snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > Amusement Bark

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 30 May 2018, 11:22 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,049
Default

This is Roseanne they were dealing with. If they didn't have a plan in place for what to do if, correction when, she finally went too far I'd be very, very surprised.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 31 May 2018, 12:15 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,525
Icon02

According to herself, she is "not a racist and never will be". There are no racists in the US, never has been and there never will be -- at least, no one who will ever admit they're a racist. You've heard of the #MeToo movement, well say hello to the #NotMe movement. The moment the word racism was invented the first thing all the racists said was "Not Me!"

Sadly, it's not only the racists that are complicit in this deception but ordinary people of all kinds because of this insidious misconception that racism is just a personal flaw in thinking rather than what it actually is: a systematic method of oppression that was developed specifically for the purpose of oppression, a system that lives on today in the methods and results, a couple of which (gleefully demon-strated in her tweet) were to constantly compare people of color to animals and to call those who stand out for their achievements extremists. This kind of incident only exacerbates this lie. The racists and non-racists alike will be sidelined to these personal flaws of thinking that, yes, do play a role in racism, but are not what racism means. It isn't just a flaw in thinking that can be erased by self-reflection, a day of seminars (I'm talking about you Starbucks), nor certainly denied simply by saying "Not Me!"

There is also a large (but not majority) group of active racists who constantly play on this. They have succeeded in changing the meaning of the word. If racism is about personal flaws and sins (rather than the original meaning of a systematic historical and present-day system of oppression) then it can easily go both ways. There can even be "racism against whites". Even the worst and most active proponents of racism can easily deny it because only they themselves can attest to what's in their heart. Ordinary people, even if they suspect it isn't true, are tricked into thinking that's a reasonable rebuttal -- even if the racist deniers have taken out full-page racist ads!

Racism is what we do (including what we say). Racism is what society and laws and economics does. It's not what's in people's hearts and minds. The way to change it is changing policy, not trying to eliminate personality flaws.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 31 May 2018, 01:14 AM
E. Q. Taft's Avatar
E. Q. Taft E. Q. Taft is offline
 
Join Date: 30 July 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 14,092
Default

I think a lot of people think in terms of what I call "intellectual" or "philosophical" racism: that is, a conscious, firm belief that one race is inherently superior to another, and that it is therefore perfectly acceptable to deny rights, privileges, and opportunities to members of the 'inferior' race. The Nazis had this philosophy: indeed, it was at the core of their belief system, and they considered it a science.

I think most Americans would sincerely deny subscribing to any such belief. I certainly would.

Does that make me, or them, 100% not-racist? No, because the problem runs far deeper than that. Apart from any inherent fear of people or things that are 'different' that may exist, our various societal inputs lead to our minds having biases, making assumptions, and generalizing in inappropriate ways. And collectively this contributes to a system that systematically oppresses certain people, even if the people who are part of that system are not making any conscious effort to do so. (Some of them may even be part of the groups being oppressed.)

But I think a lot of people don't want to accept that, and still want to attribute economic disparity, for instance, to a lack of effort or ability on the part of the poor. They may point to highly successful African-Americans, for instance, and then say, "They made it, so that proves it's not the system keeping you down."

Working our way out of that set of biases is not something we can do overnight, but we can't let that be an excuse. We have to keep trying.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 31 May 2018, 02:50 AM
Mouse's Avatar
Mouse Mouse is offline
 
Join Date: 10 July 2003
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,309
Mouse

Iíve noted the speed at which ABC canceled the show. It made me wonder how the show was doing in the ratings, whether it was one of those things where the first episode received a high number of viewers, only for there to be a steep drop in subsequent airings. ABC might have been willing to put up with a whole lot more if the show was utterly crushing it, ratings-wise.

It may only be tangentially related, but Cracked had an interesting article about the reboot versus the original: The New Roseanne Takes Place in Another Dimension, Seriously
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 31 May 2018, 03:55 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by E. Q. Taft View Post
I think a lot of people think in terms of what I call "intellectual" or "philosophical" racism: that is, a conscious, firm belief that one race is inherently superior to another, and that it is therefore perfectly acceptable to deny rights, privileges, and opportunities to members of the 'inferior' race.
Racism isn't that philosophy. Racism is the systematic segregation and oppression of a people based on (bogus) categories called race. What you're talking about is a belief in racial superiority. Yes, it's related. No, they aren't the same.

Unfortunately, the word has been commandeered in the same way that Abolitionism was made to be all about the Sin of Slavery rather than helping the people who were enslaved. After the 'emancipation' no one needed to care because the 'sin' had been eliminated.

I don't have any hope for people to really understand and appreciate what racism is anymore. I just think we need a new term and how. 'Racism' and 'Racist' have no meaning at all now. As Ta-Nehisi Coates once said,
Quote:
The bar for racism has been raised so high that one need be a card-carrying member of the Nazi Party to qualify.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...rd.single.html

That was ten years ago. Now, according to the Birther of a Nation President, even they are "good people".

