Slog
News & ArtsMonday, February 20, 2012
Science What Did an ESPN Blogger call the Asian American Baller Lin?
Posted by Charles Mudede on Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:30 AM
CNN:
ESPN has fired the employee responsible for writing an offensive headline about basketball sensation Jeremy Lin and suspended an anchor who used the same ethnic slur, the sports network said Sunday.To use the words of a 90s pop tune: It's getting kind of hectic.
The headline read "Chink in the Armor," referencing the New York Knicks' 89-85 loss Friday night to the New Orleans Hornets that ended the team's season-high winning streak.
1
I'm still scratching my head over how Jason Whitlock hasn't gotten fired by Fox Sports after a certain tweet that was exponentially more offensive than that silly "Chink in the Armor" headline.
2
The political correctness has taken control at the expense of sanity. You can now no more say "chink in the armor" than you can say "niggardly," even though neither one means anything racial.
3
I was reading Lin's history. They want to create a "rags to riches" story, but apparently he went to Palo Alto high school. Isn't that in one of the wealthiest communities in America? (Also, didn't take long for Mark Zuckerberg to glom himself on the fame...you my new best friend, Jeremy...the gravy train might need to add a few new cars this week...)
4
What I find interesting about this is that everyone is still talking about Lin's performance as a "streak" or a flash in the pan.
How long does it usually take NBA commentariat to switch the narrative from "a few great games" or "a lucky streak" to "a rising star" or "an outstanding player?"
How long does it usually take NBA commentariat to switch the narrative from "a few great games" or "a lucky streak" to "a rising star" or "an outstanding player?"
6
why didnt the anchor get fired too?
3 - you sure that's what folks are trying to say? bc no, this isn't a rags to riches story. it isn't about money. it's about race. the story is whether or not he was ignored/overlooked because of his race. whether or not he overcame a disadvantage of discrimination, not poverty
3 - you sure that's what folks are trying to say? bc no, this isn't a rags to riches story. it isn't about money. it's about race. the story is whether or not he was ignored/overlooked because of his race. whether or not he overcame a disadvantage of discrimination, not poverty
7
@2
Context matters. You can't say that word in the midst of a flurry of puns about an Asian American guy. The racist intent of that usage is clear in this case.
Context matters. You can't say that word in the midst of a flurry of puns about an Asian American guy. The racist intent of that usage is clear in this case.
8
@2 Who gives a shit that people misinterpret "niggardly", it's an archaic term that most people don't even know the meaning of, let alone the origins, and it sounds just like an offensive term everyone does know. The only reason to even use it would be pretentiousness.
I also saw the headline when it was up on ESPN.com and took it to be a deliberate pun/double entendre which is very common for ESPN headlines. Keep lamenting the evil PC police if you want!
I also saw the headline when it was up on ESPN.com and took it to be a deliberate pun/double entendre which is very common for ESPN headlines. Keep lamenting the evil PC police if you want!
9
Look, obviously ESPN was playing on an over-the-top retro-racism where its so obviously racist that it's designed to provoke humor that most people under 30 would understand.
However, the more unfortunate racism is the totality of the Jeremy Lin Story: "Oh, look...there is this Asian fellow...and yes, yes, I do believe...he's playing basketball! My word!"
Also, what about Kevin Durant and the Thunder -- they're tearing it up...and they looked real good in last year's finals.
http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/…
Yeah, I know, Kevin Durant isn't going to expand the market for NBA.TV in Taiwan.
But still. Thunder are a real story, as well!
However, the more unfortunate racism is the totality of the Jeremy Lin Story: "Oh, look...there is this Asian fellow...and yes, yes, I do believe...he's playing basketball! My word!"
Also, what about Kevin Durant and the Thunder -- they're tearing it up...and they looked real good in last year's finals.
