KFC possibly racist advert

[therealshell]

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,26562441-952,00.html

[garyrulez]

I heard about this and my only thought would be POSSIBLY racist? I would have to think hard about how you could get more racist!

[therealshell]

Okay, not possibly, but definitely.

[Philip]

This must be all to do with seeing the ad in an American context. To me, although dull and not particularly creative, the ad isn't racist at all.

[Lacey]

Frankly I'm not sure you can put a black person in a commercial about fried chicken anymore without someone thinking it's racist (eyeroll)

[just blame craig]

Is it racist to use stereotypes? If your answer is yes, then that ad is racist.

What if it was a stereotype with a good connotation, is it still racist?

I just feel racist is a word that gets overused. It groups everyone of that race into your hate. Prejudice is the word that more often fits (at least in my mind). It allows all races to be in the group you hate. I think the media use key words to elicit stong responces in order to grab ratings. Racism and racist are such words.

I don't mean to take away from the severity of truely despicable racist acts. I just think (and maybe it's all just hope) there are not that many racists in the world. But I do think the world is full of prejudice.

[PolyesterAngel]

This must be all to do with seeing the ad in an American context. To me, although dull and not particularly creative, the ad isn't racist at all.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

[Lacey]

It's only racist if you think "black people eat fried chicken!" is a stereotype, which I guess it is in the US. Black people do eat fried chicken, and many southern (black) cooks pride themselves on their fried chicken. It's a staple of southern cooking. Lots and lots of white people eat/cook fried chicken too. And Asian people. And everyone else. So uh, yeah.

If it was reversed, and it was one black person handing out chicken to lots of white people, people would call that racist too, because omg black people cook fried chicken! What if it was a black guy handing it out to black people? no white people at all? Would that still be "omg black people and friend chicken!"?

Yeah there's really no way to win in the US with black people and fried chicken, apparently. Also, I'm bored at work.

[garyrulez]

Well, for me, it was more the vibe that he was trying to pacify the people (who happened to be black) with the fried chicken- that's where the creepiness was for me.

[kinch]

Is it racist to use stereotypes? If your answer is yes, then that ad is racist.

What if it was a stereotype with a good connotation, is it still racist?


Stereotypes are racism, good or bad. Prejudice and discrimination both fit under the same umbrella of racism.

Prejudice is about making prejudgements about people. This can be done by a landlord who will only rent to older tenants because they are quieter. He/she automatically makes the assumption that younger tenants are noisy and older tenants are quiet. When the landlord acts on these prejudices it becomes discrimination, with the younger tenants getting the short side of the stick.

So this advertisement is racist because it uses stereotypes as a way of reinforcing prejudice. It certainly isn't the most hurtful kind of racism, but we shouldn't be afraid to call it out.

And yes, even "positive" stereotypes are racist. "Positive" is subjective. Stereotypes puts people into molds that are hard to escape from. "The role of women" comes to mind. Some say that women are "very good caretakers, cooks and housekeepers." - A sexist stereotype. This makes it very difficult for women to escape from these roles, for men to overtake them or for their to be a sharing of those responsibilities. While the stereotype seems very positive, it has negative implications.

[garyrulez]

Stereotypes are racism, good or bad.

Absolutely false- you could stereotype someone who is tall at being good at changing lightbulbs; you could stereotype someone who has a wide ass as being a potentially good running back; you could stereotype someone who dances well at being good in bed.

None of those things has anything to do with race, and they are all stereotypes.

I also totally disagree with you that all stereotypes are bad. Let's say you see someone drop on the sidewalk clutching his heart. You look up and see two people. One is a guy talking to a telephone pole eating a pile of dog doo off the street. The other is a woman wearing medical scrubs with a pager attached to them. You will stereotype that woman as more likely to be able to help this man having the potential heart attack.

The fact that you've used stereotypes in this case is a very good thing.

[kinch]

Absolutely false- you could stereotype someone who is tall at being good at changing lightbulbs; you could stereotype someone who has a wide ass as being a potentially good running back; you could stereotype someone who dances well at being good in bed.

None of those things has anything to do with race, and they are all stereotypes.


You are taking my words out of context. Stereotypes that involve race are racist. Racism is simply the belief that the race you are born with will require you to develop certain traits.

[garyrulez]

I appreciate the clarification, but I didn't take your words out of context- you never specifically said you were referring to racist stereotypes, and you used two examples (the young vs. old renters and the "traditional female roles") that had nothing to do with race.