That happened because it was made to be a variety of philosophy, and finally just a personal philosophy. That's not what it is. It's actions and deeds, policies and laws, words, economies, jobs and education. Tweets too. It's what we do that counts. Not some abstract internal representation of how we supposedly feel.

(That's how they attack Affirmative Action as well - the lie that it comes from a kind of racism itself. Getting rid of racism requires action! Not just changing a few minds! That's not reverse racism, it's the only thing that can reverse racism.)

Last edited by ganzfeld; 31 May 2018 at 04:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 31 May 2018, 06:48 AM
Dasla's Avatar
Dasla Dasla is offline
 
Join Date: 15 April 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,606
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouse View Post
It may only be tangentially related, but Cracked had an interesting article about the reboot versus the original: The New Roseanne Takes Place in Another Dimension, Seriously
From the above article

Quote:
to Roseanne inviting David to live with them after discovering that his mother is emotionally abusive.
That is another thing that stuck me about the reboot, her attitude to David. I did see enough to get what David had done to annoy her so much but in the original serious she really seem to like David. In fact at times I wondered if she like David more then her own children. So he attitude to him in the reboot surprised me.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 31 May 2018, 06:52 AM
Dasla's Avatar
Dasla Dasla is offline
 
Join Date: 15 April 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,606
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sue View Post
Sadly the actor who played Mark (Becky's husband) died, IIRC it was a drug overdose. One of the criticisms of the reboot was that while they state that Mark, the character, died, they never address what happened to him.
Ok, I didn't realise that. Googling currently would just give me lots on the cancellation. So I mad an assumption. That is a shame.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 31 May 2018, 12:06 PM
Sooeygun Sooeygun is offline
 
Join Date: 30 May 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,120
Default

Even re-runs are being pulled in some cases. From Viacom owned stations and Hulu. That's a hit in the royalties.

https://screenrant.com/roseanne-reru...cklash-racist/
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 31 May 2018, 12:18 PM
Psihala's Avatar
Psihala Psihala is offline
 
Join Date: 28 February 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 7,951
Jaded Roseanne Barr hints she may challenge cancellation of hit show

The day after ABC pulled the plug on her No. 1 show over a racist tweet, Roseanne Barr returned to Twitter with a vengeance. The embattled comic hinted she may challenge the cancellation, tweeting to her fans Wednesday, "you guys make me feel like fighting back. I will examine all of my options carefully and get back to U [sic]." Barr created a firestorm this week when she posted a tweet likening former Obama White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett to an ape.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/roseann...fighting-back/
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 31 May 2018, 12:20 PM
Psihala's Avatar
Psihala Psihala is offline
 
Join Date: 28 February 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 7,951
Default

So much for "I am leaving Twitter."

~Psihala
(*No 'Rule 6' for Twitter, I guess.)

Last edited by Psihala; 31 May 2018 at 12:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 31 May 2018, 12:23 PM
DawnStorm's Avatar
DawnStorm DawnStorm is offline
 
Join Date: 11 March 2003
Location: Montgomery County, MD
Posts: 16,502
Reading

Here's a good article/column from The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...litics/561503/


Roseanne sure is a piece of work!
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 31 May 2018, 06:02 PM
E. Q. Taft's Avatar
E. Q. Taft E. Q. Taft is offline
 
Join Date: 30 July 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 14,092
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psihala View Post
So much for "I am leaving Twitter."
Probably the Ambien again.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 31 May 2018, 06:33 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 25,799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sue View Post
This is Roseanne they were dealing with. If they didn't have a plan in place for what to do if, correction when, she finally went too far I'd be very, very surprised.
That may very well be true, but if so, it reflects somewhat badly on the network in the first place. It sounds like they knew of her history, knew that she'd be unlikely to change, but decided to give her a show anyway because there was money and none of her issues were recent enough to cause them trouble.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psihala View Post
The embattled comic hinted she may challenge the cancellation, tweeting to her fans Wednesday, "you guys make me feel like fighting back. I will examine all of my options carefully and get back to U [sic]."
Challenge it how? AFAIK, there is no legal mechanism for forcing a network to air a show (nor should there be). If ABC was trying to cancel her contract due to the issues, she could fight that, but the remedy would be payment of the full term, not forced broadcast. Maybe she means to challenge it by shopping it to another network but I'm not sure any network (except Fox News) would want to take on such baggage.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 31 May 2018, 06:51 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
That may very well be true, but if so, it reflects somewhat badly on the network in the first place. It sounds like they knew of her history, knew that she'd be unlikely to change, but decided to give her a show anyway because there was money and none of her issues were recent enough to cause them trouble.
Also when they rebooted the show it was a limited engagement. They only committed to something like 8 episodes. They renewed for a second season on the strength of phenomenal ratings for the first episode or two. Not sure if the ratings continued that strong but they were strong enough to make a lot of people happy. Anyway they had an out they could have exercised right from the start if Roseanne had caused trouble then and they must have thought Roseanne herself wanted the show to continue. A lot of people are speculating that she did this to herself because she actually wanted to have the show cancelled. But personally I think she just figured she was untouchable.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01 June 2018, 02:07 AM
UEL's Avatar
UEL UEL is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2004
Location: Fredericton, Canada
Posts: 9,163
Baseball