Durant scored a career-high 51 points and Russell Westbrook added 40 points in the Thunder's 124-118 overtime victory over the Nuggets. In addition, teammate Sege Ibaka posted his first career triple-double in the win as the Oklahoma teammates became the first trio in NBA history to record such a feat.
http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/…
Yeah, I know, Kevin Durant isn't going to expand the market for NBA.TV in Taiwan.
But still. Thunder are a real story, as well!
10
@9 Kevin Durant has been an NBA star for years and everyone already knows he is a good player. The primary interest of the Jeremy Lin story is that he went from being a complete nobody to having the highest scoring first 5 games in NBA history. Noting the additional fact that he is Asian in a league with very few Asians is not racist.
11
he's having his moment now but time will tell if he'll stand the test of time. overall he makes a lot of mistakes, takes a lot of bad shots, and turns the ball over too much.
14
@13 I don't think not knowing the definition of "niggardly" in 2012 automatically qualifies someone as stupid, but even if it does, I think claiming outrage about political correctness over the word is even stupider.
15
ESPN full of stupid idiot jocks who happened to get a gig on TV. Why are we surprised that they are ignorant, slobbering troglodytes?
(now watch jockey white boys get their man panties in a twist)
(now watch jockey white boys get their man panties in a twist)
16
@2 all that racial sensitivity from your police training sure does show. I mean, how can we possibly be expected to remember to beat the Honduran piss out of someone these days - they all look brown.
17
Ruler you are missing the point, probably on purpose. It's not a rags to riches story, it's the underdog story, the guy that was cut by several teams and left for dead, who comes out of nowhere to revitalize a previously terrible new york knicks team and take the sports world by storm. Deal with it.
19
I think unless they can prove it was intentional don't fire the guy but suspend him.
@15 Its probably a good idea to not generalize sure some at ESPN are like that but not all. Only whites can be jocks.
And I say this as an East Asian guy myself.
@15 Its probably a good idea to not generalize sure some at ESPN are like that but not all. Only whites can be jocks.
And I say this as an East Asian guy myself.
20
I for one would love to see the Knicksanity tear up LeBron's last lottery ticket for a ring with the Heat and play fresh ball with the Thunder.
21
@12: The Okies did not "steal" the team. Our local idiot, Howard Schultz, SOLD it to them, presumably because--why? he needed the money? we wouldn't give him hundreds of millions of tax dollars? Blame Howard, not the people who bought the team. They couldn't have bought it if Howard and his partners hadn't been so GREEDY. I never did understand that complaint.
22
@14 I think knowing definitions of words and how to use them is a pretty good sign of intelligence. It's also pretty lazy to assume the definition of a word because it sounds like another word. It's downright stupid to get offended by a word that you don't know the definition of.
23
@21 oh yes they did in fact "steal" the team. Howard Schultz is a pathetic turkey for sure, and he sold us down the river and should be/is the biggest culprit, but if you are at all familiar with the details of what happened, it is clear that Clay Clay & his good ol boys stole the team. www.sonicsgate.org. Here's a couple definitions of "steal" from Merriam-Webster's: to accomplish or get in a concealed or unobserved manner; to seize, gain, or win by trickery, skill, or daring
24
"chink in the armor"
WOW! Seriously? In writing? On a news site? That's more like something The Stranger would say, well, more like the opposite, white guilt everywhere on 11th and Pine.
Is it racist to say "white". I'm not sure anymore, can someone tell me the latest offensive word(s)?
WOW! Seriously? In writing? On a news site? That's more like something The Stranger would say, well, more like the opposite, white guilt everywhere on 11th and Pine.
Is it racist to say "white". I'm not sure anymore, can someone tell me the latest offensive word(s)?
25
I'm 39. Though I've heard of the slur, only time I've ever actually heard it in use was in a rerun of "All in the Family". I think it has fallen out of use enough that it's plausible that the editor really didn't realize the stupendous error he was making.
26
@2: "You can now no more say "chink in the armor" than you can say "niggardly," even though neither one means anything racial."
