warning. Firing him is too much.

Also, I would not classify the comment as 'racist'.
 
StillBallin75 said:
I have some experience in journalism, so I'm familiar with how headlines work. Editors and reporters really want headlines that are attention-grabbing, which is something i just hate (unless you are in the tabloid business). Just tell us what the **** is going on, no embellishment. What the heck is wrong with "Knicks win streak snapped at 7?"
Click to expand...

Doesn't have a just Lin reference anywhere.
 
JustinS said:
I see what you mean, but I never said that the person should go without a warning. Firing him is too much.

Also, I would not classify the comment as 'racist'.
Click to expand...

I'll put it this way. If it was unintentional and completely coincidental (which I highly doubt) then it's just funny.

If it wasn't, then it is not racist per se, but it was racially insensitive joke.
 
^ I tend to agree with this, because racial or cultural insensitivity doesn't imply racism.
 
Kali said:
But then would it not open others to be able to slip in some so called fun racist humor now and again? As a company ESPN has to take a strong stand and in this case they did the right thing. That saying stand for something or fall for anything comes to mind. If you let one racist comment like this goes with just a warning and to not do it again? You set a bad example and risk the chance of folks thinking that they can "get away with it" at least once.

They did the right thing and have no doubt they did it to cover their own ass over outrage. But at least they did do the right thing.
Click to expand...

I get the argument you're making about this setting precedent, but this is America... we have a collective attention span of a gnat.

In other words, this will be long forgotten in a week.
 
Your Star said:
Or they could have just used the expression and not think about the racial implications. It's easy to miss stuff like this if your not thinking about race IMO.
Click to expand...
This wasn't an accident. Those kinds of terms or phrase are never used for basketball. The one who wrote it might have done so for pure racist reasons, but I suspect they were trying to be cute and it not work out so well for them.
 
Enola said:
As I said...I didn't see what the big hoopla was. Finally it dawned on me they were bitching about the chink word. In essence, I was not looking for something racial and never made the connection. I would have if they said "Gook in the armor".
Click to expand...

Gook usually refers to Vietnamese or Korean and chink is used for Chinese people.

His family is from China.
 
Mason66 said:
Gook usually refers to Vietnamese or Korean and chink is used for Chinese people.

His family is from China.
Click to expand...

My bad. Point is, Lin is not upset about it, so why is everyone else? Whomever has not watched the SNL skit I posted, please do. Very eye opening on how ludicrous this all is, in hindsight.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I get the argument you're making about this setting precedent, but this is America... we have a collective attention span of a gnat.

In other words, this will be long forgotten in a week.
Click to expand...

I doubt it will be forgotten by Lin or the dumbass that got fired. But yeah I do see what you mean. I may have a short attention span but this will probably still be in my mind at least for a few months. And a couple of years from now if it comes up again? Hopefully if the booze and drugs do not rot my mind by then? I will remember it. :)
 
Kali said:
I doubt it will be forgotten by Lin or the dumbass that got fired. But yeah I do see what you mean. I may have a short attention span but this will probably still be in my mind at least for a few months. And a couple of years from now if it comes up again? Hopefully if the booze and drugs do not rot my mind by then? I will remember it. :)
Click to expand...

I think Lin will be fine. He makes several million dollars for playing basketball, for goodness sake. Don't feel too sorry for him.

The bigger question is, what does this say about our society?
 
StillBallin75 said:
I'm just saying it's a hell of a curious choice for a headline. Is it possible it was a coincidence? Maybe, but I don't think so. My guess is that it was a joke gone wrong.
Click to expand...
Here's my take SB. I am a broadcasting alum and worked in media, was fortunate to work with "the good ones" that is they knew what we did and where the line was, can't say that about all in the field. As a broadcasting student we also had to learn journalistic practices and techniques, proper reporting versus op-ed, etc.

There are two things at play here:
1) The media in general try to put on the most entertaining show possible but sometimes that means risking "the line" between what will get you an award and what will get you fired. Anyone who plays it too safe or too loose with that will end up unemployed.
2) Many in the field of journalism aren't as smart as they think they are and tend to church up the presentation to show all of us on the consumption end that they are on a higher level. This fails for multiple reasons, including misusing phrases and words, incidents where the audience get bored of the drivel, and the granddaddy of them all is offending an audience whether intentionally or not. In fact, we were always taught in the program I was in to keep the discourse simple, the least advanced in the audience should enjoy it just as much as the most advanced.
* The best example of a journalist outsmarting themself is that incident where the radio personality was speaking of Condolezza Rice's potential bid to be NFL commissioner when he said it would be a major "coup in" the leage but said it just a little too fast. The audience percieved a slur and basically it was game over for that guy.
Had he kept it simple he still would have gotten the point across and wouldn't be percieved as "that idiot who blew his ride on the perception of a slur".

