Political Correctness

[UKMikey]

It's only the pc police that makes "changing their approach" a thing to begin with. If everyone in the ad were white it would be "racist". If it were for a dark beer and any word even remotely connected in the most innocent way with people of colour it's "racist". Using another culture to sell your beer? Cultural appropriation. There's no pleasing the pc police.

I don't think one rapper constitutes a "PC police" but I guess you can apply any attributes you like to an imaginary construct and nobody could prove otherwise.

I don't think you quite see the irony of shooting down individuals who have a different view from yours as if it were protection of freedom of expression. To me your list of imaginary examples sounds like paranoia that things aren't what they used to be like in the old days when everyone knew their place.

Regardless, ad agencies are commercial organisations doing their best to sell products to as many people as they can. The only pressure they respond to is commercial.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I don't think one rapper constitutes a "PC police" but I guess you can apply any attributes you like to an imaginary construct and nobody could prove otherwise.

I don't think you quite see the irony of shooting down individuals who have a different view from yours as if it were protection of freedom of expression. To me your list of imaginary examples sounds like paranoia that things aren't what they used to be like in the old days when everyone knew their place.

Regardless, ad agencies are commercial organisations doing their best to sell products to as many people as they can. The only pressure they respond to is commercial.

I also don't think an ad selling light beer saying light is better is in any way racist no matter who the actors are in the ad but the fear of an SJW fueled attack alone on social media is strong enough to get the ad pulled. That's political correctness on steroids.

 

[UKMikey]

I also don't think an ad selling light beer saying light is better is in any way racist no matter who the actors are in the ad but the fear of an SJW fueled attack alone on social media is strong enough to get the ad pulled. That's political correctness on steroids.

One person does not make an SJW army. It sounds like more of an SJW Leeroy Jenkins "attack".

You can continue to peddle this narrative as long as you like, but either way, it's their money and their prerogative and a long way from the anti-discrimination legislation people were complaining about at the beginning of this thread.

If Heineken feel uncomfortable putting this ad out there and want to pull it, then it really doesn't matter what you think since they don't perceive you as their target market.

 

[Johnnypenso]

One person does not make an SJW army. It sounds like more of an SJW Leeroy Jenkins "attack".

You can continue to peddle this narrative as long as you like, but either way, it's their money and their prerogative and a long way from the anti-discrimination legislation people were complaining about at the beginning of this thread.

If Heineken feel uncomfortable putting this ad out there and want to pull it, then it really doesn't matter what you think since they don't perceive you as their target market.

Such is the power of political correctness that you can say, presumably with a straight face, that Heineken felt uncomfortable putting this ad out there. Right. Months of back and forth meetings in their own marketing departmentry and likely numerous reviews and a lengthy approval process and all of a sudden they were uncomfortable putting it out. As I've already pointed out a couple of time it's the fear of backlash that powers political correctness in this case and others like it. The fear is real.

 

[polysmut]

Such is the power of political correctness that you can say, presumably with a straight face, that Heineken felt uncomfortable putting this ad out there. Right. Months of back and forth meetings in their own marketing departmentry and likely numerous reviews and a lengthy approval process and all of a sudden they were uncomfortable putting it out. As I've already pointed out a couple of time it's the fear of backlash that powers political correctness in this case and others like it. The fear is real.

Or all the news stories mentioning Heineken pulled their ad got the Heineken name mentioned for free. Why pay for any more ad space for a while?
I've said Heineken three times now in this post alone and they didn't have to pay me a penny.

 

[Rallywagon]

Or all the news stories mentioning Heineken pulled their ad got the Heineken name mentioned for free. Why pay for any more ad space for a while?
I've said Heineken three times now in this post alone and they didn't have to pay me a penny.

The flaw in this is that creating the ad and buying the ad space wasnt free, and pulling the ad before its cycle hardly began means all that money is down the drain. Not exactly a very cost effective way to get "free" advertising.
Oh right, there is also a bit of a morale dump for everyone involved in making it.

