Just got word of a protest at 1 Herald Square at 4 over the Herald's "FADE TO BLACKO" cover today. Protesers say it was racist and offensive to Boston's black community:
Michael Jackson was an icon and should be respected!
If you were there, post a report.
Seriously? This is just like Rhode Island politicians wanting to drop "and Plymouth Plantations" from the official state name...because it harkens back to slavery.
"Fade to Black" - not racist.
"Jacko" - not racist.
"Fade to Blacko" - portmanteau of two NOT RACIST terms = NOT RACIST.
If you owned a farm in the 1600's, it was a "plantation". Roger Williams was one of the first in this nation to disavow differences of race by skin color. Suggesting that his half of the Rhode Island name be dropped because "plantation = slavery" is just plain ignorant.
Some people need to grow up.
If RI plans to change the name of the state anyway, why not go all the way? I've been to RI many times, and although it DOES contain an island (Aquidneck), the bulk of the state is part of the mainland...thus it's NOT an island at all like Hawaii. I say change the name to something that accurately describes the state: Baja Massachustts.
it's Rhode Island and the Providence Plantations, smart guy
Yeah, I said Plymouth and that was the wrong P-town. I had a brain fart after a week of putting out fires at work. Big whoop...you wanna fight about it?
A grown-up knows that symbolic-logic validity and social validity are not necessarily equivalent. Any variant on "black" is obviously questionable, to say the least. Suggesting that it is not a loaded word in this context is truly being ignorant of American history.
"Fade to black" definitely takes on a different meaning when you're talking about Michael Jackson. It's not racist, exactly, but certainly in poor taste
The ignorant part is that the full name of the state of "the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations".
I agree that for one to get a racist intent from the headline is a stretch, and your description plays that out- is it racist to refer to James Bulger as "Whitey"?
Still, if people can read into something simple a racist undertone, the best phrase is ignorant- meaning not thinking that something was racist- than racist
It's soooooooo stupid I don't even know what the paper meant. It doesn't make a bit of sense--why "fade" to "blacko"? Jacko? Obviously they meant "fade" like his skin faded--what else could they have meant without it just being the most inane and meaningless headline of all time?
I think they meant to be clever using the "Fade to black" phrase, as in the end of a movie or scene and thought using "Blacko" was clever. I doubt they were being racist, but who knows.
Are you kidding me? Maybe it was innocent/careless mistake, but seriously, is the Boston Herald editor such a drunken chimp at his job? I'm all for public spanking on this one.
I thought it was "Plimouth Plantation".
RIP Sky Saxon
Plymouth Plantation (by any spelling) was never part of Rhode Island.
I really can't say if this is or isn't racist, not being black, but it really doesn't make any sense anyway. Only the Herald referred to him as "jacko" in the first place, for reasons obscure and certainly unknown, and the remix doesn't quite translate.
I'm surprised they never called him "Jacko Homo", but I guess even the Herald has limits
One thing is clear. The headline is a quip about his death and their attitude about it. I think it's disrespectful to make light of his demise.
Apparently, at the Herald its ok to show open disregard for people indicted for child molestation and found not guilty in the court of law.
Huck the Ferald.
I hope nobody buys the paper; and the editor in chief can't get another job.
Maybe in Boston but google Jacko and see how many hits you get... I even see the Times of India using it.
You can indeed combine two non-racist terms to make a portmanteau or pun that is in itself racist and/or offensive.
If Hillary Clinton is stung by a bumble, and conspicuously puts lotion on her elbow, will the Herald write BEE ITCH on its front page? Neither bees nor itches are offensive in and of themselves. According to your logic, Bee Itch therefore cannot be offensive. This is incorrect.
I think Blacko is such a case. Adding o to black takes it from a color to a racial epithet. Hey Blacko!