It is plausible these guys let an off color joke slip through though, and the fact that they chose poorly negates whether or not they are innocent because in the media world perception is king.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
What is the significance of the story? My posts in this thread have focused on the fact that the word has a racist/racialized history and that it isn't sensitive to think of that history when evaluating someone's use of it.
Click to expand...

Your response and others here surprise me. The question is should he have been fired. I say no.

As for the why: Yes, the word "chink" and other words have a racist/racialized history. That is history the only way we let those words affect us the same way today is if we give them power over us. For example: gays took back the word "fag" by embracing it and now use it themselves in various ways.

Other people find various ways to utilize words to give them different meanings. Example: The word "nigger" was given a "funeral" by the NAACP in 2007 NAACP buries the word nigger, entertainers resurrect it:: Black Press Magazine.com While the NAACP and other community leaders tries to bury the racist history of the word, others such as musicians and other artists have embraced the word and use it in a variety of ways. Example: the word "Bitch", generally seen as a derogatory term for women, feminists brought new meaning to it by starting "Bitch" magazine, and in the same way as gays did, women took back the power by referring to each other as "bitches" in endearing ways.

I am not saying people should not feel something when these words are used, just remember they only have the meaning you allow them to. This employee may or may not have meant the word "chink" to be offensive, we will probably never know. As Enola pointed out, she didn't notice the racial undertones until it was mentioned, so why should anybody else?

It all depends on the old journalistic rules: who, what, why, when, where and how.

P.S.-- I see no one mentioned how "offensive" the term "Linderella" (referring to fairy tales and the Cinderella story--one of a girl forced into indentured servitude).

I responded to ThePlayDrive's post not only because of your concerns about racism but also because you use potentially offensive language in your signature. "Yo mama" and other "yo" jokes, especially those insinuating something to fear, are considered highly offensive by some.
 
Last edited:
I don't like this. To those who are against the editor, could this whole issue be considered a fallacy of equivocation, or not? The editor probably meant chink as in armor; a metaphor regarding competitive sports. He may have meant the other meaning, but wouldn't that be speculation? If certain people are going to nail others based on what those certain people perceive, shouldn't that hold for all? I would hate to see some of these same people get defensive should the shoe be on the other foot.
 
With all of the safeguards I am sure the writer had to go through before putting their story online, I highly doubt that it was intentionally racist, or even a joke gone bad. These writers/editors/whomever who produce these articles that will be seen by the general public would know better than to even try to slip something like that in. But the issue here isn't whether it was racist or not, but really intent. If everyone involved intended it to be a racist comment, then it is. If they didn't intend for it to be racist, I would go with racially insensitive. It is real easy to judge someone, but without knowing intent, we expose our personal feelings and sensitivities to things such as racism. Just because I don't feel that this was meant to be racist, doesn't make me sympathetic to racist or racism, it just means I am giving the person the benefit of the doubt. I don't understand people who are so quick to call racism, and then doggedly defend their judgement, without knowing everything. Oh, it has to be racist, there is no other way to take it! Really?
 
taxigirl said:
Your response and others here surprise me. The question is should he have been fired. I say no.

As for the why: Yes, the word "chink" and other words have a racist/racialized history. That is history the only way we let those words affect us the same way today is if we give them power over us. For example: gays took back the word "fag" by embracing it and now use it themselves in various ways.
Click to expand...
When I say "history" I'm not referring simply to the distant past. There are, in fact, racists TODAY who use words like 'chink' in racist manner. So to reiterate my original point, it's not sensitive to take that into account when determining whether or not it could be racist. This has nothing to do with "giving words power over us" or being "affected" by those words. It has to do with seeing a word and discerning the intent of the author who used it.

Other people find various ways to utilize words to give them different meanings. Example: The word "nigger" was given a "funeral" by the NAACP in 2007 NAACP buries the word nigger, entertainers resurrect it:: Black Press Magazine.com While the NAACP and other community leaders tries to bury the racist history of the word, others such as musicians and other artists have embraced the word and use it in a variety of ways. Example: the word "Bitch", generally seen as a derogatory term for women, feminists brought new meaning to it by starting "Bitch" magazine, and in the same way as gays did, women took back the power by referring to each other as "bitches" in endearing ways.

