Racist post on online vendor's FB page really bothers me

[diamondseeker2006]

While I appreciate what Dreamer has said and find it very enlightening, as one who rarely looks at political jokes, cartoons, etc., I totally missed "the point" that some of you saw. I guess I didn't "get" the "joke". Now I understand what you mean, but just because someone is politically conservative does NOT make them a racist!!! And to insinuate someone is a racist because they click like or post a political joke or cartoon like this is extremely irresponsible because they absolutely could have had the impression that dragonfly is trying to explain. You can dislike a president because of their politics and actions without bringing race into it.

 

[Circe]

That's terrifying. The way I look at it is, if someone chooses not to get insurance, and something happens to them, and they then cannot or do not pay the bills, that is thousands and thousands of dollars being detracted from doctors who are working to ensure the health of everyone. They can't work to their best potential if they are scrounging to make ends meet to keep things up and running.

Except, as a society, we can't apply this to children - they don't really have a lot of currency, and being born into an abusive or indigent household isn't exactly their fault. And as for the doctors ... well, that's why it's our collective responsibility to pay them, both for the selfish reason of keeping our next generation healthy and for the moral reason that American babies shouldn't be dying from asthma or infected teeth or other easily preventable causes.

And, just to consolidate ....

It frightens me even more that people who I deem intelligent and who say they are not racist, and don't support racism, are unable to look at this image without taking it in a racist context.....I suppose if it had been an image of Bush then that means it wouldn't be racist.

Dude, if it had been an image of Bush, the juxtaposition wouldn't have been employed, because there would be no coherent narrative. The only narrative that makes sense in comparing these two is, sadly, Deen's use of a word all too many people still apply to our president. Otherwise, a disgraced cook and the leader of the free world? Not really so comparable ....

I dunno. I guess I just make myself take a step back. I don't look at is as some racist white woman who said a racist word and is thus disgusting, vs. a black man who is "evil" (I have to at that interpretation). I look at it as a WOMAN who, yes, said a racist word... 20 years ago and a MAN who is doing a pretty deplorable job at his job. That is what it pointed out to me. That those are the things that happened and the media is more worried about the woman who said a racist word, than the man who is doing a deplorable job at running our country. I don't see why his race has to be injected at all. Nor her's. That is what is done by those who cannot see past the race. One is black and is running our country, and the other is white and said a racist remark decades ago. But most people can only see that he's black and she's white and racist. God forbid they just look at them as two people. Two human beings. Period.

I don't see Deen as disgusting, though I do see her as being unapologetic and kind of creepy (no, calling out your black employee to come forth and prove that some of your best friends are black - while referencing the darkness of his skin! - is not exculpatory). And I'm actually on the page of seeing the intent behind the phrasing as deliberate ... though I do also think it's cyclical and perhaps sadly immutable, because when my dad says similar things, it's all I can do not to bite little pieces off of my tongue as I hold back the desire to point out our surplus under Clinton, our ginormous near-immediate deficit under Bush, and our slow climb back to stability, with a bonus side of social justice under Obama. But, anyway, getting back to the point ... I don't use myself as the standard when I read social texts. Because I'm a weirdo who doesn't see things the same way a lot of the time. I use the median and the mean of popular opinion, and, wow, can that be bleak sometimes. Bleak ... and black ... and white.

P.S. - I also wonder what media sources the authors of the image was reading. I have yet to see anything about Deen in, say, "The Economist." Methinks they're saying more about their own reading matter than anything else.

ETA: Actually, wait, that's not the problem. From a rhetorical standpoint, it's that they're attempting to parallel a thing both sides acknowledge - she DID say nigger, apparently repeatedly, and in increasingly inappropriate circumstances, 'cause, dude ... children? - and a thing that's, a) subjective (aside from caving to the conservatives time and time again, I think Obama's not doing a bad job), and, b) pre-set to be weighted! It's the liberal media in both instances!

Now talk to me about the conservative media and their strange focus on exonerating the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Don Imus and, yes, Paula Deen when we could be talking about bettering the social welfare of, say, America's children.