[kinch]

I also totally disagree with you that all stereotypes are bad. Let's say you see someone drop on the sidewalk clutching his heart. You look up and see two people. One is a guy talking to a telephone pole eating a pile of dog doo off the street. The other is a woman wearing medical scrubs with a pager attached to them. You will stereotype that woman as more likely to be able to help this man having the potential heart attack.

The fact that you've used stereotypes in this case is a very good thing.

That's kind of stretching the concept of stereotyping a tad bit too muich. Grasping at straws?

Stereotypes are simplified conceptions of groups. Someone in a nurses or doctors uniform, you can safely assume is a nurse or doctor. If that assumption is correct, then you know that she has years of specialized medical training. As far as I know, there isn't another group of people walking around in medical scrubs, except maybe at Halloween.

If I was in that situation I'd first of all run over to the man/women clutching his/her heart. Cause attention so that any passerby's with more knowledge than me could take over, and call 911. I would not simply run up to women in scrubs and say "You've got to help this man."

[kinch]

I appreciate the clarification, but I didn't take your words out of context- you never specifically said you were referring to racist stereotypes, and you used two examples (the young vs. old renters and the "traditional female roles") that had nothing to do with race.

Context, as in what other people were talking about.

I then listed two other examples of prejudice and possible discrimination in order to demonstrate the concepts. Not everyone gets a first-hand experience of being on the negative side of racism, so I brought up two other factors that are universal (age and sex.)

[Amicustoall]

This discussion just reinforces in me that sometimes people see what they want to see, and that we as a society often create our own problems. Terms are bandied about without much real thought as to their applicability.
I have to have this discussion with people all the time. The use in our society of the word "discrimination" has come to be an automatic negative. That is not accurate but has created a feeling in many people that everything that is discriminatory is wrong and/or actionable.
This is Main Entry: dis·crim·i·na·tion
Pronunciation: \dis-ˌkri-mə-ˈnā-shən\
Function: noun
Date: 1648

1 a : the act of discriminating b : the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently
2 : the quality or power of finely distinguishing just foolish.
I mean every time you make a decision you are discriminating..........for example, when I decide to go to Burger King for lunch, I am discriminating against all other places that sell food. When I hire my secretary I am discriminating against all other applicants. When I go see movie "a" I am discriminating against all other that are available. Have I done anything wrong in those situations? Hell no. I am making decisions.
Do I realize that improper discrimination occurs? Yes, but to me it is really "cheapened" by the constant barrage of that is discriminatory.
I think the same is true of "stereotype." It is automatically assumed to be a negative. But I don't think that is accurate either. If I stereotype all graduates from Harvard Med School as competent is that a negative?

[garyrulez]

That's kind of stretching the concept of stereotyping a tad bit too muich. Grasping at straws?

Wow...holy condescending. Anyhoo...

Let me throw this one at you:

Don't advertisers stereotype? Golf magazines have ads for high end cars and financial services. Shows on Lifetime and E! have ads for feminine hygeine products. This isn't bad- it's just economically sensible to stereotype the readers/viewers of those things.

[just blame craig]

Stereotypes are racism, good or bad. Prejudice and discrimination both fit under the same umbrella of racism.
...
And yes, even "positive" stereotypes are racist. "Positive" is subjective. Stereotypes puts people into molds that are hard to escape from. "The role of women" comes to mind. Some say that women are "very good caretakers, cooks and housekeepers." - A sexist stereotype. This makes it very difficult for women to escape from these roles, for men to overtake them or for their to be a sharing of those responsibilities. While the stereotype seems very positive, it has negative implications.

That is a very good point you make about negative implications of a positive stereotype. And any intelligent person also knows there are exceptions to the stereotypes. I think everyone here understands that. We seem to be a smart and compassionate group.

Google English dictionary defines:" Racism is the belief that people of some races are inferior to others, and the behaviour which is the result of this belief."

This is why I didn't consider the positive ones so racist. But you made an excellent point about the unintended implications and that's something I will think about.

I do disagree about prejudice and discrimination being under the umbrella of racism. I feel it is the other way around. Prejudice is the umbrella that covers racism, sexism, ageism and so on. All racism is prejudice but not all prejudice is racism. (EXAMPLE) I could be prejudice about people that wear their pants baggy and below their butt but it's not racism, it's prejudice. It wouldn't matter what race they were. (THAT WAS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT COULD BE, don't get all crazy on me) And my point was that the media uses the term racism to mean prejudice every chance it gets in order to attract attention.