Are you retarded? The former, when used specifically towards a person of Asian descent is a slur. The latter has nothing etymologically to do with any ethnic slur and is simply of questionable judgment. The former is absolutely intentional.
Are you retarded? The former, when used specifically towards a person of Asian descent is a slur. The latter has nothing etymologically to do with any ethnic slur and is simply of questionable judgment. The former is absolutely intentional.
29
"The former, when used specifically towards a person of Asian descent is a slur."
Only if you have no sense of the etymology of the phrase.
Only if you have no sense of the etymology of the phrase.
30
ohhhh, so that's what all those white kids meant when they called me a chink and a gook in junior high and high school. they meant it as a compliment, like i was a knight in shining armor!!! i should have said "thanks white folks! i feel so bad for oppressing you with my political correctness!" P.S. if you didn't know that 'chink' was a racial slur, you are most likely white, and didn't have it screamed at you from white kids in monster trucks. this wasn't 1960, it was 1997.
31
@29 and it's only not racist if you know the etymology but have no grasp of the definition of "pun"
32
5280, bud, you're wrong on this one.
@ 25, you probably don't live someplace with a significant Chinese population.
@ 25, you probably don't live someplace with a significant Chinese population.
33
@28: There is only one definition for "chink" when applied to an individual of Asian descent and when used to caption a photo of them. There are zero definitions of "niggardly" that involve racist sentiment.
34
When I first saw it on espn.com, it actually didn't occur to me--that's how blind I was to it. The phrase struck me as odd, but I didn't click on the link.
To all those defending this . . . why? Is this the hill you want to defend? Are you seriously suggesting that it was a complete coincidence that this phrase was used to headline a story about an Asian-American player? Not buying it.
To all those defending this . . . why? Is this the hill you want to defend? Are you seriously suggesting that it was a complete coincidence that this phrase was used to headline a story about an Asian-American player? Not buying it.
35
@23: "There is only one definition for 'chink' when applied to an individual of Asian descent and when used to caption a photo of them."
Or .... when used to describe someone previously thought to be infallible or powerful showing a failing or weakness, but then that person happens to be Asian. An innocuous phrase turns into something potentially offensive. It's a shift of context.
Jesus, I'm really surprised how heated people are over this, and how sure they are about its racist intent. "Chink in the armour" is a normal phrase with lots of historical use and which has never had anything to do with Asian people at all or PEOPLE at all. "Chink" means a small opening, like a "chink of light under a door."
"Chink" came to be a racial slur in reference to Asians' "slanted" or "slitted" eyes. I can't believe I'm actually explaining this, but a few of the comments here don't seem clear on the connection and lack of connection here. It's not only basic etymology; it's still used today, and not just by old people. We don't go through books and cross out "chink" where it's describing a hole.
To me, this looks like a situation where a guy used it and failed to realize the shift of context when applied to an Asian person. It's really stupid, but not *necessarily* malevolent. If he had used it in reference to anyone non-Asian, we would have automatically assumed he was using in its slightly quaint but innocent context.
(If you want my "credentials" ... yeah, Asian here (Chinese). And I live in Toronto where there is a significant Chinese population -- if I'm not mistaken, among the largest in the world outside China. I'm well-aware of what "chink" can mean, though I will say that I have not experienced any significant amount of overt racism personally. I have not ever heard it used here, and I personally also feel like it's an antiquated term, even for racists today. I only know it through my experience with old films, TV, and history, which is also why I think a young editor at 28 might genuinely not recognize the connection instantly.)
I think this was a colossally stupid mistake for an editor to make, and barring real, documented proof that this was a genuinely racist play on words, I honestly do not believe it warranted losing his job. An apology, definitely, and a suspension, probably, and certainly ESPN reviewing their editorial process.
