Social Media Outrage/Cancel Culture

[swampfrog]

I will happily continue to shop at Trader Joe's.

A few weeks ago, an online petition was launched calling on us to “remove racist packaging from [our] products.” Following were inaccurate reports that the petition prompted us to take action. We want to be clear: we disagree that any of these labels are racist. We do not make decisions based on petitions.

[falafel]

I will happily continue to shop at Trader Joe's.

Yay!

However, didn't they say they already had plans to change the names?

[swampfrog]

Yay!

However, didn't they say they already had plans to change the names?

Yes. I'm sure there's some internal memos that would be very interesting reading.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I will happily continue to shop at Trader Joe's.

God bless Trader Joe's. Love it.

[Eddie]

Yay!

However, didn't they say they already had plans to change the names?

I thought I read in that letter that they've changed or dropped some products over the years, when they don't sell well, and that they'll continue to change or drop products that don't sell well. But did I misunderstand? Because I thought that latest letter essentially said they're keeping a bunch of the "racist" stuff.

[Eddie]

I thought I read in that letter that they've changed or dropped some products over the years, when they don't sell well, and that they'll continue to change or drop products that don't sell well. But did I misunderstand? Because I thought that latest letter essentially said they're keeping a bunch of the "racist" stuff.

OK - just saw the other article where they said that over time they're slowly changing all of them back to their original name. It will be interesting to see how quickly that happens now with this latest statement.

[swampfrog]

OK - just saw the other article where they said that over time they're slowly changing all of them back to their original name. It will be interesting to see how quickly that happens now with this latest statement.

Pretty sure this is a reversal of the earlier messaging about removing the ethnic names.

Following were inaccurate reports that the petition prompted us to take action.

Recently we have heard from many customers reaffirming that these name variations are largely viewed in exactly the way they were intended*—as an attempt to have fun with our product marketing.

The reports were originally provided from the LA Times I believe. Linked back to Kenya Friend-Daniel (company spokeswoman in the article). LinkedIn has her job title as National Director, Public Relations. It would be very interesting to see what the internal communications are around this, her response appears to have been solicited in response to the online petition, which the most recent formal published communication rejects outright.

I don't know how much can be read into the bolded portions, but it could be inferred that feedback from customers pushed the company to reverse direction. The petition creator published this update on change.org.

Trader Joe’s has issued a new statement as of July 24, 2020 that appears to be a reversal of a previous statement issued on July 17, 2020. The latest statement is a departure from the company’s commitment to removing products that they have recognized have not been inclusive or conducive to creating a welcoming, rewarding customer experience. Further, this recent statement adds confusion as to how – and whether – Trader Joe’s will proceed with the repackaging of their ethnic foods.

Given the contradictory nature of these statements, we ask that Trader Joe’s clarify which ethnically branded products will be modified.

[YOhio]

This is funny.

https://nypost.com/2020/07/30/wokefi...ium=SocialFlow

[swampfrog]

This is funny.

https://nypost.com/2020/07/30/wokefi...ium=SocialFlow

Word of the day: Kleptogamy

[BigFatMeanie]

I'm putting this here because the aggrieved went public on Facebook.

https://www.ksl.com/article/50001751...chool-yearbook

The quote from a student in the high school yearbook:

"There are two genders and a lot of mental illnesses."

The reaction from the aggrieved:

"This is a clear attack towards the trans community at Highland. As a member of the LQBTQ+, this was extremely offensive to me and many of the students at my school. I demand action to be taken against the student and the administrator that made it so hate speech could go into our 2020 yearbook.”

The response from the school district:

Unfortunately, one of the senior quotes in the yearbook included hate speech. Even more unfortunately, this quote was published in spite of the editing protocol in place for the yearbook. This yearbook quote is absolutely unacceptable and in no way reflective of the Salt Lake City School District, the value we place on every student, and the standards we strive to uphold. Let me make it clear that the Salt Lake City School District condemns hate speech in any form. To have something like this included in one of our high school yearbooks is abhorrent. We are committed to providing a safe and equitable learning environment for all students, including our LGBTQIA+ community. To our LGBTQIA+ and other marginalized students I say, please know how deeply your teachers, school administrators and district leaders care about you and your well-being"

Can I get a ruling on whether this was "hate speech"?

[Pelado]

I'm putting this here because the aggrieved went public on Facebook.

https://www.ksl.com/article/50001751...chool-yearbook

The quote from a student in the high school yearbook:



The reaction from the aggrieved:



The response from the school district:



Can I get a ruling on whether this was "hate speech"?

Would have been less hateful to say "There are two mental illnesses and a lot of genders."

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[swampfrog]

Can I get a ruling on whether this was "hate speech"?

I don't know who gets to rule on these things, but here's my opinion. Not hate speech. The outrage is performative.

Embedded Tweet

[old_gregg]

I don't know who gets to rule on these things, but here's my opinion. Not hate speech. The outrage is performative.

Embedded Tweet

oh shut up. performative outrage? it's a yearbook quote with no possible purpose other than poking people in the eye.

[swampfrog]

oh shut up. performative outrage? it's a yearbook quote with no possible purpose other than poking people in the eye.

I agree the quote itself is also performative. It has no place in the yearbook. Still not hate speech.

[swampfrog]

Data analysis of main stream media contribution to the great awakening. Pointing to a major shift of Critical Social Justice language prevalence starting around 2014. In-group versus out-group tensions exacerbated by media.

What the data presented here suggests is that editorial decisions made over the past decade at some of the most powerful media outlets in the world about what kind of language to use and what kind of stories merited coverage when it came to race—whatever the intention and level of forethought behind such decisions—has stoked a revival of racial consciousness among their readers. Intentionally or not, by introducing and then constantly repeating a set of key words and concepts, publications like The New York Times have helped normalize among their readership the belief that “color” is the defining attribute of other human beings. For those who adopt this singular focus on race, a racialized view of the world becomes baseline test of political loyalty. It requires adherents to overlook the immense diversity among so-called “People of Color” and “People Not-of-Color” (i.e., whoever is being lumped together as “white” according to the prevailing ideological fashion). In doing so, it has made stereotypes socially acceptable, if not laudable.

The same media institutions that have promoted revanchist identitarianism and the radical transformation of American society along racial lines, could instead have focused their attention and influence on improving the quality of life for all. Working to ensure that Americans of any background aren’t unjustly victimized by the police and have access to quality health care, schools, and affordable housing doesn’t require the promotion of a “race-consciousness” that divides society into “oppressed” and “privileged” color categories. To the contrary, it requires that we de-emphasize these categories and unite in pursuit of common interests. This may not suit the media’s prerogatives, and it may not appeal to activists whose desire for cultural “recognition” trumps their devotion to material progress, but it does offer the potential benefit of improving the lives of ordinary Americans.