It's also not funny. It's stupid. I understand a lot of people hate The Gloved One because they think he's a serial child rapist who got away with it, and so they want to say the worst thing they can. I'm sure there are folks at the Herald of that persuasion. But "Fade to Black" would have been a much better head.
Let me guess - you're white?
Hmm grow up...look in the mirror.
Nooooooooo that's ignorant; you're ignorant!
I'd like to protest people who have too much time on their hands, but I'm too busy.
Yikes, just imagine for a moment the scary lot that shows up to this.
Its not racist, but its sort of tasteless. Par for the course with the Herald I guess.
Reminds me of that Pheonix cover from a few years ago where they had a picture of the world trade center in flames and the headline "The Feel-Good Movie of the Summer". It was a review of Oliver Stone's 9/11 movie.
I'm not commenting to address whether this cover is racist or not. Regardless, it is still borderline inappropriate. It's disrespectful even if you don't have respect for MJ. But in the least, you can't argue that isn't a bit silly.
I'm not surprised, but I am still troubled that so many use the Herald as a source for information or anything. I once respected its local coverage, but the rag's increasing lack of actual content has ended that. We're already a one-newspaper town.
The Herald uses all kinds of slurs on their cover every day. The thing is a tabloid, not a serious newspaper. It isn't worth protesting it, much like The Star and Weekly World News aren't worth finding offensive.
The Herald never was a newspaper. Its a tabloid. Newspapers don't use adjectives like "thugs" to describe someone accused of a crime, not matter how heinous.
Before 1981, the Herald was a broadsheet, not a tabloid.
Not sure if it is racist but it sure is a little stupid.
And you're talking about it.
Yes, yes I am... waiting on your point?
Yes NotWhitey, we are talking about it. And?
Self-destructive pop freak dies young, local tabloid takes
the low road....Wow, now that's news!
I can understand someone saying it was in poor taste creating a rhyme with his nickname Jacko but Fade to Black is a common term to mean death. I think people are over-sensitive with political correctness and read into things too much. You can make any title politically incorrect or bigoted if you try hard enough.
I think people are over-sensitive with political correctness and read into things too much.
Yeah. Right. Let us know when you are subjected to any "real" mistreatment on account of your race or gender and I might be willing to believe that you know the first thing about it. In the meantime, think about how condescending it is to have those who experience little or no bias in their lives deciding for others what is offensive.
What is the phrase about walking a mile in someone's shoes ...
Way to prove his point. I don't see where the commenter noted their race OR gender in that comment and yet you read into it that "he" is white and male? Way to go, you overly assumptive bitch.
Really. Nice job further illustrating the issue. Spoken like a true privileged hater.
If I didn't know better, I'd think you were Republican. Seriously, way to play out of the Rove handbook. I see you're fond of the chapter on "vicious attack and then act innocent".
You have now made any number of woman and transperson hating comments at UHub. If you should ever be accused of some nasty things, every time you called somebody a bitch, displayed violent temper in a thread about women or blamed the victim of a violent crime or made an enraged comment about a cross-dresser, it has been publicly recorded.
Perhaps you should go back and read some of the things you have written here and think about how it all looks. This is the internet - we don't have our human displays of body language or in depth knowledge of each other to mitigate these things. It would be too easy to think that you harbor a violent hatred of women and people who don't conform to conventional roles given what you have posted.
Ah, back to this old canard. Well, whatever gets you through the day. I stand by everything I've ever posted here. I still don't hate women. I don't hate transgenders (really? when did I ever say anything about TGs??). I hate you when you post these over-reaching glory mode posts. But, I see you're on a roll, so I'll just sit back and watch how you deal with the others calling you on it too.
PS - Calling YOU a bitch is not an indictment of womanhood. Sorry, you're just not that special.
Half an hour of sunbathing will do wonders for everyone, and no one will feel like perpetuating this silly thread.