 

[dragonfly411]

So now she is the poster child for the N word? I mean.... really?!

Please go read some of the rap artists' lyrics, then tell me who the poster children are.

Circe - I think your last point is really hitting the nail on the head, and points out a bit of the message behind the image. I know many don't agree with the message about the president, BUT the other part of the message is that this woman said something bad and is the MAIN HEADLINE of our news right now. There are so many more important things than whether Paula Deen said the N word.


P.S. To those of you who are SO critical. Please take time to evaluate yourselves, and your past. Make sure you are perfect, and have never made the mistake of saying offensive words.

I certainly can't say I'm innocent.

On that note, I have to get up at 5 AM. Night all.

 

[AGBF]

You can dislike a president because of their politics and actions without bringing race into it.

One can, indeed, dislike a president without bringing race into it. In this case the person who created this ad for the conservative publication very deliberately and very skillfully brought race "into it", however. It is a bit unfair to blame the victims of this disgusting piece of racism for disliking it and for pointing out that it is racist!

Deb

 

[Circe]

On that note, I have to get up at 5 AM. Night all.

Ugh, on the 4th? You have my sympathies. Sleep well, celebrate hard.

 

[AGBF]

So now she is the poster child for the N word? I mean.... really?!

I stand by that, dragonfly. She certainly didn't ask for this position, but ask anyone on the street what Paula Deen is on the news for, and you will hear the same answer.

Deb

 

[AGBF]

P.S. To those of you who are SO critical. Please take time to evaluate yourselves, and your past. Make sure you are perfect, and have never made the mistake of saying offensive words.

Those of us who are so critical of Paula Deen or those of us who are disagreeing with you over whether someone deliberately created a racist ad for political purposes? I am quite certain that a political strategist for a politician or political group with racist aspirations was hard at work creating that ad and that he pulled out all the stops with subliminal advertising. I haven't uttered a word of criticism of Paula Deen except in the context of how she was manipulated by the creator of the poster, though. She is a cook. I have not and don't plan on judging her. As I said earlier, I wouldn't have started to post about her at all- in the thread about her-if Jimmy Carter hadn't been mentioned there. He is someone about whom I can get excited, someone of stature.

Deb

 

[Rosebloom]

Well articulated and elucidatory, Dreamer!

 

[distracts]

Those of us who are so critical of Paula Deen or those of us who are disagreeing with you over whether someone deliberately created a racist ad for political purposes? I am quite certain that a political strategist for a politician or political group with racist aspirations was hard at work creating that ad and that he pulled out all the stops with subliminal advertising. I haven't uttered a word of criticism of Paula Deen except in the context of how she was manipulated by the creator of the poster, though. She is a cook. I have not and don't plan on judging her. As I said earlier, I wouldn't have started to post about her at all- in the thread about her-if Jimmy Carter hadn't been mentioned there. He is someone about whom I can get excited, someone of stature.

I have to add that, as someone who works on political campaigns, YES the racial implications of every political piece put out are thought through. I worked for a candidate who was of Bavarian ancestry, and everyone thought she was Hispanic because of her coloring (extra hilarious because her name was really effing German), and you can bet your butt that the opposing candidate darkened mine in pictures, sent out tons of things about how my candidate was "for illegal immigration" and "the welfare state" (cause don't you know those mexicans just want to take over and then suck good white people dry of their money), etc etc. You could tell who our opponent was mailing to because instead of having questions about the economy like everyone else, they had questions about illegal immigration. Heck OUR consultants came up with an attack ad (that the CM nixed, thankfully) about how our opponent was funded by a construction magnate, and you know what kinds of people work in construction (so the implication was that our opponent would have to be for illegal immigration since it keeps construction overheads higher and her funder could thus make more money to give to her). These things work because people don't think them through. They glance at them, form an impression (that has been carefully created to activate some existing cultural notion that works in predictable ways, such as racism), and then toss them, never to think of them again, but that split-second impact lasts and lasts.

 

[JewelFreak]

YES the racial implications of every political piece put out are thought through.

