Danny Baker is trending. He isnt a rapist. He isnt dead. He's ....

[David]

8 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

He said something racist, and, being a figure in the public eye, this would've been seen by many. Being somebody in a position of privilege, he should've held to his responsibility of not saying racist things.

I don't think we should look at things as black and white, so to speak. There should be some element of common sense and savvy applied, no?

For example, if we're talking about racism in the strictest sense surely this Tweet could have been taken as offensive?

A certain element of those online did complain, but is the comedian in question a racist? I doubt it, he's made what many would consider an off the cuff remark that was meant as a joke, right?

Should he have lost his job? Been doorstepped by the media? Of course not. Because context and intent matters.

[Carbomb]

8 minutes ago, David said:

I don't think we should look at things as black and white, so to speak. There should be some element of common sense and savvy applied, no?

For example, if we're talking about racism in the strictest sense surely this Tweet could have been taken as offensive?

A certain element of those online did complain, but is the comedian in question a racist? I doubt it, he's made what many would consider an off the cuff remark that was meant as a joke, right?

Should he have lost his job? Been doorstepped by the media? Of course not. Because context and intent matters.

Yes, context matters, but we're living in an age robbed of nuance by extremism and hatred. It's sort of a by-product of Poe's Law. When you've got people being taken seriously who in any other age were or would be seen as a pathetic joke, you're going to get people reacting to that with the attitude that "well, if Trump can get into power, people are clearly that thick and we need to come down on stuff like that really fucking hard".

On the other hand, I do see your point of view, and in normal circumstances would agree with you.

The answer, I suspect, is somewhere in the middle.

[organizedkaos]

Quote

Because context and intent matters.

Whilst to an extent I agree on the intent front, you're choosing when context matters. The baby's mother has received a tonne of racial abuse and you're questioning how someone could be perceived to have made a racist joke towards their child. In this context we're talking about these people and the existing racism that has been exhibited towards them.

The context is there is still a massive problem with how certain races are treated by society and how people have intentionally mocked people of said races for things they cannot control. Seems like a public persona should be aware of this context when making comments to half a million people that could potentially contribute to a racist discourse even if the intent of the joke was not that 

Edited May 9, 2019 by organizedkaos
missing of

[Loki]

You're arguing a strawman here David, I don't think anyone genuinely thinks he's racist, or should have lost his job.

What we are contending is your earlier argument that what he said wasn't racist because you didn't immediately make the association.  

As for whether he'd have posted it if the child was (in your definition) black (and I disagree that only a kid born of two black parents will be perceived as black):

""Would have used same stupid pic for any other Royal birth or Boris Johnson kid or even one of my own. It's a funny image. " - Danny Baker

So either he would have posted it because he's genuinely colourblind, as he suggests, or he wouldn't for a black baby, as you suggest, because he understands the connotation of the monkey pic.  As I said, you can't eat your cake and have it.

[Chest Rockwell]

5 minutes ago, Loki said:

should have lost his job.

There definitely are people in this thread who have argued that him losing his job is appropriate.

[David]

2 minutes ago, Loki said:

You're arguing a strawman here David, I don't think anyone genuinely thinks he's racist, or should have lost his job.

And yet, he has. Why? Because the BBC have a no-nonsense policy when it comes to their employees possibly stepping out of line in this way? I don't think so, we've seen the likes of Alan Sugar post something that was blatantly racist and I don't think he was dealt with in a similar manner, was he? I may have genuinely missed it mind you.

He was sacked because the BBC, for want of a better phrase, "shat it" when they saw the Twitterati light the torches and grab the pitchforks. 

9 minutes ago, organizedkaos said:

The context is there is still a massive problem with how certain races are treated by society and how people have intentionally mocked people of said races for things they cannot control. Seems like a public persona should be aware this context when making comments to half a million people that could potentially contribute to a racist discourse even if the intent of the joke was not that 

Should that same context be applied to the Tweet that I posted further up the page then? The comedian in question is something of a public persona, and has made an off the cuff remark that could be taken as racist, no? 

Maybe he should have been pulled up and told that he should be aware that by posting what he did he simply provides ammo for the right-wing types to say "See? Racist remarks aren't all treated the same!" which would lead to further division and a feeling of "yeah, they fuckers always get away with stuff that the white man can't" and so forth.

That Tweet was treated as a joke at best, and a stupid thing to post at worst. The comedian wasn't pilloried for it, and common sense prevailed. No loss of his job, no media vilification, no apologies demanded. 

The same should have been afforded to Baker in all honesty. 

 

[organizedkaos]

Quote

Should that same context be applied to the Tweet that I posted further up the page then? The comedian in question is something of a public persona, and has made an off the cuff remark that could be taken as racist, no? 

Different context.

Surely you're not arguing the same societal context applies to a comedian of Sri Lankan descent saying "Crazy White Bastards" versus a white comedian comparing black people to animals (even unintentionally)?

Edited May 9, 2019 by organizedkaos

[Cannibal Man]

I mean, how many white people go on to experience racism? How many people in that photo of Leave Means Leave are getting the train or bus home suspecting they'll get their heads kicked in just for the shade their skin is, or lose a job, or have their windows bricked in or whatever else? It's a joke about race in the above example but IMO it's not racist. Racism to me has always meant coming from a position of power and control, punching down if you will. There's no Conservative endorsed van driving round Newton Le Willows with WHITE CUNTS WE'LL FIND YOU AND SEND YOU BACK MATE.