I think we're splitting hairs here. Our thoughts on this topic seem to be along the same lines (That racism is not a good thing). I just prefer

[garyrulez]

Craig hates people who wear baggy pants.

[just blame craig]

Craig hates people who wear baggy pants.

FLAGGED!

I had decide between Flagged or I hate...your face. Sorry I dicriminated against your face Gary.

[garyrulez]

Racist....

[Amicustoall]

Damned computer, let gary beat me to that one.

[garyrulez]

Kinch, you would have thrown up at this:

One of the (female) assistants in my office just walked over to a couple of the other (female) assistants and said "hey girls, there's a couple of really good girlie movies coming out this weekend!"

[therealshell]

I was in my twenties before I saw a filmed version of a "girlie" magazine.

[garyrulez]

Yeah, I'm not sure that's the kind of girlie she was talking about...I think she was more in the Kate Hudson/romcom frame of mind.

[Lacey]

ugh, those movies are annoying. still better than saying, "hey, this dress DOES make my boobs look big!" like one of my stupid coworkers did today in the restroom, when she knew the CEO was standing 3 feet away from the door in the hallway.

(that really had nothing to do with this thread but it was a funny story so there you go)

[garyrulez]

I like that story...total coincidence that the CEO was standing there, right? I'm assuming he's male, because he's a CEO, by the way.

[Lacey]

your stereotype was correct!

and if you were going to stereotype my coworker as a dumb blonde, you'd also be correct!

[just blame craig]

I like that story...total coincidence that the CEO was standing there, right? I'm assuming he's male, because he's a CEO, by the way.

SEXIST!

this post was too short so I will reword

Gary, You SEXIST!

[garyrulez]

See? Stereotyping made me correct! A rare occurrence indeed.

[sarah11918]

I'll be the downer and go back to being serious for a moment.

I really, really recommend reading the blog of the "Angry Black Woman." (I'm pretty sure it was a Ships and Dipper who tweeted about it and turned me on to it.) I find her stuff really insightful, and not in the "everything's racist/sexist and you all suck" kind of way. Being a woman, I have a tiny glimpse into -isms that we take for granted as normal behaviour just because it's been ingrained in us, but being white I know I miss out on a LOT of stuff that others have to live with every day.

I tend to side with kinch on this one - there's a crap load of -ist assumptions that we all make and have internalized (over generations), and I personally think it's more productive to recognize that (both that it exists and that it's ingrained in our society - not necessarily conscious actions) than to defend some behaviour as not really racist/prejudiced because we didn't intend for it to be or because if you call "x" racist than you have to call "y" and "z" racist too, and it'll go on forever.

I think most of us (in society) and all of us (here) are well-intentioned, and while I don't think white males, or any group, has it made, I have learned from the shared experiences of others that being white is often a very different experience from not being white. I couldn't possibly do those experiences justice, but some of ABW's blog posts (even about characters on tv shows) was pretty interesting to me and has started to change the way I look at things.

It's not something to feel guilt over, but I do think it's something of which we need to be cognizant. Neither racism nor prejudice need intent to function, and in fact, it's the stuff that happens without our conscious participation that is the hardest to recognize and overcome, often because we don't believe it exists.

[Sean]

Thank god i live in the UK. After watching this i think it is pretty pathetic people are calling it racist, everyone is looking too deep into it.

I think it is just the differences in humour between USA, Aus and UK

I personally dont see it as any different to this advert (below) which was shown in england this year before the ashes. It shows Australian 'Stereotypes' but nobody complained... well not in the UK or Australia anyway!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GGdpBKUJI8

Just a bit of fun (which afterall is the West Indian attitude to its cricket)


Now maybe people in the media should start focusing on real news! :)

Rant over:p

[garyrulez]

I think it's interesting that most of our overseas (and even Canadian) friends don't see this as anything but harmless fun.

I guess I'm in the middle. I DO find this ad racist, but I definitely can't go as far as Kinch and Sarah.

[DaWezl]

I tend to side with kinch on this one - there's a crap load of -ist assumptions that we all make and have internalized (over generations), and I personally think it's more productive to recognize that (both that it exists and that it's ingrained in our society - not necessarily conscious actions) than to defend some behaviour as not really racist/prejudiced because we didn't intend for it to be or because if you call "x" racist than you have to call "y" and "z" racist too, and it'll go on forever.