By professionals, yes, but not necessarily by any old schmuck on FB.

The point of the item is that PD said the N word 30 years ago & the media hammers her to a pulp, while the prez has done whatever the poster thinks he's done to "wreck the country" & gets a free pass from said media. The only underlying message is what viewers put there. This is what I mean by the prism of race; maybe I should have said the prism of racial resentment.

It is very clumsily done. He could have used, say, Allen West, who's been skinned alive by the media. Or the Black Panthers with clubs at the voting place, who were ignored by "reporters." Because many people see a white person next to a black one & can't think beyond that, when there is no indication racism is intended. Quite the opposite: this guy made the mistake of believing people would look at his political statement without resorting to the usual huff. I'm so tired of it!

Save anger for the real stuff. There's enough of that without inventing where it isn't meant.

--- Laurie

 

[diamondseeker2006]

YES the racial implications of every political piece put out are thought through.

By professionals, yes, but not necessarily by any old schmuck on FB.

The point of the item is that PD said the N word 30 years ago & the media hammers her to a pulp, while the prez has done whatever the poster thinks he's done to "wreck the country" & gets a free pass from said media. The only underlying message is what viewers put there. This is what I mean by the prism of race; maybe I should have said the prism of racial resentment.

It is very clumsily done. He could have used, say, Allen West, who's been skinned alive by the media. Or the Black Panthers with clubs at the voting place, who were ignored by "reporters." Because many people see a white person next to a black one & can't think beyond that, when there is no indication racism is intended. Quite the opposite: this guy made the mistake of believing people would look at his political statement without resorting to the usual huff. I'm so tired of it!

Save anger for the real stuff. There's enough of that without inventing where it isn't meant.

--- Laurie

Well said, Laurie. There are plenty of people who clicked "like" on that picture purely because they dislike the politics of the President and who did not stop to analyze what underlying message there might be. And to call everyone who clicked "like" a racist is absolutely offensive.

 

[Rhea]

I normally see things like this and pass them by. I'm really not concerned about them now I'm no longer living in the US and surrounded by them. I'm often appalled by the low-blows of American media and it bothers me for the reasons that Wink mentioned, but I normally just move on. We have enough in-fighting in politics in my adopted country that I can concern myself with.

I stuck around for this thread and am glad that I did. Thanks to, Circe, Dreamer, and Distracts I'm thinking about racism and the message that we are intended to get in a different way than I have before. And it actually started a really good conversation between DH and I about racism, both overt and the idea of modern racism; a phrase whcih I hadn't heard before. I'm not saying that we're perfect and have never offended anyone before, both purposely and accidentally, but it's really opened my eyes to how this is a racial motivated advert.

My British husband who has lived in England his entire life asked if PD was "the butter eating woman who used the n-word". She's made our news as well.

 

[Lula]

While I appreciate what Dreamer has said and find it very enlightening, as one who rarely looks at political jokes, cartoons, etc., I totally missed "the point" that some of you saw. I guess I didn't "get" the "joke". Now I understand what you mean, but just because someone is politically conservative does NOT make them a racist!!! And to insinuate someone is a racist because they click like or post a political joke or cartoon like this is extremely irresponsible because they absolutely could have had the impression that dragonfly is trying to explain. You can dislike a president because of their politics and actions without bringing race into it.

You are absolutely right, DS, it is indeed possible to criticize the president without bringing race into it. I voted for him -- twice-- and have been very disappointed with his policies in several areas; namely, his reaction to the financial crisis was tepid at best and his "solutions" largely favored the banks at the expense of the American people.

And I also agree with you that just because a person posts something on FB that may be perceived as racist by some people doesn't necessarily mean that the poster him or herself is racist. However, savvy internet use requires that we all do a little research on the source of whatever it is we're posting, because so much of what is on the web is of dubious origin. I actually designed an assignment for my undergraduate students that requires them to analyze websites' credibility, accuracy, etc. I was shocked to learn that the majority of them had no idea how to do even the most basic research about where the information on a website comes from, who supports/pays for the website, and who monitors it.