Well, the Ladies Auxiliary Internet Scorekeepers is paying attention, Mr. Kaz. This is all going in your file. When Hillary gets appointed to her rightful place, it's off to the reeducation camps with you. You won't be laughing when we put you under the knife. Not that that's a threat, because when ladies say it, it's not a threat.
I do not think Hillary is as militant feminist as she is made out to be. Hillary is a politician, a much better one then she gets credit for actually. During her campaign she did not really take a feminist tact until she hit a snag in the road, then she swerved from there to pound down shots in West Virginia as if she was an old time coal miner. She had an accent in the south, no accent in the north, sent her daughter into events with young people while her husband handled the old time political players. Honestly she did not seem to mention women all that much (considering how high profile of a woman she was) except when it was in regards to countries that still force their female residents to don face masks or those areas where female babies were killed just for being born a female. She only really attached herself to the womens groups stateside when she really needed a boost to get ahead.
Cry me a river. Ask any white, middle-aged man who has applied for a public sector job around here (in the last 20 years) whether they have been subject to reverse discrimination. I only have anecdotal data but I have a LOT of it. (In one case that bordered on humorous, my 2 degrees from Top 50 universities were trumped by a Junior College grad for a federal job.)
Mz Swirly I do believe that you are being a bit sexist and racist yourself right here.
You are saying that based off of someones race and/or gender they have no right to comment on such things. I thought we were supposed to allow everyone a voice? I guess your voice does not count if you are a male, and counts less as a white male. I do realize there was massive discrimination in the past but from my experience as of late it is not easy being a white male around here unless your a rich white male republican. It is harder for us to get jobs because of sexual and racial preferences. Sure if your rich life is still good, but if your an average person who happens to be a white male your competing against the rich white people, the average non white male subset and you have the leverage turned against you.
My family has always been working class until recently, I never benefited from the white male bumps of the past as my parents and grandparents worked in the factories and other labor positions side by side with african americans and immigrants from other countries. Please explain to me how I am better off in this world due to my being a white male?
I would also like to point out that 70 percent of the recently laid off workers were male. Males graduate from college less then their female counterparts. The trends have turned, and yet females still get institutional advantages, it does not seem fair. Once females hit 50 percent of the college population female advancement programs should have eased off. As soon as the female to male population hit 55 percent 45 percent you would have thought that those programs would have shifted to empowering young men, and trying to figure out why they do not go to college in the same numbers.
I think off all the people here your the most sexist of them all.
Here's how I see it (and yeah, I'm white and male, so I maybe don't get it, but...):
In these cases, you gotta look for intention. Was it the intention of the Herald to say something offensive about black people? Of course not. (having said that, it probably wasn't the intention of that WEEI guy a few years back either, with the escaped monkey bit, but that steered *so* close to the edge of racism that I had no problem with him being suspended.)
Was it the Herald's intention to crack a joke about an eccentric celebrity who recently died? Oh yeah. Do they have the right to do it? Certainly. And we all have the right to tell them it was tasteless, wrong, and indicative of a certain lack of humanity. I'm not even a big Michael Jackson fan, but I was offended as a human being that they'd even think that was a good idea.
the fact that wacko Jacko died several shades lighter than he was born. Didn't seem to quite work, to me. I think "Fade to Black" would have been better. "Blacko" is unpleasant in and of itself. And they couldn't write "Jacko off" for obvious reasons.
Yes seemed a joke on his skin lightening. Which might not be racist, but it's in poor taste.
Did anyone take offense at their headline "Sinko DeMasi"?
The Herald allows itself to use "eye of the beholder" slurs all the time. Things that allow them just enough wiggle room to deny overt racism if called on it but leave plenty of room of for the Howie Carr fans to get their chuckles in. Its the same crap that their talk radio buddies Severin and Graham get away with over WTKK, yeah we wont come out and use direct slur words but we'll over pronounce your name, use funny music and oh-so innocently suggest stereotypes.
Seems like that's what people were saying about MJ's appearance a decade or so ago...