On Dutch television, a new commercial for the jazz/soul radio station Radio 6 recently appeared. The first time I saw it (see linked), I had an uncomfortable feeling that I still can not shake. Is there nothing wrong with the commercial, or is it slightly racist? I'm leaning to the first option, but am curious what you think about it.
The synopsis: a black woman (presenter Sylvana Simons) is sitting in a radio studio announcing a new number. As soon as the music starts, she gets doused in black paint. Then, it shows the new slogan: "now blacker then ever" ("nu nog zwarter" ).
There is also another version with presenter Leo Blokhuis, a caucasion man.
I keep getting uncomfortable thoughts about the racial distinction. Is it different from making a commercial for a classical music station or maybe hard core house and call it "now whiter than ever"?
So, what are your thoughts?
(BTW, it is a good radio station.)
EDIT: I hate that smiley with " and ).
The synopsis: a black woman (presenter Sylvana Simons) is sitting in a radio studio announcing a new number. As soon as the music starts, she gets doused in black paint. Then, it shows the new slogan: "now blacker then ever" ("nu nog zwarter" ).
There is also another version with presenter Leo Blokhuis, a caucasion man.
I keep getting uncomfortable thoughts about the racial distinction. Is it different from making a commercial for a classical music station or maybe hard core house and call it "now whiter than ever"?
So, what are your thoughts?
(BTW, it is a good radio station.)
EDIT: I hate that smiley with " and ).
The mystery deepens... I think. *MySmiley*
This message last edited by Artsapat on 22/03/2010 at 06:47:51 PM
Is it racist?: Commercial for Jazz/Soul radio
- 22/03/2010 01:47:45 PM
2933 Views
I don't think it's racist at all
- 22/03/2010 07:15:55 PM
901 Views
Uh.
- 22/03/2010 09:36:35 PM
991 Views
Re: Uh.
- 29/03/2010 07:03:14 PM
932 Views
I'm not Dutch, but that was a pretty ignornant claim
- 29/03/2010 07:20:09 PM
854 Views
Re: I'm not Dutch, but that was a pretty ignornant claim
- 29/03/2010 07:28:34 PM
960 Views
Not "higher" nor "lower," but "different" would be the word to use here
- 29/03/2010 07:46:15 PM
787 Views
Re: Not "higher" nor "lower," but "different" would be the word to use here
- 29/03/2010 07:53:56 PM
746 Views
This. ~points at Larry's post~ *NM*
- 29/03/2010 07:42:35 PM
471 Views
Re: This. ~points at Larry's post~
- 29/03/2010 07:57:30 PM
834 Views
Um.
- 29/03/2010 08:00:54 PM
985 Views
Re: Um.
- 29/03/2010 08:44:31 PM
785 Views
My question for you was on that one line that Larry responded to.
- 29/03/2010 08:46:26 PM
820 Views
She agrees with you about it not being racist - she had issues with your "crude" comment.
- 29/03/2010 08:59:44 PM
811 Views
I don't see it
- 22/03/2010 08:19:31 PM
850 Views
i'd say the actions in the commercial are more racist than the words
- 22/03/2010 10:00:02 PM
821 Views
It would not float here in the US
- 22/03/2010 10:07:08 PM
840 Views
Agreed.
- 23/03/2010 05:36:14 AM
1003 Views
Could you please expand on one point in your reasoning?
- 23/03/2010 07:20:31 AM
858 Views
It's not race specific music if it's enjoyed/performed/presented by various races.
- 23/03/2010 07:32:33 AM
1090 Views
MOBO
- 23/03/2010 10:20:22 AM
795 Views
The trouble lies in historical neuroses cooked in our melting pot, I think.
- 23/03/2010 11:29:06 AM
842 Views
Only if it's racist to mention the fact that different races exist. Which seems to be the US view.
- 23/03/2010 09:24:23 AM
830 Views
Agreed
- 23/03/2010 10:21:59 AM
863 Views
Some people are like that, yes, but at least it isn't the "accepted" media position. Yet. *NM*
- 23/03/2010 11:01:47 AM
433 Views
Not at all, the problem is when people seem to say something is exclusive to a given race.
- 23/03/2010 11:51:06 AM
1096 Views
I agree with some of what you say, but I think you're assuming more than is warranted.
- 23/03/2010 02:33:34 PM
798 Views