Had this vendor done even a little research into the source of the photo, he/she would have found that it is connected to this guy http://www.isthatbaloney.com/about-baloney/ (who equates Obama with Hitler) and who has a lot of experience in -- wait for it -- marketing. The website's founder indeed understands the power of words -- he says so, and the power of manipulation -- he says so.

So while I agree with you that this vendor may not be racist, he/she is certainly risking giving off that impression by posting stuff that many people may perceive as racist. And, I might add, if you have an open FB page (no privacy settings) and have 500+ friends, not all of whom share your conservative beliefs, and some of whom may be current or potential customers, you really need to rethink that strategy and talk to your IT or web design staff about how to manage your online image.

ETA: Conservative News, where the photo was posted, is the Facebook arm of isthatbaloney.com https://www.facebook.com/theconservative.news

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, I appreciate your last reply, Lula. I agree that it would be great if we all took the time to research all the sources behind all these things posted on FB, but honestly, I'll bet few people do. I don't do political things at ALL on FB, but I am sure I have clicked "like" on things that I did not really research the source. People see things on a friend's page and click "like"all the time in a split second without really analyzing it. I'll rethink clicking "like" on anything other than jewelry from now on! But I agree that personal facebook pages need to be for people who really know us and who wouldn't possibly misinterpret our intent.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

There is another aspect to this thread that only Lula has addressed. How many of you can't see the racism because one of your favorite vendors is involved?. Instead of writing about people you don't know, here is a case where you do know the person and can take action to stop the perpetration of racism by not supporting this vendor.

This vendor is so anti- abortion that he put a fetus on view on his website. Thats a man asking for trouble, considering the business he is in. Of course he is free to put up what he wants to, but, I would never deal with this man. Yes, he is a conservative, and having a conservative political view brings many questions about how he feels about other issues. He's quite in your face about it. For those of you who champion him, I think its time for another look. I'm with Lula

This is real life- not just comments on a news articles.


Annette

 

[kenny]

Four pages later ... So, which vendor is it?

I'm not on FB.

 

[monarch64]

Hi,

There is another aspect to this thread that only Lula has addressed. How many of you can't see the racism because one of your favorite vendors is involved?. Instead of writing about people you don't know, here is a case where you do know the person and can take action to stop the perpetration of racism by not supporting this vendor.

This vendor is so anti- abortion that he put a fetus on view on his website. Thats a man asking for trouble, considering the business he is in. Of course he is free to put up what he wants to, but, I would never deal with this man. Yes, he is a conservative, and having a conservative political view brings many questions about how he feels about other issues. He's quite in your face about it. For those of you who champion him, I think its time for another look. I'm with Lula

This is real life- not just comments on a news articles.


Annette

Yes. I started a thread last year about that very photo you're referring to, and opened a discussion about what people thought about vendors who used their social media pages to advertise their political and social agendas. At this point, I can say that maybe it's a good thing some vendors are so open about their stances on issues, so I know who I want to avoid dealing with.

I, too, took the photo in question on this particular thread at what I assumed was face value at first. After reading all the responses and really thinking about it, I "get it." I'm thankful for this discussion. And for freedom of speech, so that we CAN have a discussion.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

A vendor's personal page is their personal page and they have freedom of speech just like anyone else here. I think it is wise for those who do not agree with someone's political or religious views to simply remove themselves from the page if they are so offended. I am glad I have friends with various political and religious viewpoints and I can be tolerant and respectful of them and call them friends and they do the same with me.

 

[rosetta]

I am most heartened by the people who have taken the time to look at the picture again, and have re-examined their previous reactions. It speaks volumes of a person who is willing to question their established views. Overt racism in the form of hate groups, although nasty, is thankfully rare. But we still have a long way to go before we have eliminate systemic, covert racism which is so much harder to detect. This is the sort of insidious prejudice I will continue to check myself on, because it is very easy to fall into the same trap ourselves.

 

[kenny]

A vendor's personal page is their personal page and they have freedom of speech just like anyone else here. I think it is wise for those who do not agree with someone's political or religious views to simply remove themselves from the page if they are so offended. I am glad I have friends with various political and religious viewpoints and I can be tolerant and respectful of them and call them friends and they do the same with me.

