Racial Indoctrination / Profiling

[Silverplum]

You're in the wrong place. STILL.

Hello Eekamouse;
Thanks for your response, at least it wasn't insulting.
I'm not sure if its just this forum or people not reading my question clearly;

My question really isn't about legal right to do something or not. Its about the profile or consistent stereotype that comes from forethought and planning. People don't spend millions of dollars to create advertising where this profiling is accidental.

Can I please have someone intelligent weigh in without trying to make my question racist?

FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

How intelligent do WE have to be to "please" you, if wikipedia is your datasource and you are asking a legal forum for answers on a nonlegal matter?

 

[tranquility]

Hello Eekamouse;
Thanks for your response, at least it wasn't insulting.
I'm not sure if its just this forum or people not reading my question clearly;

My question really isn't about legal right to do something or not. Its about the profile or consistent stereotype that comes from forethought and planning. People don't spend millions of dollars to create advertising where this profiling is accidental.

Can I please have someone intelligent weigh in without trying to make my question racist?

FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

I already did.

No, it's not actionable.

 

[LdiJ]

Nice way to pull things out of context as I did not say that I find a black PERSON gracing the same ad as offensive. Therefore your words demonstrate your lack of intelligence.

For you to say people should not find such ads offensive demonstrates your skewed social views. If I had revealed to you what color I am (and I wont) and I then posted that the Christmas Tree or the Nativity scene in public was offensive me, you wouldn't bat an eye at trying to stop me from bringing it up. Because its politically correct to be offended only if you fit a certain stereotype. I find your ideology offensive and your presumptuousness a clear sign that you are a puppet.

So I'll RESTATE MY POINT
When advertisers at Shopko sold African American Dolls for less than White Dolls the African American Coalition threatened discrimination suit and Shopko quickly changed their prices. That to me is offensive because it is pure crap to find an act of racism in the price of a childs toy.

So people find the stereotype of racial profiling offensive in advertising, you have no right what so ever to tell me I'm wrong. I'm not some white guy spouting off on racist rant, I made not a single racist comment.

I'm an individual whos race is not important but I still find it offensive because the advertisers are demonstrating a "RACIAL PROFILE and STEREOTYPE" that is offensive. Why is it offensive, because its consistently the same profile. If the advertising also included any other "multi racial" ads I'd likely never have noticed it.

I'll end this by saying that you are the most vile type of human being on earth to use the race card so recklessly. Calling someone a racist without first establishing that they are is a liberal tactic to intimidate. Doesn't work on me and if you could see my skin color, you'd realize how ignorant you really are.

Ok...you are making the assumption that juxtaposing a white woman and a black male is racial indoctrination. Has it ever occurred to you that the advertising is merely reflectings newer norms in society rather than indoctrinating? Place yourself in an urban setting where large groups of people pass by, and what you will see large amounts of mixed race couples, of all kinds of mixtures. Would you not think that it would be normal for advertising to reflect that trend? Wouldn't it be odder if advertising ignored that trend?

 

[J Ritchey]

Silverplum;
I'm a smart guy, I dont mind being proven wrong but being called a racist pissed me off. I apologize for getting so upset in the earlier post.

I'm not real sure how a question like this inflames so many casual responses to a simple question. I'd like to make a point by comparison if I may.

On the news I see that people are calling the idea that voters need an ID as racist, I say, thats just stupid, you need an ID just to be out in public according to many states.
When I see that a Jewish group threatens suit against an airport in Seattle for having a Christmas Tree, I say, thats just stupid.
When I see that people organize to file suit against against the state for having crosses on the side of the road where people died, I say, thats just stupid.
When I read that a large discount retailer was threatened to be sued because the LOW price of a Barbie Doll was "discriminating", I laugh and say, thats just stupid.
When I see another large retailer, Target, trying to go the opposite way by making the price higher, again, its "discriminating" and I just don't get it.

So, when I ask if advertising that stereotypes and profiles in ways that is neither balanced or fairly representing equality I do find it offensive because it appears more to be indoctrination.

Look, if I'm reading it wrong, I'll admit it.
But I'm not the only one having noticed that other races, including my own, are not fairly represented in the media and that a consistent stereotype is ever present.

 

[Silverplum]

Sue all the bad guys in court for eleventy million dollars.

Find a new forum in which to be ranty.

Take a walk in the sun.

Silverplum;
I'm a smart guy, I dont mind being proven wrong but being called a racist pissed me off. I apologize for getting so upset in the earlier post.

I'm not real sure how a question like this inflames so many casual responses to a simple question. I'd like to make a point by comparison if I may.

On the news I see that people are calling the idea that voters need an ID as racist, I say, thats just stupid, you need an ID just to be out in public according to many states.
When I see that a Jewish group threatens suit against an airport in Seattle for having a Christmas Tree, I say, thats just stupid.
When I see that people organize to file suit against against the state for having crosses on the side of the road where people died, I say, thats just stupid.
When I read that a large discount retailer was threatened to be sued because the LOW price of a Barbie Doll was "discriminating", I laugh and say, thats just stupid.
When I see another large retailer, Target, trying to go the opposite way by making the price higher, again, its "discriminating" and I just don't get it.

So, when I ask if advertising that stereotypes and profiles in ways that is neither balanced or fairly representing equality I do find it offensive because it appears more to be indoctrination.

Look, if I'm reading it wrong, I'll admit it.
But I'm not the only one having noticed that other races, including my own, are not fairly represented in the media and that a consistent stereotype is ever present.

 

[J Ritchey]

Ok...you are making the assumption that juxtaposing a white woman and a black male is racial indoctrination. Has it ever occurred to you that the advertising is merely reflecting newer norms in society rather than indoctrinating?

