• 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!

Is this racist?

Does racism occur in this video?


  • Total voters
    33
Based on your previous comment, that does not appear to be the case.

Of course, you might read the rest of the quote you responded to in order to know better, and it would also explain the previous quote.
 
Well - apparently: Black men are more apt to be REPORTED when they're seen to be breaking the law.
When you take classes covering quantitative social theory you see this constitutes for some of the skewed racial imbalance in crime.

What I'm curious about is the people - and other social theories like group-appeasement. (Where one person stands up for what is right, and everyone joins in because the surface of the pond is already rippling. But if someone else doesn't stand up, then people are less likely to do so themselves and be the rock in the water.). If that very first person didn't confront the black kid - would anyone else have done so? Maybe they did, I can't quite tell where the video was edited and where it was not (surely, to just cut out time and people who did nothing, I don't think they cut out people who DID respond to #1 and #3 with gnashing teeth.)

Look at the father in the first example: if he came across the black man would he have done anything else?

Meanwhile - look at the outgoing white older man in the 2nd example: if he came across the first guy, would he have done anything else?


For the girl: yeah - I don't think it would have mattered if she was black or white. She's pretty, her attitude was sort of sweet. That, by the way, is sexism.

The older white man in the 2nd example, by the way, makes me think of our debate a few years ago on the term 'uppity' - see, white people can be uppity. LOL Because that's how I'd define his behavior.
 
Last edited:
theres no real way to answer the question factually


was racism or at least prjudice PROBABLY at play? absolutley

is there any FACTUAL proof of that, no.

theres no control group or constants.

if they took the same people and the same situation then it be easier to see what was going on but we dont know maybe the same people that stood up would have stood up for everybody.
 
Well - apparently: Black men are more apt to be REPORTED when they're seen to be breaking the law.
When you take classes covering quantitative social theory you see this constitutes for some of the skewed racial imbalance in crime.

What I'm curious about is the people - and other social theories like group-appeasement. (Where one person stands up for what is right, and everyone joins in because the surface of the pond is already rippling. But if someone else doesn't stand up, then people are less likely to do so themselves and be the rock in the water.). If that very first person didn't confront the black kid - would anyone else have done so? Maybe they did, I can't quite tell where the video was edited and where it was not (surely, to just cut out time and people who did nothing, I don't think they cut out people who DID respond to #1 and #3 with gnashing teeth.)

Look at the father in the first example: if he came across the black man would he have done anything else?

Meanwhile - look at the outgoing white older man in the 2nd example: if he came across the first guy, would he have done anything else?


For the girl: yeah - I don't think it would have mattered if she was black or white. She's pretty, her attitude was sort of sweet. That, by the way, is sexism.

The older white man in the 2nd example, by the way, makes me think of our debate a few years ago on the term 'uppity' - see, white people can be uppity. LOL Because that's how I'd define his behavior.

Once you realize this is done over and over again, making it much harder to be merely related to those types of quirks, it becomes clearly that we do in fact act according to race, and that this reaction has real consequences, mostly detrimental to the minority.
 
theres no real way to answer the question factually


was racism or at least prjudice PROBABLY at play? absolutley

is there any FACTUAL proof of that, no.

theres no control group or constants.

if they took the same people and the same situation then it be easier to see what was going on but we dont know maybe the same people that stood up would have stood up for everybody.

Not exactly sure how you'd control that experiment, meaning how would you corral the same witnesses so that they witnessed the same exact crime in progress by two people equal in every aspect but race? Doing multiple experiments would get the point across sufficiently.

Interesting if not entirely surprising abstract of a study that focuses on perceptions of black people in news media vs white people:

Studies of media content consistently find that black criminal suspects are portrayed more frequently and more menacingly than white suspects in television news stories of violent crime. Here we investigate the impact of such portrayals on white viewers’ attitudes by means of a video experiment in which we manipulate only the visual image of the race of the suspect in a television news story of violent crime. We found, consistent with our expectations, that even a brief visual image of an African American male suspect in a televised crime story was capable of activating racial stereotypes, which in turn heavily biased whites’ evaluations of the suspect along racial lines. Thus, white participants in our experiment who endorsed negative stereotypes of African Americans viewed the black suspect in the crime story as more guilty, more deserving of punishment, more likely to commit future violence, and with more fear and loathing than a similarly portrayed white suspect. In the conclusion of the article, we discuss the implications of our findings for the study of racial stereotyping, visual images, and the intersection of race and crime in television newscasts.

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Anybody feel like coughing up $37 for the full study?
 
1.)Not exactly sure how you'd control that experiment, meaning how would you corral the same witnesses so that they witnessed the same exact crime in progress by two people equal in every aspect but race? Doing multiple experiments would get the point across sufficiently.

Interesting if not entirely surprising abstract of a study that focuses on perceptions of black people in news media vs white people:

Studies of media content consistently find that black criminal suspects are portrayed more frequently and more menacingly than white suspects in television news stories of violent crime. Here we investigate the impact of such portrayals on white viewers’ attitudes by means of a video experiment in which we manipulate only the visual image of the race of the suspect in a television news story of violent crime. We found, consistent with our expectations, that even a brief visual image of an African American male suspect in a televised crime story was capable of activating racial stereotypes, which in turn heavily biased whites’ evaluations of the suspect along racial lines. Thus, white participants in our experiment who endorsed negative stereotypes of African Americans viewed the black suspect in the crime story as more guilty, more deserving of punishment, more likely to commit future violence, and with more fear and loathing than a similarly portrayed white suspect. In the conclusion of the article, we discuss the implications of our findings for the study of racial stereotyping, visual images, and the intersection of race and crime in television newscasts.

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Anybody feel like coughing up $37 for the full study?

1.) i dont think it can be done, at least not for a TV show.

2.) well IMO this is obvious to anybody that watches TV or reads the paper who is honest and objective.

i remember a very large drug bust in my local area, a police chief(white) went down, 4 officers (3 whit one black) from different departments, a dispatcher(white), 1 EMT (white), 2 firemen (white) random low lifes (about 20 mix of races but mostly black), 2 teachers (white), an athletic director (white) and a 80 year old white lady.

this story took up a two page spread in the local paper with pics of everybody and the scandal and how it worked out.

what was funny was the cover pic though. "Sting operation rocks the whole Hive" and under it was a pic of not the chief, not the 80 year old lady, not the teacher but of one of the low lifes. A black guy that look like your stereotypical movie crack head missing teeth etc. He was busted with 5 20$ bags of weed but some how he made the cover?????? LMAO

also many people wondered if the others were set up but nobody talked about the guy on the front page lol.


now does stuff like this make me mad? not really because many people also talked about how obvious it was they picked the pick of that guy, most people saw right through it.

now this is just a personal story but i thought it was funny and related.

me personally the 80yr old white lady makes the cover who was selling rocks, weed and shrooms out of an ally window. THATS NEWS lol
 
Racial profiling is not racism, it is just stupid and supported by people who do not understand how to use statistics or how profiling works.

Racial profiling is in fact absolutely racist if the assumption is that one race is in worse than the other.
 
Last edited:
How racial profiling, especially as demonstrated in the OP, does not qualify as racism is beyond me.

Honestly, it depends on how you are defining racism. To me, racism requires a belief in the superiority of a race, or inferiority of a race, as a whole, to be racist. That is a high bar to prove.
 
At approximately 12 minutes, the psychologist himself gives the reason. Roughly paraphrased: "This kind of situation goes on all the time. You associate blacks with crime, and whites with being good." That is NOT racism. Even the two black women early on say, "Whites don't usually run around with burglary tools." That is NOT racism. Call it stereotyping...call it profiling. But. It is not racism.

I'll go on to say that the white guy had, probably, 30+ pounds on the black kid. That makes a significant difference in one's likelihood to confront a thief. It was quite apparent that many of the people passing the white kid thought he was stealing the bike. The question then becomes, "Why didn't more people confront him?" That is the real difference in the video. Why didn't more people confront him? NOT why did people think he wasn't stealing the bike.

And that white girl looked like she could beat down both of the boys at the same time.
 
Honestly, it depends on how you are defining racism. To me, racism requires a belief in the superiority of a race, or inferiority of a race, as a whole, to be racist. That is a high bar to prove.

Given that the video is accurate, it's reasonable to assume that the witnesses felt the actions (or presence, or whatever) of the black thief were worse and worthy of response than those of the white thief, even as the actions were identical.

Personally, I thought it was clever that they made one thief wear a blue shirt and the other a red shirt as men and women reach each color as aggressive differently.
 
Given that the video is accurate, it's reasonable to assume that the witnesses felt the actions (or presence, or whatever) of the black thief were worse and worthy of response than those of the white thief, even as the actions were identical.

Personally, I thought it was clever that they made one thief wear a blue shirt and the other a red shirt as men and women reach each color as aggressive differently.

i noticed that too and wondered if it was on purpose and also thought thats what made it less of a controlled test.

while they were dressed pretty similar colors matter too. Put the black guy in white pants and a pink shirt and pink, id bet theres a little impact.
 
Honestly, it depends on how you are defining racism. To me, racism requires a belief in the superiority of a race, or inferiority of a race, as a whole, to be racist. That is a high bar to prove.

Excellent point. How does one define racism? I guess the dictionary definition is close to what you posit here. Personally, my definition of racism is a wholesale prejudice against blacks . . . I think people who have disdain for African-Americans in general are racist. Those who won't hire blacks are racists. Those who don't want them living next door are racist, et al. That's my definition of racism.

Anyone espousing the dictionary definition is an idiot -- and a racist. IOW, the dictionary definition, in my opinion, doesn't go far enough.

A person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
 
Those who won't hire blacks are racists. Those who don't want them living next door are racist, et al. .

How do you know they're not just profiling?
 
Excellent point. How does one define racism? I guess the dictionary definition is close to what you posit here. Personally, my definition of racism is a wholesale prejudice against blacks . . . I think people who have disdain for African-Americans in general are racist. Those who won't hire blacks are racists. Those who don't want them living next door are racist, et al. That's my definition of racism.

Anyone espousing the dictionary definition is an idiot -- and a racist. IOW, the dictionary definition, in my opinion, doesn't go far enough.

If you go back and listen to the psychologist, he explains that many people associate black people with crime, and white people as good.

Hard to say that isn't racist.
 
How do you know they're not just profiling?

If you go back and listen to the psychologist, he explains that many people associate black people with crime, and white people as good.

Hard to say that isn't racist.

There's no question that some forms of profiling are racist. (Using my personal definition of racism.) The point is that, in the case of this video, I personally don't think racism was involved. The FACT that blacks commit far more robberies than whites can't be denied. If we're going to say that we have to ignore that? What kind of sense does that make? I'll answer for you: none at all.

It may be politically incorrect to profile, but that's all it is: politically incorrect.

There's a serial killer in the neighborhood. Let's ask law enforcement to spend equal resources investigating the 86-year-old grandmother as they spend on all the rest. Politically correct, don'tcha know...
 
There's no question that some forms of profiling are racist. (Using my personal definition of racism.) The point is that, in the case of this video, I personally don't think racism was involved. The FACT that blacks commit far more robberies than whites can't be denied. If we're going to say that we have to ignore that? What kind of sense does that make? I'll answer for you: none at all.

It may be politically incorrect to profile, but that's all it is: politically incorrect.

There's a serial killer in the neighborhood. Let's ask law enforcement to spend equal resources investigating the 86-year-old grandmother as they spend on all the rest. Politically correct, don'tcha know...

Actually, the "fact" that blacks commit more robberies can be denied. Or at least argued

Think about it. If, as the video demonstrates, people are more likely to report a black person committing a robbery than a white person doing the same, doesn't it make sense that would lead to more black people being arrested and convicted of robbery?
 
Given that the video is accurate, it's reasonable to assume that the witnesses felt the actions (or presence, or whatever) of the black thief were worse and worthy of response than those of the white thief, even as the actions were identical.

Personally, I thought it was clever that they made one thief wear a blue shirt and the other a red shirt as men and women reach each color as aggressive differently.

Good observation. Why didn't they have both wearing the IDENTICAL clothes, rather than having one wearing basically a red flag?
 
Good observation. Why didn't they have both wearing the IDENTICAL clothes, rather than having one wearing basically a red flag?

Because if both had been wearing red shirts only the men would have been influenced by that as an aggressive factor (as emotional reactions to color goes), while if they had both been wearing blue only women would have perceived that as aggressive.

Given that, a neutral color would probably have been more sensible.
 
Oy vey, Maggie, the two people in that video were acting the same. Same dress, same dodgy behavior. Yet two entirely different reactions were given.

They were NOT dressed "the same." A good question is why? Why not identical clothing? Why the two whites in soft blue and the black in blazing red? Notice the cap difference too!
 
They also have the white male wearing a good-guy crisp white cap.

This clearly was manipulated to a desired result. Or at least seems so.
 
Once you realize this is done over and over again, making it much harder to be merely related to those types of quirks, it becomes clearly that we do in fact act according to race, and that this reaction has real consequences, mostly detrimental to the minority.

Well - speak for the others . . . I wouldn't have been involved with anyone because I wouldn't have noticed. I don't make a habit of talking to strangers long enough to determine what they're doing, and if they should be doing it.

There are a lot more people like me who walked by and gave no notice. . . and instead, these few who were involved to any degree will be labeled as racist - and unfortunately, some people would label me and any other white person as one, too, no matter what, purely because we share one trait. . . . and that pisses me off.

Back to group appeasement theories - if they had one white person stand up and make a stink with #1 or #3 - would others have joined in? I think they would have. It would have been interesting to find out.

Again - I'm discussing theories that are applied to social standards to understand all the many ways in which humans work. I'm not just focusing on the racist aspect of things. . .and that shouldn't be construed as anything other than taking a quantitative approach to examining the entire situation.
 
Last edited:
They were NOT dressed "the same." A good question is why? Why not identical clothing? Why the two whites in soft blue and the black in blazing red? Notice the cap difference too!

I know, and personally I think they both should have worn the same neutral colors. But to say that the different colored shirts skewed all the results is really reaching. What's important is that neither of the thieves looked like they were on their way to white collar job interviews.
 
Doesn't it? You act against someone based on race, isn't that really racism?

No.

In my view, and perhaps you hold a different view, racism requires a certain level of irrational behaviour that is driven solely by a dislike for a person's race. It would be racism, in my view, to be the white owner of a store and deny blacks to shop there - that's just not good business and hurting yourself irrationally. It would not be racism, however, in my view, to be the white owner of a store and keep a close watch on young black male customers because in the past you've had trouble with young black males shoplifting or holding you up. That's just being smart and protecting your property and your interests.
 
Given that the video is accurate, it's reasonable to assume that the witnesses felt the actions (or presence, or whatever) of the black thief were worse and worthy of response than those of the white thief, even as the actions were identical.

they're not even the same people, genius ....

The people reacting to the white kid don't even come into contact with the black kid, and vice versa.

See how your stupid video leads to stupid views and opinions?
 
Back
Top Bottom