I haven't posted here in a while (POV-Ray is one of three main hobbies I rotate
through, and lately I've been focused on RC planes.) Anyway, I couldn't believe
I heard him say it and had to share this observation:


This is Tavis Smiley interviewing Cedric The Entertainer.  8:50-8:59 will give
you the context.  The statement made by Tavis at 9:00 has been edited to remove
two words.  His statement used to be racist but they edited it to make it no
longer racist.    http://video.pbs.org/video/2042179615/

The quote:
Tavis Smiley:  "See I'm just, I'm just impressed that [they let] a black man
host{s} a show when there's fifty million dollars on the stage."

What's in the square brackets [] is what has been removed.  What's in the curly
brackets {} is what should have been added to give the edit proper grammar.

Tavis's original statement is racist because it suggests that whoever "they"
are, would normally distrust a black man because he is black.

I can't tell so far by looking at the video that it's been edited, but I clearly
heard the missing words on the over-the-air broadcast.

Cedric's response is also evidence of the edit since it fits even better with
Tavis's original statement than with the edited statement.

Thanks,
Charles

Post a reply to this message

Charles C escreveu:
> This is Tavis Smiley interviewing Cedric The Entertainer.  8:50-8:59 will give
> you the context.  The statement made by Tavis at 9:00 has been edited to remove
> two words.  His statement used to be racist but they edited it to make it no
> longer racist.    http://video.pbs.org/video/2042179615/

don't know either of them nor did watch the video.  Racism, sexism and 
violence in general are facts of life, so what is there to surprise?

-- 
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9

Post a reply to this message

On 7/6/2011 8:10, Charles C wrote:
> What's in the square brackets [] is what has been removed.  What's in the curly
> brackets {} is what should have been added to give the edit proper grammar.

No they didn't. At least, not in that link.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message

nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> don't know either of them nor did watch the video.  Racism, sexism and 
> violence in general are facts of life, so what is there to surprise?

  A more interesting social phenomenon is the inflation of certain terms,
the word "racism" being a prime example.

  The meaning of the term "racism" is prejudice or discrimination based on
ethnicity (iow. the notion that certain ethnic groups are in some ways
inferior to or worse, eg. more violent, than others, and/or the concrete act
of discrimination against people because of their ethnicity).

  However, the meaning of the term has been expanded enormously. For example,
xenophobia is not, by definition, racism because it has nothing to do with
ethnicity. (For example, the citizen of a country can have the opinion that
foreigners in general should not be welcome because they lack the uprising,
culture, values and knowledge of the people who have born and raised in the
country, and (adult) foreigners coming to the country is only detrimental
to those values and culture.) A xenophobe might be completely unconcerned
about ethnicity, and only concerned about culture, upbringing, values and
customs. However, xenophobes are called racists as a matter of course.
(So much in fact that the very word "xenophobia" has fallen almost completely
out of usage, replaced with the word "racism". Many young people probably
have never even heard the word "xenophobia" or what it means.)

  Also people who show strong opposition to certain cultures and/or religions
are also usually called "racists" as a matter of course, especially if the
majority of people representing those cultures/religions are non-white. Yet
again, these opinions may have absolutely nothing to do with ethnicity.

  "Racist" has become a derogatory insult, a word of vilification. It has
lost most of its original meaning and has become a political swearword.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> On 7/6/2011 8:10, Charles C wrote:
> > What's in the square brackets [] is what has been removed.  What's in the curly
> > brackets {} is what should have been added to give the edit proper grammar.
>
> No they didn't. At least, not in that link.


Wait, you mean you heard the words "they let" in Tavis's comment?

Post a reply to this message

On 7/6/2011 9:59, Charles C wrote:
> Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom>  wrote:
>> On 7/6/2011 8:10, Charles C wrote:
>>> What's in the square brackets [] is what has been removed.  What's in the curly
>>> brackets {} is what should have been added to give the edit proper grammar.
>>
>> No they didn't. At least, not in that link.
>
>
> Wait, you mean you heard the words "they let" in Tavis's comment?

Yeah. He stutters just before it, but it's not chopped out. Why, don't you?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message

On 06/07/2011 04:51 PM, nemesis wrote:

> don't know either of them nor did watch the video. Racism, sexism and
> violence in general are facts of life, so what is there to surprise?

Heh. I still remember a DJ on the radio played a song, and after it 
finished playing, he replayed the intro - multiple times - because it 
amused him so.

When he played it, a chorus of angry teenage voices proclaim

   "My friend's got a girlfriend and he hates that......chick"

Oh yes, that is *so* what they originally sang! ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> On 7/6/2011 9:59, Charles C wrote:
> > Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom>  wrote:
> >> On 7/6/2011 8:10, Charles C wrote:
> >>> What's in the square brackets [] is what has been removed.  What's in the curly
> >>> brackets {} is what should have been added to give the edit proper grammar.
> >>
> >> No they didn't. At least, not in that link.
> >
> >
> > Wait, you mean you heard the words "they let" in Tavis's comment?
>
> Yeah. He stutters just before it, but it's not chopped out. Why, don't you?
>
> --
> Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
>    "Coding without comments is like
>     driving without turn signals."

Plain as day now.   Strange I didn't hear it a bunch of times re-playing those
few seconds. Weird buffering issue?  Anybody else?  I guess I don't need to try
to prove it had been cut out if it's there now.  Anyway the overall issue isn't
whether it had been edited but that he said something offensive.

Post a reply to this message

On 6-7-2011 22:55, Charles C wrote:
> Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom>  wrote:
>> On 7/6/2011 9:59, Charles C wrote:
>>> Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom>   wrote:
>>>> On 7/6/2011 8:10, Charles C wrote:
>>>>> What's in the square brackets [] is what has been removed.  What's in the curly
>>>>> brackets {} is what should have been added to give the edit proper grammar.
>>>>
>>>> No they didn't. At least, not in that link.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wait, you mean you heard the words "they let" in Tavis's comment?
>>
>> Yeah. He stutters just before it, but it's not chopped out. Why, don't you?
>>
>> --
>> Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
>>     "Coding without comments is like
>>      driving without turn signals."
>
> Plain as day now.   Strange I didn't hear it a bunch of times re-playing those
> few seconds. Weird buffering issue?  Anybody else?  I guess I don't need to try
> to prove it had been cut out if it's there now.  Anyway the overall issue isn't
> whether it had been edited but that he said something offensive.

Why is it offensive?
I don't know the guy and I have only watched this part of the show, but 
to me it sounds like a sarcastic joke. What he implied is that TV and 
society used to be much more racist and that he is glad that has changed.
Sure, if you take the exact same words and put it in a speach with a 
racist context it would be offensive. In this context, in the way he 
says it and with the reaction of the other guy, it clearly isn't. So 
again: why do you think it is offensive?



-- 
Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per 
citizen per day.

Post a reply to this message

andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Why is it offensive?
> I don't know the guy and I have only watched this part of the show, but
> to me it sounds like a sarcastic joke. What he implied is that TV and
> society used to be much more racist and that he is glad that has changed.
> Sure, if you take the exact same words and put it in a speach with a
> racist context it would be offensive. In this context, in the way he
> says it and with the reaction of the other guy, it clearly isn't. So
> again: why do you think it is offensive?


I took it as a cynical joke on the current (not past) state of race in the US.
I think it shows he has a low view of the general public and/or the studio or
television network.   I'm not sure that having a low view of the public is even
what bothers me.  Basically it sounded accusational to me.   To me, being
accused out-of-hand actually would offend me.

Charles

Post a reply to this message