Even as a Chinese person, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and forgive him. Real racists show their true colours (oh no, is this a bad phrase to use in this conversation?) over and over, not just in one slip of the pen, as it were. If he did do this intentionally, then yes, he's a racist idiot, but jeez, even the most liberal workplaces can do things like put people through sensitivity training rather than just fire them (unless for something more seriously threatening or violent). I can believe that people reform.
I am generally not a person that says "there's worse out there" but I am in total despair about how amazingly strong and passionate people feel about this arguably ambiguous error, in comparison to some of the other crap I've seen fly under people's noses -- probably because "trigger" words weren't used. Next time I see something more obvious and *serious* than this, I hope you're all here losing your shit.
More...
Or .... when used to describe someone previously thought to be infallible or powerful showing a failing or weakness, but then that person happens to be Asian. An innocuous phrase turns into something potentially offensive. It's a shift of context.
Jesus, I'm really surprised how heated people are over this, and how sure they are about its racist intent. "Chink in the armour" is a normal phrase with lots of historical use and which has never had anything to do with Asian people at all or PEOPLE at all. "Chink" means a small opening, like a "chink of light under a door."
"Chink" came to be a racial slur in reference to Asians' "slanted" or "slitted" eyes. I can't believe I'm actually explaining this, but a few of the comments here don't seem clear on the connection and lack of connection here. It's not only basic etymology; it's still used today, and not just by old people. We don't go through books and cross out "chink" where it's describing a hole.
To me, this looks like a situation where a guy used it and failed to realize the shift of context when applied to an Asian person. It's really stupid, but not *necessarily* malevolent. If he had used it in reference to anyone non-Asian, we would have automatically assumed he was using in its slightly quaint but innocent context.
(If you want my "credentials" ... yeah, Asian here (Chinese). And I live in Toronto where there is a significant Chinese population -- if I'm not mistaken, among the largest in the world outside China. I'm well-aware of what "chink" can mean, though I will say that I have not experienced any significant amount of overt racism personally. I have not ever heard it used here, and I personally also feel like it's an antiquated term, even for racists today. I only know it through my experience with old films, TV, and history, which is also why I think a young editor at 28 might genuinely not recognize the connection instantly.)
I think this was a colossally stupid mistake for an editor to make, and barring real, documented proof that this was a genuinely racist play on words, I honestly do not believe it warranted losing his job. An apology, definitely, and a suspension, probably, and certainly ESPN reviewing their editorial process.
Even as a Chinese person, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and forgive him. Real racists show their true colours (oh no, is this a bad phrase to use in this conversation?) over and over, not just in one slip of the pen, as it were. If he did do this intentionally, then yes, he's a racist idiot, but jeez, even the most liberal workplaces can do things like put people through sensitivity training rather than just fire them (unless for something more seriously threatening or violent). I can believe that people reform.
I am generally not a person that says "there's worse out there" but I am in total despair about how amazingly strong and passionate people feel about this arguably ambiguous error, in comparison to some of the other crap I've seen fly under people's noses -- probably because "trigger" words weren't used. Next time I see something more obvious and *serious* than this, I hope you're all here losing your shit.
37
@35: "To me, this looks like a situation where a guy used it and failed to realize the shift of context when applied to an Asian person."
You're wrong. It was an intentional use. It was approved by several people in the chain.
http://www.racialicious.com/2012/02/20/w…
"Another account found online seems to suggest that it was Begley who suggested, and went with, the “Chink” headline."
I have no clue why so many people make excuses for everyday incidents of racism.
"I am generally not a person that says "there's worse out there" but I am in total despair about how amazingly strong and passionate people feel about this arguably ambiguous error"
Get a grip. All racist humor deserves a similarly nasty response. Stop making excuses for these people. This wasn't an accident. This went through a few editors who believe such "jokes" are appropriate for sports culture.
You're wrong. It was an intentional use. It was approved by several people in the chain.
http://www.racialicious.com/2012/02/20/w…
"Another account found online seems to suggest that it was Begley who suggested, and went with, the “Chink” headline."
I have no clue why so many people make excuses for everyday incidents of racism.