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
That may very well be true, but if so, it reflects somewhat badly on the network in the first place. It sounds like they knew of her history, knew that she'd be unlikely to change, but decided to give her a show anyway because there was money and none of her issues were recent enough to cause them trouble.
I am not looking so critically at the network. Even if they did know that she had issues. Perhaps they had indications from her that she was going to keep it under control, or the level of vitriol that she would demonstrate was able to manageable. Their wanting to tap into the demographic that is not regularly being served by current sitcoms outweighed the potential costs of her going off script.

After all, this is a business. And businesses are all about managing risk. ABC may have viewed the risk as manageable, but their assessment was off.

But, my gut feeling is that they had their "get out of trouble card" already prepared. After all, after the twitter storm the other day and ABC dropped her, how many people have praised ABC for making a tough decision. The network would win either way. Roseanne does not melt down and they have a sitcom pulling in 15 million viewers every week, or Roseanne melts down, they cut the show and a large portion of the US thinks ABC is socially responsible, therefore worthy of patronage. ABC could not lose.

And as a business, a win-win situation is hard to turn down.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01 June 2018, 09:51 AM
Don Enrico's Avatar
Don Enrico Don Enrico is offline
 
Join Date: 05 October 2004
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 7,570
Default

Dear US snopsters, please help be understand. In her oroginal "excuse me" tweet, Barr said
Quote:
It was 2 in the morning and I was ambien tweeting-it was memorial day too-i went 2 far & do not want it defended
I understand the "I was on drugs" defence. What I don't get is the "it was memorial day" defence.

Is she implying that she was so emotional about fallen soldiers that she didn't know what she did? Or that things you do on a holiday don't count somehow? Or is there some other connection between memorial day and her actions I don't get?

Please remember that we don't have memorial day in Germany, and no real equivalent, either. There's Volkstrauertag, but in it's modern form that is as much about the civilian victims of war and opression as about soldiers. We have some difficulties with honoring everything German soldiers did, especially in the last war, as you may know...
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01 June 2018, 11:00 AM
Psihala's Avatar
Psihala Psihala is offline
 
Join Date: 28 February 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 7,951
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Enrico View Post
Dear US snopsters, please help be understand.
Memorial Day, being a national holiday that always falls on a Monday (and thus extending the weekend), in addition to its intended honoring of those in the military who fell in service to their country, is also typically associated with actual celebrating; i.e. backyard bar-b-q's, family get-together's, and the like. It's sort of the unofficial "Official" start of the summer season.

I can't say for certain what Barr may have meant. I don't know her personal commitments schedule, or her views on the military, but its possible she might have been referring to the latter way of observing the holiday.

~Psihala

Last edited by Psihala; 01 June 2018 at 11:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01 June 2018, 11:35 AM
Sooeygun Sooeygun is offline
 
Join Date: 30 May 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psihala View Post
Memorial Day, being a national holiday that always falls on a Monday (and thus extending the weekend), in addition to its intended honoring of those in the military who fell in service to their country, is also typically associated with actual celebrating; i.e. backyard bar-b-q's, family get-together's, and the like. It's sort of the unofficial "Official" start of the summer season.

I can't say for certain what Barr may have meant. I don't know her personal commitments schedule, or her views on the military, but its possible she might have been referring to the latter way of observing the holiday.

~Psihala
I took it to mean the latter and referred to the drinking that is often associated with long weekends in summer.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 01 June 2018, 12:10 PM
Don Enrico's Avatar
Don Enrico Don Enrico is offline
 
Join Date: 05 October 2004
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 7,570
Default

Okay, that makes sense. It means "I was on drugs and intoxicated" then.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 03 June 2018, 01:55 AM
Ducky's Avatar
Ducky Ducky is offline
 
Join Date: 16 June 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,124
Default

Then there's this...

https://pagesix.com/2018/05/31/rosea...29dd0273c7bbe8

She "thought Jarrett was white"? I have no idea how you'd think a person is white then proceed to make an awful comment like she did anyway.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
School worksheet quizzed students on "boy toy," "trophy wife" and affairs Psihala NFBSK Gone Wild! 5 16 November 2017 01:30 PM
Limbaugh: The Left Sends Out "The Rape Police" Whenever There's Sex With "No Consent" TallGeekyGirl Social Studies 111 30 October 2016 01:12 AM
"Star Trek" & "Planet of the Apes" Comic Crossover Planned catty5nutz Amusement Bark 11 31 July 2014 10:06 AM
"Password" unseated by "123456" on SplashData's annual "Worst Passwords" list snopes Techno-Babble 32 04 February 2014 12:42 AM
SC Republican Fiercely Opposes "North American Union" and the "Amero" Bohemian Rhapsody in Blue Sightings 13 31 May 2008 11:46 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.