Of course I consider that; I wasn't going to say what I am but I guess it doesn't really matter. I'm Jewish and Native American. I keep a watchful eye on patterns or I wouldn't be in advertising so trends are very important. However, if your argument is to be correct, wouldn't it also reflect other racial mixes at least or somewhat diverse?

So I'm pretty much done with the subject here, I'll just create a blog this weekend pointing out stereotypes in advertising and put forth the question as to why all other races are not similarly represented.
I'll think of a "politically correct" name later today for the blog.

Thanks for your time and input.

 

[justalayman]

it is not illegal to be a racist

it is not illegal to present (what you believe to be) racism in privately funded advertising

it is not illegal to attempt to indoctrinate the general public. The gov does it all the time as does every politician out there as well as many other entities.



If you do not like the advertising, you can either ignore it, make a complaint with the advertising company or the entity paying for the advertising, or let them know with your wallet you do not approve of their advertising by not purchasing products from the companies that utilize this form of advertising.

 

[justalayman]

On the news I see that people are calling the idea that voters need an ID as racist, I say, thats just stupid, you need an ID just to be out in public according to many states.

no, you do not need an ID to be out in public in any state.

When I see that a Jewish group threatens suit against an airport in Seattle for having a Christmas Tree, I say, thats just stupid.

Given the fact that federal money is provided to that airport and that means the Jews are supporting Christianity, I don't.

When I see that people organize to file suit against against the state for having crosses on the side of the road where people died, I say, thats just stupid.

if the state didn't put them there, there is nothing to sue the state for. Beyond that, if the cross is on the highway right of way, the state has a right to remove the crosses

When I read that a large discount retailer was threatened to be sued because the LOW price of a Barbie Doll was "discriminating", I laugh and say, thats just stupid.

threatened..but apparently not. A private entity can price their merchandise as they choose. They buckled to public pressure, nothing more.A suit would go nowwhere.

When I see another large retailer, Target, trying to go the opposite way by making the price higher, again, its "discriminating" and I just don't get it.

EVERYBODY discriminates. They do it every single day of their life. There is a huge difference between illegal and legal discrimination.

So, when I ask if advertising that stereotypes and profiles in ways that is neither balanced or fairly representing equality I do find it offensive because it appears more to be indoctrination.

So what? Maybe it is. The point is; it's not illegal.

Look, if I'm reading it wrong, I'll admit it.

You may or may not be reading it wrong but in reality, it is irrelevant. They can indoctrinate to their hearts desire and never break the law. It is their right to spend their money as they choose.

But I'm not the only one having noticed that other races, including my own, are not fairly represented in the media and that a consistent stereotype is ever present.

so what? you have no right to demand what an advertising company does in their ads.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Wow, if you think these ads are bad, you'll probably totally flip your lid if you found out McDonalds has a website specifically for black people.

Yet, still no lawsuits though.

 

[ecmst12]

NO ONE, no race, no gender, no ethnic group, is portrayed in a fair and balanced way in the media or advertising. EVERYONE is stereotyped. Get over it. It's a single photograph, what exactly do you think would have made it better? People of the same race? Both white, both black, both latino? Black and latino? White and asian? Seriously, get over it.

 

[tranquility]

Wow, if you think these ads are bad, you'll probably totally flip your lid if you found out McDonalds has a website specifically for black people.

Yet, still no lawsuits though.

I have to disagree. No matter which McDonalds site I go to, it seems like they emphasize the top 1%. (You know, rich white guys in top hat and tails.)

 

[You Are Guilty]

I have to disagree. No matter which McDonalds site I go to, it seems like they emphasize the top 1%. (You know, rich white guys in top hat and tails.)

http://www.365black.com/365black/index.jsp


They have Asian and Latino versions too.

 

[tranquility]

http://www.365black.com/365black/index.jsp


They have Asian and Latino versions too.

Who knew people of color don't like the money, money, money of Monopoly's guy who does not pass go for $200?

 

[stealth2]

Nice way to pull things out of context as I did not say that I find a black PERSON gracing the same ad as offensive. Therefore your words demonstrate your lack of intelligence.

For you to say people should not find such ads offensive demonstrates your skewed social views. If I had revealed to you what color I am (and I wont) and I then posted that the Christmas Tree or the Nativity scene in public was offensive me, you wouldn't bat an eye at trying to stop me from bringing it up. Because its politically correct to be offended only if you fit a certain stereotype. I find your ideology offensive and your presumptuousness a clear sign that you are a puppet.

So I'll RESTATE MY POINT
When advertisers at Shopko sold African American Dolls for less than White Dolls the African American Coalition threatened discrimination suit and Shopko quickly changed their prices. That to me is offensive because it is pure crap to find an act of racism in the price of a childs toy.

So people find the stereotype of racial profiling offensive in advertising, you have no right what so ever to tell me I'm wrong. I'm not some white guy spouting off on racist rant, I made not a single racist comment.

I'm an individual whos race is not important but I still find it offensive because the advertisers are demonstrating a "RACIAL PROFILE and STEREOTYPE" that is offensive. Why is it offensive, because its consistently the same profile. If the advertising also included any other "multi racial" ads I'd likely never have noticed it.

I'll end this by saying that you are the most vile type of human being on earth to use the race card so recklessly. Calling someone a racist without first establishing that they are is a liberal tactic to intimidate. Doesn't work on me and if you could see my skin color, you'd realize how ignorant you really are.

I'm confused... WE are throwing the race card? I think you did that in your first post. Here's a cluestick - people are allowed to associate with any kind of people they want to - even in print ads.

However, I still do not understand just what you find offensive or racist.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

At the risk of drawing fire onto myself

I think that particular combination hits a broad demographic of shopper on different various levels. I think the only demographic that would find it a turn off would be that of the white male, who could see it, on various levels, as a challenge to his virility.