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
2860 Views
I don't think it's racist at all
- 22/03/2010 07:15:55 PM
863 Views
Uh.
- 22/03/2010 09:36:35 PM
943 Views
Re: Uh.
- 29/03/2010 07:03:14 PM
883 Views
I'm not Dutch, but that was a pretty ignornant claim
- 29/03/2010 07:20:09 PM
812 Views
Re: I'm not Dutch, but that was a pretty ignornant claim
- 29/03/2010 07:28:34 PM
915 Views
Not "higher" nor "lower," but "different" would be the word to use here
- 29/03/2010 07:46:15 PM
741 Views
Re: Not "higher" nor "lower," but "different" would be the word to use here
- 29/03/2010 07:53:56 PM
705 Views
This. ~points at Larry's post~ *NM*
- 29/03/2010 07:42:35 PM
451 Views
Re: This. ~points at Larry's post~
- 29/03/2010 07:57:30 PM
789 Views
Um.
- 29/03/2010 08:00:54 PM
936 Views
Re: Um.
- 29/03/2010 08:44:31 PM
737 Views
My question for you was on that one line that Larry responded to.
- 29/03/2010 08:46:26 PM
767 Views
She agrees with you about it not being racist - she had issues with your "crude" comment.
- 29/03/2010 08:59:44 PM
759 Views
I don't see it
- 22/03/2010 08:19:31 PM
798 Views
i'd say the actions in the commercial are more racist than the words
- 22/03/2010 10:00:02 PM
785 Views
It would not float here in the US
- 22/03/2010 10:07:08 PM
796 Views
Agreed.
- 23/03/2010 05:36:14 AM
955 Views
Could you please expand on one point in your reasoning?
- 23/03/2010 07:20:31 AM
805 Views
It's not race specific music if it's enjoyed/performed/presented by various races.
- 23/03/2010 07:32:33 AM
1041 Views
MOBO
- 23/03/2010 10:20:22 AM
756 Views
The trouble lies in historical neuroses cooked in our melting pot, I think.
- 23/03/2010 11:29:06 AM
802 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
794 Views
Agreed
- 23/03/2010 10:21:59 AM
828 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
414 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
1044 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
748 Views