 

[polysmut]

The flaw in this is that creating the ad and buying the ad space wasnt free, and pulling the ad before its cycle hardly began means all that money is down the drain. Not exactly a very cost effective way to get "free" advertising.
Oh right, there is also a bit of a morale dump for everyone involved in making it.

I don't believe Heineken did the whole thing on purpose, just that they haven't really lost out in the long run.

 

[TexRex]

Such is the power of political correctness that you can say, presumably with a straight face, that Heineken felt uncomfortable putting this ad out there. Right. Months of back and forth meetings in their own marketing departmentry and likely numerous reviews and a lengthy approval process and all of a sudden they were uncomfortable putting it out. As I've already pointed out a couple of time it's the fear of backlash that powers political correctness in this case and others like it. The fear is real.

...

...



...

Yeah, no...I found the ad incredibly offensive. I mean, it depicted...*shudder*...Heineken.

As strongly as @Johnnypenso seems to feel about this, I wonder if he went out and bought a couple cases of the awful stuff to protest the protest.

 

[Rallywagon]

Awful? Psssh. For a major brand Heineken is rather good.

 

[TexRex]

Awful? Psssh. For a major brand Heineken is rather good.

"It's a good throwing beer."



Yeah, no, the majors have their place, for certain, but I can go to Walmart and pick up some waxy, orange roma tomatoes or I can go to my local food co-op and pick up some that I'd have no problem biting into and ending up with a sloppy, seedy grin on my face.

If I'm having a beer, I want it to be what I want to drink rather than something that's brewed in an attempt to please millions while being cost-effective.

 

[Rallywagon]

Preaching the the pastor here man. I live in Michigan, home of craft beers. Our smallest party store carries over 400 different flavors and i dont drink enough to be anything other than a beer snob. Im just saying... Heineken is far from horrible.
I will say in Johnnys defense, Heineken did cave to PC SJWing before it even really got started. To think otherwise is silly, and busting his chops about it is semantic nonsense.

 

[UKMikey]

Such is the power of political correctness that you can say, presumably with a straight face, that Heineken felt uncomfortable putting this ad out there. Right. Months of back and forth meetings in their own marketing departmentry and likely numerous reviews and a lengthy approval process and all of a sudden they were uncomfortable putting it out. As I've already pointed out a couple of time it's the fear of backlash that powers political correctness in this case and others like it. The fear is real.

Somebody's fear is very real... Look, it's not like ads haven't been pulled before after unfavourable receptions by the public. How many of those back and forth meetings involved any kind of focus testing?

Unlike randoms commenting on the internet, ad managers don't have the luxury of high handedly lecturing their consumers on what they should or shouldn't be offended by. Their job is to sell product.

 

[TexRex]

Heineken did cave to PC SJWing before it even really got started. To think otherwise is silly, and busting his chops about it is semantic nonsense.

Sure, and I indeed don't think otherwise, but I don't see how SJWs are the only "bad guys" here. If Heineken felt so strongly about the ad not intending to do harm, they could air some more Antonio Banderas ads (I'm just yanking your chain, Benicio) while they put this one on the back burner and strike up a dialog with numerous figures that stand up for the group that was supposedly so offended; I'm sure there are plenty who would leap at the opportunity to have the discussion. If it concludes with the ad being deemed genuinely offensive, Heineken comes out of it looking much better than they do with their "we're sorry" because they made an effort, and if it isn't seen as offensive (which seems the more likely outcome to me), they put the ad back on the air and Chance The Rapper comes off looking like more of an ass clown than he already strikes me as being because of this.

And yeah, the only reason I had for "busting his chops" was the overwhelming desire to do so. He's so quick to point out others' left-leaning biases while he wears his own bias on his sleeve with comments he makes, and he calls out people "avoiding the subject" in threads while evidence of him doing exactly that exists on the very same page.