The BBC are damned if they do or don't here. Baker's made a blunder with a connotation that comes with the 'joke' whether he realised or not and the BBC could either keep him and keep a tone deaf prick on board or launch him down the fire exit stairs into the arms of a chorus of lads going UNBELIEVABLE. I imagine he'll be back and wont be taking it too badly because he seems intelligent, but hopefully he doesn't get absorbed by gobshites.

Edited May 9, 2019 by Cannibal Man

[David]

5 minutes ago, organizedkaos said:

Different context.

Surely you're not arguing the same societal context applies to a comedian of Sri Lankan descent saying "Crazy White Bastards" versus a white comedian comparing black people to animals (even unintentionally)?

Of course I'm not, I'm arguing that there has to be some form of contextualisation somewhere though.

We can't just look at one instance and say "well, the guy in question is a comedian, so there's a chance he was trying to be funny, plus he was commenting on a current political topic that has a lot of comedic value, so we'll give this particular instance a pass," but then go "What Baker did was racist, no ifs, no buts, end of story."

I'm not a fan of Bakers by the way, but didn't he say that he uses the chimps in nice clothes thing quite a lot in his so-called comedy or something? If he did, should that be taken into account? If not, then that's a different story entirely.

The main thrust of my argument is that what he did doesn't warrant him losing his job and being effectively vilified. I mean, I know the media in this country love nothing more than jumping on someone when they're down, but still.

When we live in a world where someone's life and livelihood can be dictated by social media mob mentality, we're heading down a dark path. And that's what's happened here.

10 minutes ago, Cannibal Man said:

I mean, how many white people go on the experience racism? How many people in that photo of Leave Means Leave are getting the train or bus home suspecting they'll get their heads kicked in just for the shade their skin is, or lose a job, or have their windows bricked in or whatever else? It's a joke about race in the above example but IMO it's not racist. Racism to me has always meant coming from a position of power and control, punching down if you will. There's no Conservative endorsed van driving round Newton Le Willows with WHITE CUNTS WE'LL FIND YOU AND SEND YOU BACK MATE.

So racism only matters if a particular group faces an acceptable amount of hate and threats? Interesting way of looking at it in all honesty. There are white people who experience racism for sure, it may not be as prevalent and not as widely reported, but it does happen. I'm not sure I'm all that comfortable dismissing any form of racism just because it's not the norm and the victim group doesn't make the headlines.

For me, dismissing racism against a particular group as you have in your post has implications that reach much further than you may think. Telling someone who's been a victim of racist abuse from non-whites that their torment doesn't matter as much as victims of abuse from whites is the kind of thing that leads to problems down the line. By doing that we're only helping to ensure that those who are tormented in such a manner, and those who see racism of that type go unchecked are funnelled into the far-rights reaches, which could then result in them carrying out hatred and violence against those different to them.

If we don't tackle it from all angles then we'll fail to ever tackle it properly I think.

Each to their own though, I guess. Probably a discussion for another thread, but interesting all the same.

[Keith Houchen]

I know it's all about your definition of racism but in this country, white people don't suffer from racism, they suffer from prejudice.  Racism is an economic, political and societally institutional power structure, one that whites hold all the keys to.  Sure, someone can be as prejudicial about whites as someone can be about non whites, but it isn't racism per se.

[David]

2 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

I know it's all about your definition of racism but in this country, white people don't suffer from racism, they suffer from prejudice.  Racism is an economic, political and societally institutional power structure, one that whites hold all the keys to.  Sure, someone can be as prejudicial about whites as someone can be about non whites, but it isn't racism per se.

Whatever we want to label it, people suffer, they feel victimised, which then leads in many cases to anger and right-wing tendencies, be it in the form of Britain First, the EDL, a right-wing Islamic group or whatever.

Personally, I see it getting a whole lot worse before it even looks like improving, because I think we're going about it the wrong way for the most part.

[PowerButchi]

1 hour ago, David said:

I'm not a fan of Bakers by the way, but didn't he say that he uses the chimps in nice clothes thing quite a lot in his so-called comedy or something? If he did, should that be taken into account?

 

[King Pitcos]

Until this happened, I didn’t even know Megan Markle was black. And I thought Megan Markle was someone off British reality TV, like Gemma Collins. I thought the Megan that married Prince Harry was someone different, but also not black.

People naming their kids after Riverdale characters, though. Crazy black bastards, as Romesh might say.

Edited May 9, 2019 by King Pitcos

[Hannibal Scorch]

- I don’t believe he is racist

- I do believe the tweet could have been seen as racist (I did)

- The apology was fucking woeful

- The BBC had to sack him

- Rather to continue to act like a spoilt brat, he should be grovelling 

- Alan Sugar’s tweets are worse and he too should have been sacked. I’m guessing it’s because he’s not directly employed to the BBC like Baker, Brand and Wossy were. 

[Keith Houchen]

It was the lead story on the six o'clock news on the BBC.  He was saying he didn't know which royal had a baby but if he'd known it was a person of colour, he'd have never posted it.  So he, a BBC employee and broadcaster, didn't know Meghan was giving birth.