Yes, vendors have freedom of speech, but customers have freedom of spend.

 

[rosetta]

Four pages later ... So, which vendor is it?

I'm not on FB.

I would really like to know too, please.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Hi,

There is another aspect to this thread that only Lula has addressed. How many of you can't see the racism because one of your favorite vendors is involved?. Instead of writing about people you don't know, here is a case where you do know the person and can take action to stop the perpetration of racism by not supporting this vendor.

This vendor is so anti- abortion that he put a fetus on view on his website. Thats a man asking for trouble, considering the business he is in. Of course he is free to put up what he wants to, but, I would never deal with this man. Yes, he is a conservative, and having a conservative political view brings many questions about how he feels about other issues. He's quite in your face about it. For those of you who champion him, I think its time for another look. I'm with Lula

This is real life- not just comments on a news articles.


Annette

Annette, did you see many people (including me) here admit that they did not see anything racist about that picture until others pointed out a possible covert meaning? Do you personally know the vendor and his or her personal views enough to say whether they were clicking "like" for political reasons or for racial reasons? Did you ask them before posting what you did? If not, to accuse someone of being a racist, who is not, in print in a public forum is libel, isn't it?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

A vendor's personal page is their personal page and they have freedom of speech just like anyone else here. I think it is wise for those who do not agree with someone's political or religious views to simply remove themselves from the page if they are so offended. I am glad I have friends with various political and religious viewpoints and I can be tolerant and respectful of them and call them friends and they do the same with me.

Yes, vendors have freedom of speech, but customers have freedom of spend.

Kenny, so you approve of calling someone a racist when they absolutely are not? You'd change your buying preferences based on a lie?

 

[kenny]

A vendor's personal page is their personal page and they have freedom of speech just like anyone else here. I think it is wise for those who do not agree with someone's political or religious views to simply remove themselves from the page if they are so offended. I am glad I have friends with various political and religious viewpoints and I can be tolerant and respectful of them and call them friends and they do the same with me.

Yes, vendors have freedom of speech, but customers have freedom of spend.

Kenny, so you approve of calling someone a racist when they absolutely are not? You'd change your buying preferences based on a lie?

Whoa!
I'm not flying anywhere near that fly-paper.

Each person will evaluate what a vendor posted, what they feel it means, how it matches their own views, and whether to boycott the business because of it.

Where you draw a line and where I draw the line, and where the other 7 billion on the earth draws the line is not relevant since people vary.

A rose is always a rose regardless of who is looking at it, but things like that image with Obama and Deen are not just one thing.
What it is and what it means varies with the viewer.
Even then, a viewer like myself understands there is not ONE single meaning.
IOW, I dont' put so much weight on my opinion.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Kenny, yes, we all make evaluations. But I know I would want to be judged by the truth and not lies. Wouldn't you?

 

[kenny]

Kenny, yes, we all make evaluations. But I know I would want to be judged by the truth and not lies. Wouldn't you?

That image of Dean and Obama is not a rose.
It involves, rather may involve, politics and race.
Views on these subjects are all over the map.
One person's truth is another's lie.

Two people will look at that image and see different things.
The majority of people see their interpretation as the truth.

I try to not fall into that trap when looking at non-roses.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Kenny, yes, we all make evaluations. But I know I would want to be judged by the truth and not lies. Wouldn't you?

That image of Dean and Obama is not a rose.
It involves, rather may involve, politics and race.
Views on these subjects are all over the map.
One person's truth is another's lie.

Two people will look at that image and see different things.
If they are regular people they will each be sure that their interpretation is the truth.

I try to not fall into that trap when looking at non-roses.

I try not to fall into that trap, either. Because the truth is everything to me and I will simply go ask if it is important to me to know if someone dislikes the president because of race (or any other thing). Unless you know the person, you cannot make assumptions without asking. The picture was political in nature.

