Psst. I didn’t miss the explanation. Unless it was Wee Bairn there with him in Florence, how do we know that they approached him because he was black?
At least we know that in the future, pizzabrat won’t fulfill a stereotype of a blackman, he’ll buck convention by snitchin’.
:rolleyes:
pizzabrat Well I don’t know how those natives in Florence dress. I’m assuming that if it’s the same as the rest of Italy, that it’s probably quite similar to how I would see people dressed here in New York being as a lot of people here are into Italian designers and all. Most of my suits were made in Italy, so would I be dressed ‘like an American’ if I wore them? What precisely distinguished you? Were you wearing an Hermes belt or Prada shoes or something? You seem awfully certain that they approached you because you were black. Do you have any indication that this was the reason other than you were approached. I am not black and I have been approached to buy pot many times. I’m just trying to get a better sense of it. Don’t be shy, I’m gonna take you at your word, if you have any other evidence that tells you this was the case.
I’ve been approached, too (skinny white female here). I have approached both black and white people for a dope hook-up, but never based on race. I go for the general look, which, while not a definite tell, is certainly an indicator. I’d never hit up a guy in a suit (though I know many who smoke pot), but if I see someone dressed in urban chic garb standing around outside a concert venue, my chances of scoring are probably pretty good.
I did - I made it clear that I never said I was “awfully certain” - that’s your deal to make me seem like I’m some paranoid, race-obsessed black. I said “It’s possible that that wasn’t the reason, but it’s also a reasonable assumption [that it was, considering what Wee Barin said that prompted my sharing it in the first place]”. Read.
Keep the faith. If you keep believing, really, really hard, maybe it’ll come true some day. Until then, my years in radio, television and newspapers tell me that when you hear, see or read the same message over and over and over and over, you begin to believe it. Like the message that music and video games have no effect whatsoever on the popular culture. Keep repeating it over and over and over and people will keep believing it, whether it’s true or not.
Oh, yeah, the studies. Who conducts those studies? Might be worthwhile to put in some scholarship time and find that out. Sorry, there aren’t any easy hotlinks to cite – us lazy thinking people gotta’ go to a major library to find that.
Like the message that degenerate entertainment media doesn’t contribute to a degenerate populace. I get why the Hollywood would push so hard for such a message, but don’t get why normal citizens are so compliant in helping them absolve their responsibility (other than the idea that people just don’t want to admit that the stuff that their into is socially destructive).
I’m not entirely certain what tack you’re taking, but I think I understand. Let me just clarify a point: A very large part of my job is to broadcast what we call “action messages.” That’s a message that says, “Buy something you otherwise wouldn’t buy.” People pay me a very good salary to write ad copy that makes shopping in stores sound like a great idea. I’m good at it. Our clients are very happy.
Does this mean that I have magical control over people’s minds? Of course not. But stop and think about the last Home Depot TV ad you saw (I work in radio now, but I know TV advertising pretty well.) Do you see how much fun the people are having? Don’t you want to have that much fun? Do you want your home to look like the homes in those ads? Of course you do. Then go to Home Depot, talk to their experts and soon, with a little fun effort, you home will look like that, too!
Sounds harmless enough. Remember, the message is repeated over and over again to create what we call “top of mind” awareness.
Now imagine an image of a tough, independent, defiant young man with his hat on askance. Look, the man is very wealthy, he’s selling drugs and the gorgeous women in almost no clothing are just crawling all over him. Doesn’t he look like he’s having fun? See how he eliminates people he doesn’t like, like cops and other people, just by using his gun? Look how big his gun is. Look how powerful and independent and wealthy the man is. You want to be like that, don’t you? Play that image over and over and over, and it creates top of mind awareness.
A message is a message. Repetition is repetition. Messages played repetitively have an effect. The “reflection” of that effect is the front page of the local newspaper after some kid decides he wants to be like the powerful man in the images he’s seen and heard countless times.
One other thing, reverting back to my original point about rock’n’roll music: I teach mass communications at the local college, and one of the points we make when teaching masscom is the huge impact rock music had on society – and continues to make. We don’t teach that music “relfects” society, but that it shapes it. Because it does.
If you mean do they get those ideas all by themselves, I suppose that, being a human being, a kid from the ghetto is as susceptible to role models as we all are. I’m not saying the media images alone are to blame, only that they reinforce. And they do reinforce. If they didn’t, I’d be doing other people’s taxes for a living.
Sorry, I’m just not letting the “media” off the hook on this one. And I’m part of it. It’s heresy for me to say it, but we are not blameless. We need to stop copping out and understand that some of those very lucrative images we put out are harmful. (Actually, we do understand – we just don’t give a shit.)
To me, that is the very definition of damnation via faint praise.
Is loyalty to a person/cause/ethnic group justification for bad behavior? That seems to me to be what the OP is asking. If I had a loyal friend who was a kidnapper and torturer, I would seriously question my value system.
I think you are misinterpreting the the real world application of the “no snitching” rule. Nobody, even those in poor inner-city communities, would really castigate someone for turning in a serial killer (Cam’ron’s comments aside). It just doesn’t work that way. There are plenty of crimes that people would not hesitate to inform police about. The big exception being gang/drug related crimes like assault or murder. Most people in the inner-city see these things as something akin to “job hazards”. Especially since the reality is that many of the people who are victims of such crimes have put themselves in the line of fire in some way. Not to say they deserve it, but most people (even drug dealers) don’t kill random people. In those rare cases where “innocent” people are injured, I doubt they have too many problems finding witnesses, or exacting street justice.
The “no snitching” rule mostly applies to people turning others in to lighten their sentences. Just like the Italian mob hates rats. Now, the culture of silence is stronger in poor/minority communities because the people don’t trust cops, they fear retribution, and because the black market represents a sizable percentage of the economy. Disrupting that hurts everyone. However, it should be noted that the “no snitching” rule is something most in society follow to some extent. Do you really think Enron could have happened without the complicitity of scores of people, all who could have alerted the gov’t at some point to the irregularities? Why didn’t they tell the SEC that the books were cooked? Because the “snitch” usually gets screwed. Why doesn’t Colin Powell talk about what lead to the debacle at the UN? Why don’t the CEOs of companies talk all the dangerous products they knowingly put on the market? Self preservation ususally trumps “doing the right thing”, especially when we consider the growing responsibilities and duties we take on as we age. Few would risk turning in a bad guy if it meant risking the pension, reputation, safety, and ability to provide for your family. Poor people have even less margin for error, and and stronger disincentives to not put their neck out.
For all of you decrying this “no snitching” notion on an idealistic basis, how can you defend not turning everyone in for any crime? If the law is to be respected, then why not turn in the prostitute on the corner, or the guy selling weed?