"I am generally not a person that says "there's worse out there" but I am in total despair about how amazingly strong and passionate people feel about this arguably ambiguous error"
Get a grip. All racist humor deserves a similarly nasty response. Stop making excuses for these people. This wasn't an accident. This went through a few editors who believe such "jokes" are appropriate for sports culture.
38
@36: "White athlete excels; total crackerjack!"
Except that it's not an equivalent slur. Keep fighting for the rights to internalized racism without being called out for it, I guess.
Except that it's not an equivalent slur. Keep fighting for the rights to internalized racism without being called out for it, I guess.
39
Please. The guy who wrote this knew exactly what he was doing. ESPN has a right to fire its employees for fucking up.
40
@37: Ok, fair. As I said in my comment, I wanted to see documented evidence, and all I ever read were people making huge leaps and assumptions, making tenuous connections based on the very same account I was reading. I guess they were right he did it on purpose, but they were not basing it on anything more than strength of belief.
"All racist humor deserves a similarly nasty response."
Did I say it doesn't? My entire comment is based on the fact that people were reacting to a situation I saw as ambiguous. If it was NOT ambiguous to me, my reaction would have been the similar to theirs.
"Keep fighting for the rights to internalized racism without being called out for it, I guess."
Yes, this is totally something I do on a regular basis, because I've done this a lot here in this forum and you know that and can show that to me.
I clearly explained why I felt the way I did, looking at several aspects of the situation as I had read in several papers and online sources, and gave my reasons, both based on the evidence available and on my own personal experiences. I didn't get to look at the one you linked to, and now I have (although I still question what "suggests" means).
I still think that a situation can exist where this was a careless mistake, rather than malevolent. Evidently that just wasn't the case here.
I see no fault in recognizing that I am 60% sure about something and asking that condemnation be put on hold while more facts come to light. I see this as similar to the belief that I'd rather let a guilty person go than damn an innocent one. I also still believe in forgiveness, which I rarely dole out.
It's insane how much I speak out against racism and gender inequality in my life (and get serious, scary flak for it), but that's only something I can say to you and you don't know if that's true. All I can tell you that in this case, I was not sure about this guy and his intentions, and I was ready to give the benefit of the doubt; that sentiment had meaning to me because I normally am surer.
I'm also going to say that at least part of the impetus behind my comments is the fact that not many -- many others do -- seem to care that ESPN has a problem with their editorial process, or this might be a part of a bigger problem, and only that yep, we fired a racist, and that's that; we fixed it. I see this as a symptom of the real problem out there -- that people can get over insidious racism, especially if somebody has to explain it to them (even if it's the person being oppressed), but something "obvious" to them, well, that's outrageous.
If you still disagree with me, that's your right. If you think I condone racism and fight for the rights of racists, sure. I know what I really believe and what I really do makes the difference, not your opinion of me.
More...
"All racist humor deserves a similarly nasty response."
Did I say it doesn't? My entire comment is based on the fact that people were reacting to a situation I saw as ambiguous. If it was NOT ambiguous to me, my reaction would have been the similar to theirs.
"Keep fighting for the rights to internalized racism without being called out for it, I guess."
Yes, this is totally something I do on a regular basis, because I've done this a lot here in this forum and you know that and can show that to me.
I clearly explained why I felt the way I did, looking at several aspects of the situation as I had read in several papers and online sources, and gave my reasons, both based on the evidence available and on my own personal experiences. I didn't get to look at the one you linked to, and now I have (although I still question what "suggests" means).
I still think that a situation can exist where this was a careless mistake, rather than malevolent. Evidently that just wasn't the case here.
I see no fault in recognizing that I am 60% sure about something and asking that condemnation be put on hold while more facts come to light. I see this as similar to the belief that I'd rather let a guilty person go than damn an innocent one. I also still believe in forgiveness, which I rarely dole out.