 

[JewelFreak]

Obviously the vendor feels strongly enough about his views that he's willing to have some potential customers go down the virtual street. Since I'm not on FB, I don't know if he's one of my favorites or not. However, if this is his own social page & not his business page, he's as free to say what he thinks as anyone else. If you don't like it to the extent of passing on his stones, you're free to do that.

I'm not attracted to attributing hidden motives to somebody whose identity I don't know & whose actions IRL mean a lot more than a dumb posting on FB.

--- Laurie

 

[Lula]

DS, I am not in any way insinuating that the vendor is racist, only that I perceived the photo that the vendor "liked" to be racist. There is a big difference. The photo offended me because I viewed it as racist. Obviously, many people on this thread do not see the racism. And that is okay. I'm talking about my discomfort here. The vendor's page made me feel uncomfortable.

As you mention, it is the vendor's "personal" page, but the vendor has over 700 friends and followers, many of whom are obviously business-related friends and followers, like me. I was not this vendor's "friend" during the abortion dust-up.

I believe the vendor is foolish to mix business and friendship/family on Facebook, but that's just my opinion. The vendor's personal page is completely open (no privacy settings at all), and I was shocked to see that this vendor is a member of many (far) right-wing causes. I was shocked and saddened, as I mentioned earlier, because this was someone I respected. I no longer respect this vendor. Because you see, I, too, have friends on "both sides of the aisle," but I avoid people who are on what I consider the "fringes" of either side -- both liberal and conservative -- because they tend to be zealots, and motivated by emotion rather than reason. That's how I see this vendor. It has nothing to do with whether or not this vendor is or is not racist him/herself; it has everything to do with the vendor posting material that I find offensive. Not just this particular photo, but lots of other material that I believe simply inflames people's emotions and makes it impossible to find middle ground.

I can make the same argument, leaving aside what I believe is the racist nature of the photo, and just speak to the political message in the photo. It's inflammatory political rhetoric, and I want less of that in my life, not more.

I have purposely not named the vendor because I was hoping we could have a civil discussion about what this photo depicts (or doesn't depict) without the thread turning into a discussion about the particular vendor in question. If others want to name the vendor, that's their choice.

 

[kenny]

DS, I am not in any way insinuating that the vendor is racist, only that I perceived the photo that the vendor "liked" to be racist. There is a big difference. The photo offended me because I viewed it as racist. Obviously, many people on this thread do not see the racism. And that is okay. I'm talking about my discomfort here. The vendor's page made me feel uncomfortable.

As you mention, it is the vendor's "personal" page, but the vendor has over 700 friends and followers, many of whom are obviously business-related friends and followers, like me. I was not this vendor's "friend" during the abortion dust-up.

I believe the vendor is foolish to mix business and friendship/family on Facebook, but that's just my opinion. The vendor's personal page is completely open (no privacy settings at all), and I was shocked to see that this vendor is a member of many (far) right-wing causes. I was shocked and saddened, as I mentioned earlier, because this was someone I respected. I no longer respect this vendor. Because you see, I, too, have friends on "both sides of the aisle," but I avoid people who are on what I consider the "fringes" of either side -- both liberal and conservative -- because they tend to be zealots, and motivated by emotion rather than reason. That's how I see this vendor. It has nothing to do with whether or not this vendor is or is not racist him/herself; it has everything to do with the vendor posting material that I find offensive. Not just this particular photo, but lots of other material that I believe simply inflames people's emotions and makes it impossible to find middle ground.

I can make the same argument, leaving aside what I believe is the racist nature of the photo, and just speak to the political message in the photo. It's inflammatory political rhetoric, and I want less of that in my life, not more.

I have purposely not named the vendor because I was hoping we could have a civil discussion about what this photo depicts (or doesn't depict) without the thread turning into a discussion about the particular vendor in question. If others want to name the vendor, that's their choice.

Lula, which vendor is it?
You are not hurting or insulting the vendor by answering, because he/she has already made public his/her views.
In fact you are helping this person spread his/her views, which is clearly what this person wants.
Plus, (s)he clearly fells that publishing controversial views gets them more customers than they lose.