 

[UKMikey]

I will say in Johnnys defense, Heineken did cave to PC SJWing before it even really got started. To think otherwise is silly, and busting his chops about it is semantic nonsense.

If it hadn't even got started then what did they supposedly cave to? This campaign may have picked up momentum now and beome a self fulfilling prophecy but at the time I originally posted it was just one guy with a Twitter account, not a torch and pitchfork wielding mob of global villagers.

 

[Rallywagon]

If it hadn't even got started then what did they supposedly cave to? This campaign may have picked up momentum now and beome a self fulfilling prophecy but at the time I originally posted it was just one guy with a Twitter account, not a torch and pitchfork wielding mob of global villagers.

But it wasnt just one person. If it had been joe blow random on the twitter sphere, it probably wouldnt have had the clout to have ever reached Heineken. But it wasnt, is was a very prominent rapper who reaches millions and more people.

 

[TexRex]

a very prominent rapper who reaches millions and more people

Like this one?

Prominent and well-informed are not mutually exclusive characteristics of an individual.

 

[Rallywagon]

Like this one?

Prominent and well-informed are not mutually exclusive characteristics of an individual.

Didnt say it was. And i dont think that matters. His message would reach plenty of impressionable, lazy and volatile types. By the fact Heineken felt the need to pull the ad makes it clear they think it would reach too many of the sorts as well.

 

[UKMikey]

But it wasnt just one person. If it had been joe blow random on the twitter sphere, it probably wouldnt have had the clout to have ever reached Heineken. But it wasnt, is was a very prominent rapper who reaches millions and more people.

Clearly he should have kept his mouth shut then as only Joe Blow is allowed an opinion on Twitter.

Either that or his supposed millions of Twitter followers could think for themselves and make up their own minds.

 

[TexRex]

His message would reach plenty of impressionable, lazy and volatile types.

I know what you mean...

Spoiler

...but that doesn't lend credence to the message he was sending--which is what I was getting at.

By the fact Heineken felt the need to pull the ad makes it clear they think it would reach too many of the sorts as well.

The ad was likely intended to reach many millions, and it's not too farfetched to imagine some of those many millions would be screwy--is that or one blowhard and some of his numerous Twitter twits justification for pulling the ad? What of the dialogue notion that I offered? It sure seemed reasonable to me.

Regardless of the above, the whole thing strikes me as less an exercise in political correctness and more just general fanaticism.

 

[Rallywagon]

Fanaticism on Heinekens part?

 

[TexRex]

No, on the part of the rapper on his high horse. I have a very hard time believing he was genuinely offended, and frankly I suspect he was told about this "offensive ad" and formed an opionion prior to actually seeing it.

 

[Rallywagon]

Fanatical would imply he was quite deeply offended, but here we are arguing semantics again when i agree with your point. I don't think he was all that offended either. More likely he just wanted some extra bit of attention.

 

[TexRex]

Fanatical would imply he was quite deeply offended

"Fanaticism consists of redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim." -- George Santayana

Chance The Rapper (and what a stupid name that is, amiright?) is playing the role of fanatic, "with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics." Pitching a fit the way he did was definitely extreme, and arguably uncritical (it certainly strikes me as such).

Note that I "liked" your post, though; I'm not trying to debate anything. I'm simply providing my own intent behind the use of the word because it can indeed be used in more than one way.

More likely he just wanted some extra bit of attention.

This.

 

[Rallywagon]

"Fanaticism consists of redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim." -- George Santayana

Chance The Rapper (and what a stupid name that is, amiright?) is playing the role of fanatic, "with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics." Pitching a fit the way he did was definitely extreme, and arguably uncritical (it certainly strikes me as such).

Note that I "liked" your post, though; I'm not trying to debate anything. I'm simply providing my own intent behind the use of the word because it can indeed be used in more than one way.


This.