It's insane how much I speak out against racism and gender inequality in my life (and get serious, scary flak for it), but that's only something I can say to you and you don't know if that's true. All I can tell you that in this case, I was not sure about this guy and his intentions, and I was ready to give the benefit of the doubt; that sentiment had meaning to me because I normally am surer.
I'm also going to say that at least part of the impetus behind my comments is the fact that not many -- many others do -- seem to care that ESPN has a problem with their editorial process, or this might be a part of a bigger problem, and only that yep, we fired a racist, and that's that; we fixed it. I see this as a symptom of the real problem out there -- that people can get over insidious racism, especially if somebody has to explain it to them (even if it's the person being oppressed), but something "obvious" to them, well, that's outrageous.
If you still disagree with me, that's your right. If you think I condone racism and fight for the rights of racists, sure. I know what I really believe and what I really do makes the difference, not your opinion of me.
41
@38: "Except that it's not an equivalent slur."
I've made similar remarks in the past, so I kind of appreciate what you mean here, except it's always been an iffy thing to say. Are you going to provide a link to a chart where everyone has decided how offensive certain slurs are in relation to others? Does this chart have two columns -- how the race being referred feels (as a race, of course) and how everyone else feels?
Example: If I, as one Chinese person, isn't offended by "chink", does this break the system a little? Or do my feelings don't count because ... I dunno, I'm racist?
I'm sort of offended by it, though not crazy outraged. My response immediately would be "What's wrong with you?", followed up by "Did you just step out of the 1960s?" I feel much more rage when people assume I don't speak English, I'm demure, or that I excel at math, because their assumptions impinge on an identity I have *worked* to make my own. (When one or two people called me "Oriental," I say, "Noodles are Oriental. I'm Chinese.")
But I have a feeling people won't be so angry because, hey, way fewer of us use "chink" than assume Asian parents are strict disciplinarians.
I've made similar remarks in the past, so I kind of appreciate what you mean here, except it's always been an iffy thing to say. Are you going to provide a link to a chart where everyone has decided how offensive certain slurs are in relation to others? Does this chart have two columns -- how the race being referred feels (as a race, of course) and how everyone else feels?
Example: If I, as one Chinese person, isn't offended by "chink", does this break the system a little? Or do my feelings don't count because ... I dunno, I'm racist?
I'm sort of offended by it, though not crazy outraged. My response immediately would be "What's wrong with you?", followed up by "Did you just step out of the 1960s?" I feel much more rage when people assume I don't speak English, I'm demure, or that I excel at math, because their assumptions impinge on an identity I have *worked* to make my own. (When one or two people called me "Oriental," I say, "Noodles are Oriental. I'm Chinese.")
But I have a feeling people won't be so angry because, hey, way fewer of us use "chink" than assume Asian parents are strict disciplinarians.
42
Aquilera's choreography spic-and-span for latest tour
DeGeneres puts a finger in the dyke for JC Penny
Scorsese promises a wopper of a prequel for 'Raging Bull'
DeGeneres puts a finger in the dyke for JC Penny
Scorsese promises a wopper of a prequel for 'Raging Bull'
43
@41: "Example: If I, as one Chinese person, isn't offended by "chink", does this break the system a little? Or do my feelings don't count because ... I dunno, I'm racist? "
Neither. It means you've internalized the slurs, the system has broken you down. Whether it doesn't bother *you* or not is irrelevant to the intention towards all.
This is not an argument about whether you're offended or not or whether you use "chink" as a "joke" or not. This is an argument about someone who uses an ethnic slur willfully, and with several editors signing off on the headline and as on-camera commentary.
Neither. It means you've internalized the slurs, the system has broken you down. Whether it doesn't bother *you* or not is irrelevant to the intention towards all.
This is not an argument about whether you're offended or not or whether you use "chink" as a "joke" or not. This is an argument about someone who uses an ethnic slur willfully, and with several editors signing off on the headline and as on-camera commentary.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (43) RSS