I am not saying people should not feel something when these words are used, just remember they only have the meaning you allow them to. This employee may or may not have meant the word "chink" to be offensive, we will probably never know. As Enola pointed out, she didn't notice the racial undertones until it was mentioned, so why should anybody else?

It all depends on the old journalistic rules: who, what, why, when, where and how.
Click to expand...
I didn't say people should recognize racial undertones, I said that when people do recognize the racial undertones, they aren't automatically sensitive. That is fact. Recognizing reality does not make them sensitive, it makes them knowledgeable. Moreover, my comments had nothing to do with how people "feel" and they also had nothing to do with "meaning that we allow words to have". My comments were about the objective reality that the word "chink" has been and still is used by people in a racially charged or racist manner and that recognizing this does not make someone sensitive.

P.S.-- I see no one mentioned how "offensive" the term "Linderella" (referring to fairy tales and the Cinderella story--one of a girl forced into indentured servitude).
Click to expand...
Why would anybody find that potentially offensive? Cinderella is not cited in American culture to refer to indentured servitude, it is cited to refer to "fairy tale" like stories.

I responded to ThePlayDrive's post not only because of your concerns about racism but also because you use potentially offensive language in your signature. "Yo mama" and other "yo" jokes, especially those insinuating something to fear, are considered highly offensive by some.
Click to expand...
If somebody finds my signature offensive, then they are retarded.
 
DiAnna said:
:shrug: I thought it was both racist and tasteless. If the story covered the feats of a black athlete, and said "XX spearchucks opposition's niggardly performance" I'd say the same thing. Someone obviously thought calling an Asian a "chink" was cute. I, however, did not.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know. Which is sad...it just ruins that common idiom of "Spearchucking the opposition". I know I've heard that used to describe doing better than a competitor all the time.
 
What if people only think the editor said the Chinese man was a "chink."

Is the phrase "chink in the armor" never to be used around Chinese people because obviously it only refers to them? It's not like there are any other meanings. Oh hell no. :roll:
 
StillBallin75 said:
I'll put it this way. If it was unintentional and completely coincidental (which I highly doubt) then it's just funny.

If it wasn't, then it is not racist per se, but it was racially insensitive joke.
Click to expand...

I find it being coincidental highly unlikely. I also think it being actually racist as also being highly unlikely. I'd say the most likely scenario was a racially insensitive joke that was stupidly hoping it would catch some attention due to the pun on a very comon idiom that has since blown up on his face.

Next thing you're going to tell me is that the media is referring to an african american basketball player as a negro snake.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
Yeah I know. Which is sad...it just ruins that common idiom of "Spearchucking the opposition". I know I've heard that used to describe doing better than a competitor all the time.
Click to expand...

lol.........
 
Wake said:
What if people only think the editor said the Chinese man was a "chink."

Is the phrase "chink in the armor" never to be used around Chinese people because obviously it only refers to them? It's not like there are any other meanings. Oh hell no. :roll:
Click to expand...

the editor didn't say lin was a chink.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
When I say "history" I'm not referring simply to the distant past. There are, in fact, racists TODAY who use words like 'chink' in racist manner. So to reiterate my original point, it's not sensitive to take that into account when determining whether or not it could be racist. This has nothing to do with "giving words power over us" or being "affected" by those words. It has to do with seeing a word and discerning the intent of the author who used it.


I didn't say people should recognize racial undertones, I said that when people do recognize the racial undertones, they aren't automatically sensitive. That is fact. Recognizing reality does not make them sensitive, it makes them knowledgeable. Moreover, my comments had nothing to do with how people "feel" and they also had nothing to do with "meaning that we allow words to have". My comments were about the objective reality that the word "chink" has been and still is used by people in a racially charged or racist manner and that recognizing this does not make someone sensitive.


Why would anybody find that potentially offensive? Cinderella is not cited in American culture to refer to indentured servitude, it is cited to refer to "fairy tale" like stories.


If somebody finds my signature offensive, then they are retarded.
Click to expand...


:shock:...................
 
Enola said:
Some were fired after that. The news guy suspended for 30 days.

Myself, a chink in the armor to me meant a flaw in the armor of the opposing team. That the player happens to be asian and the term chink is a derogatory name is purely coincidence.
Click to expand...

Of course it is.

By the way, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom