No sorry, it’s silly. And not on point. We are talking about opinions. The test you propose assumes a non-biased arbitrare. The Rock’s opinions are subjective - not objective. Within this very thread we have many wildly opposing opinions.
A persons ability to beat me up doesn’t make their opinion more valid than mine. Suppose Dwayne walks up to me wearing socks with sandals and I tell him that in my and most of America’s opinion wearing socks with sandals are tacky. He doesn’t like that so he tosses me in a trash can. Does that somehow make socks/sandals fashion forward now? Of course not. It’s a silly idea and thought experiment.
BTW, regarding the cartoon, at first blush it looks a bit racist to me.
You are correct. But just because some people do see ape-like features doesnt mean the artist intended them to be nor had any intention of being racist. IOW, those people could be wrong.
Are there any people of color in the Australian media watchdog group or is this just another group of white people deciding what people of color should and should not be offended by?
While I certainly don’t know the answer to the first question, I ask you also if you read the article? Because I see a logical explanation as to why they came to their conclusion and no suggestion of the latter possibility you mention.
I did read the article and as far as I can tell the media watchdog group basically decided it wasn’t racist because they didn’t think it was racist. If this group is going to unilaterally decided what is and isn’t racist I would love to know the racial make up of that particular group.
What “logical explanation” did you take away from the article?
My apologies, as I was specifically referring to the council’s adjucation, which was linked to in the original article, which you can find here. I find it perfectly reasonable and logical, both with what the newspaper said in response as well as the specific conclusion of the council. If you or anyone else doesn’t and wants to explain why, great. But I really have nothing else to add to how I feel about this.
And just because some people - such as the Australian Press Council - say it’s not racist, doesn’t mean it isn’t. IOW, those people could be wrong. And, in point of fact, there’s no basis to say that their opinion on the piece is any more or less correct than any other person’s. They aren’t an arbiter of objective meaning. Subjectively, I found their conclusion a joke. They didn’t address any of the elements that have been called out as racially problematic at all, and their investigation of the controversy doesn’t seem to have extended past, “Well, we asked the guy who drew it, and he says it wasn’t racist, so that settles it.”
The article from the Herald Sun is much more informative. Thanks for that. Sadly, the conclusion appears to remain the same: It’s not offensive because we don’t think it’s offensive.
I think Miller’s response above pretty much sums up my opinion on the subject. Just because an arbitrary group of people decide something isn’t offensive doesn’t mean a damn thing to the people who were the target of the offense.
And I hope you can understand why I would have problem with a group consisting of all white people sitting around deciding what is and what isn’t racist.
“Nonetheless, the Council acknowledges that some readers found the cartoon offensive.”
To you and Miller both, what more can the council do here? As we all ackowledge, this is subjective. And since it’s subjective, of course they can only tell you what they think.
I think the first and only thing that should be done is to tell the council to keep their opinions to themselves. Sure, people were upset by the caricature and lots of folks expressed their opinions on both sides of the issue. At least there was a discussion going on and people of color had an opportunity to say their peace. After the council issued their opinion, discussion over.
By issuing an official opinion on the subject they have given the racists absolution for their (social) crimes and all of the justification they need to do it again. IMHO they have all but ensured that the situation we are discussing is going to happen again under the guise of “the council said it was OK.”
If the council must review the situation and issue an opinion then they need to ensure that they are a diverse group of individuals that can represent the opinions of a wide range of people and backgrounds.
The council exists to give opinions. If they dont give opinions, why exist? If you want to say they shouldn’t exist, fine, but don’t criticize them for not being diverse when you yourself admit to not knowing their makeup. You are engaging in a theoretical here, and not basing this part of your argument on facts.
I don’t think the council should exist, and if you recall, my purpose for posting in this thread was to ask about the make up of the council so that I can better understand the type of people involved in expressing this opinion. I fail to understand how asking the question results in me engaging in the theoretical and not basing this part of my argument on facts. Isn’t asking the question the exact opposite of that?
If this happened in the US I would be very concerned that the council is made up entirely of white people who have no interest in the opinions of people of color. Since I’m not an Aussie and don’t know much about how things work there I figured I would ask The Dope for insight.
Can you honestly say that you don’t already have a pretty good idea in your head that the council is just a bunch of biased white people who dont give a damn if some blacks are offended? I am not saying you do. I have no idea. But that is certainly what your tone here suggests. But here’s an idea: find out for yourself who is on the council. But whomever they turn out to be, good luck in showing that they came to their conclusion because of bias or straight up racism, rather than an honest attempt to examine the facts and reach a conclusion based on them.
But more important, you nor Miller answered my question: what else was the council supposed to do here?
I don’t care what this council does. I’ve never heard of them before this thread got bumped. I don’t care about what they think on any particular subject, except to the extent that they’ve been presented here as some sort of authority on recognizing racist imagery. They aren’t, and their conclusions carry no water for me.