Wouldn't fanaticism require a "belief" in what you are doing? He may be a fanatical SJW. I couldnt tell ya though cause I dont follow him, or any rapper, or, well, anyone really. This just doesn't seem genuine enough to be fanatical i guess.
As for the name... it's like Bob the builder level of naming for sure. His name is Chancellor (that was not auto corrected) so, while rather linguistically simple, he didn't exactly "chance" into it.

 

[Johnnypenso]

A small glimpse into your politically correct future. I give you the University of Michigan Bias Response Team.

A bias incident is conduct that discriminates, stereotypes, excludes, harasses or harms anyone in our community based on their identity (such as race, color, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, disability, age, or religion).

Bias may stem from fear, misunderstanding, hatred or stereotypes. It may be intentional or unintentional.

That's right kids, even if someone makes you feel bad, even unintentionally, you can report it to Big Brother and they'll deal with it.

 

[MatskiMonk]

A small glimpse into your politically correct future. I give you the University of Michigan Bias Response Team.


That's right kids, even if someone makes you feel bad, even unintentionally, you can report it to Big Brother and they'll deal with it.

That's not really how it sounds to me.

The BRT cannot impose discipline and no one is required to participate in any aspect of the BRT’s work. Its purpose is to assist those who feel aggrieved, to help students, faculty or staff understand how their behavior has affected others and, over time, to contribute to the maintenance of respect and understanding among members of the University community.

 

[TexRex]

That's right kids, even if someone makes you feel bad, even unintentionally, you can report it to Big Brother and they'll deal with it.

So, uh...where'd you get that? It's certainly not represented in the bit you quoted, nor is it in the rest of the brief to which you linked. Surely you didn't dare misquote or misrepresent the material to push an agenda informed by your own bias. I'm also sure you weren't trying to imply a dystopian abolishment of freedoms by referring to a mediating body there to assist in conflict resolution as "Big Brother." This all strikes me as addressing the convention of bullying just as your beloved Melania is supposedly doing, and I can't imagine you'd go against her--she's fluent in six languages for crying out loud. Six languages!

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

A small glimpse into your politically correct future. I give you the University of Michigan Bias Response Team.


That's right kids, even if someone makes you feel bad, even unintentionally, you can report it to Big Brother and they'll deal with it.

The BRT’s sole purpose is to assist those who feel aggrieved by incidents of bias and to promote respect and understanding among members of the University community.

I mean, I get the frustration you perceive at things like the BRT, but is it really as bad as you think it is? Their mission statement seems pretty reasonable. Bias can be extremely frustrating for people on the receiving end of it, and from my experience, Asians and Middle-Eastern folks tend to receive a good bit of bias in Ann Arbor. To me it seems understandable for the University to work to foster a respectful community. I know many people who's very first impression of North America (hell, the western hemisphere) came from that town and that campus....good ambassadorship should permeate to even the most local levels, in my opinion.

 

[TexRex]

Ah, I see what prompted the post about U-M's BRT. And here I figured Tucker Carlson ranted about it on air.

But why is @Johnnypenso crying foul now--as opposed to when the lawsuit was filed or even when U-M implemented the body (I suppose it wasn't big news in Canada)--when Jeff Sessions' DOJ is coming out on the side of Speech First?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Ah, I see what prompted the post about U-M's BRT. And here I figured Tucker Carlson ranted about it on air.

But why is @Johnnypenso crying foul now--as opposed to when the lawsuit was filed or even when U-M implemented the body (I suppose it wasn't big news in Canada)--when Jeff Sessions' DOJ is coming out on the side of Speech First?

Your assumption is incorrect. I don't have cable and I don't watch Fox News. I happen to live a hop, skip and a jump from Michigan State and Detroit is less than 5 km from my front door. MSU has been on the radio news most every day since the Larry Nassar scandal broke. I heard about this on the radio and went straight to the source. I know Fox is one of your favourite whipping boys and it probably makes you feel good to link it to those you disagree with but in this case it is a faulty assumption.