Well said. One thing my husband discusses each year with his class is about the fact that as an artist, once you put your work out into the world, you have no control over how others perceive it. It doesn't matter if *your* intention was noble and pure--if others interpret it to be prejudiced, racist, or otherwise demaning and take offense, their reactions are just as valid as your initial motivations.

It's part of the intricate give and take between creators and their audience. In a positive sense, sometimes an audience brings a whole new level of understanding to a piece of work. The creator is so close to the work that they can't see it for themselves, but someone with just a little more distance is able to perceive it. Many of our most profoundly admired artworks have endured because they can be interpreted in so many different ways. Unfortunately, many creations fail to connect, or, as in this case, actually offend audiences.

Even if the offended party holds a view that you consider to be "crackpot"--for example, people who get offended by fantasy stories because they feel it encourages drug use, a view that the majority of people would feel is a tenuous connection at best--it doesn't mean that their view is invalid. A creator does not have to react to every single negative reaction that their audience experiences, but they should appreciate that those views are just as real to those audience members as the positive ones are to others.

Having finally seen the commercial in question, as well as explanations of the cultural milieu that it was meant to be aired in (i.e. during the frenzy of a very specific cricket match), I still think there were some fairly insulting--if not intentionally racist, per se--elements to the commercial. The "too easy" line, even outside of a racist fried chicken connotation, is clearly meant to be demeaning to the "others" in the commercial, regardless of who the "others" happened to be. The fact that in this case the "others" are West Indian may add race into the interpretation, but it still would be a nasty comment, even if the "others" just happened to be a different Australian team. As to the overall appropriateness, I think that anytime a company chooses to promote their project with negative methods, there's a very real risk of a public backlash. It's very similar to the recent articles about companies that rely on sex in their advertisements (http://www.ditchwalk.com/2009/12/28/sex-tells/). If you're choosing to be snarky in your message, you're not confident that you can sell the product on it's merits alone. They could have easily used the same scenario--lone fan making friends with the other team's fans through KFC--in a much more positive manner, but they chose the direct insult.

[Ellen from Saint Louis]

It does sterotype rowdy cricket fans as being easily distracted by fried chicken.

[Philip]

It does sterotype rowdy cricket fans as being easily distracted by fried chicken.

With a cricket test match lasting up to 5 days, and where the great excitement occurs only in the last five minutes, anything can be an easy distraction.

[Sean]

especially turning empty beer cups into towers:D

[therealshell]

The whole "racist" thing reminded me of a sick parody advert in the old National Lampoon. It was for "Kentucky Fried" ....I won't go there, but the word started with a "c".

[sarah11918]

If you're choosing to be snarky in your message, you're not confident that you can sell the product on it's merits alone. They could have easily used the same scenario--lone fan making friends with the other team's fans through KFC--in a much more positive manner, but they chose the direct insult.

I agree. Maybe a public ad for mass viewing isn't the best place for things like questionable humour, negative stereotypes etc. I'm not saying everything has to be portrayed in happy fun land, but look at the top reviewed commercials from 2009 - the Amex one with all the frownie faces in every day objects that turns to happy faces (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m56F4EKN9hg) and the Toyota Prius commercials with the people as flowers and grass and the catchy tune (she recorded all the parts herself - one woman a cappella). There's still a place for "happy" in advertising, and when done artistically, it's quite successful.

[garyrulez]

You want to see a great food commercial: the new Domino's pizza commercial is 30 seconds of actual footage of people talking about how much Domino's pizza sucks ("this crust tastes like cardboard"), followed by a very sincere message as to how they changed their recipe.

It's everything most commercials aren't: honest, straightforward, directly to the point. I don't know how they pulled it off.

Now don't get me started on Taco Bell's fucking diet commercials...holy crap.

[garyrulez]

Speaking of racist, what do you guys think about this:

In a book published this past week, Bill Clinton is quoted as saying during the presidential campaign that "a few years ago, this guy (President Obama) would have been getting us coffee."

In the same book, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is quoted to say that Obama had a good chance to win, due in part to the fact that he doesn't have a "Negro dialect unless he wants one."

[therealshell]

Harry Reid is a lightweight.

[caycay]

Harry Reid is a lightweight.


No worries. The Reverend Al Sharpton forgave him today.

[garyrulez]

Phew...but, interestingly, Reverend Al DIDN'T forgive Bill Clinton.