Let's talk racism in sports journalism: Rice, Peterson, Hardy, Dwyer, McWhatever, & Winston in NCAA

Its kinda simple to me.

This is a country that was founded upon the tenet that "All men are created equal", well except the ones we treat as property and base our entire economy on the exploitation of their free labor.

In order for White America to handle the cognitive dissonance that is associated with the treatment of Black people in this country they have to look at us as inhuman or subhuman.

So any imagery that portrays us as violent, stupid or lazy is always going to permeate popular culture.

Its how they cope.

This is quite the generalization. Don't you think?

I mean, any one can flip what you said and relate that to you making a generalization of white people as well. Kind of what you're accusing white people of doing in the first place. Get what I mean?

I'm not trying to come at you, but I'm trying to bring up discussion.
 
 
 
I think things would be vastly different for guys like Rocker/Romanowski had their incidents happened during the social media era. I think it makes a HUGE difference as far as the amount of vitriol directed towards some of these guys.
I hear this 'social media era' thing thrown around too many times where one key element is forgotten: there was still exposure.

In the John Rocker/Bill Romanowski era, I still knew of Prime Time's ego, I still knew of Bobby Bonilla telling a reporter "Make your move" in a post game interview, and I still knew of Barkley saying he's not a role model.

Yes, to your point, I think things would have been different for guys like Rocker, but it's not like the difference is from 'no exposure; able to hide' to 'on blast'.
When Rocker/Romanowski made their comments, where would the general public voice their displeasure? Writing an editorial in the local paper, the occasinal SI/ESPN poll, what? Having a platform like Twitter is VERY powerful for getting your voice heard by many others. Obviously for guys like Rocker, what he said is what's going to be tied to him until the day he dies. However, I do feel as though if those comments were made in 2014, the outcome would be much worse.
OK, so you're saying the ability for people to lash back would be different, not so much that the exposure would necessarily be worse.

I agree. Sure, Rocker (and Marge Schott) got a lot of heat for their comments, but in 2014, the backlash would definitely be much worst because so many social vehicles are in place that weren't even an idea yet in 199_.
 
OK, so you're saying the ability for people to lash back would be different, not so much that the exposure would necessarily be worse.

I agree. Sure, Rocker (and Marge Schott) got a lot of heat for their comments, but in 2014, the backlash would definitely be much worst because so many social vehicles are in place that weren't even an idea yet in 199_.

Agreed 100%

Had Rocker said what he said now, he would've been eaten alive by the media and probably suspended for the year :lol:
 
 
Its kinda simple to me.

This is a country that was founded upon the tenet that "All men are created equal", well except the ones we treat as property and base our entire economy on the exploitation of their free labor.

In order for White America to handle the cognitive dissonance that is associated with the treatment of Black people in this country they have to look at us as inhuman or subhuman.

So any imagery that portrays us as violent, stupid or lazy is always going to permeate popular culture.

Its how they cope.
This is quite the generalization. Don't you think?

I mean, any one can flip what you said and relate that to you making a generalization of white people as well. Kind of what you're accusing white people of doing in the first place. Get what I mean?

I'm not trying to come at you, but I'm trying to bring up discussion.
If he's applying that literally... like he literally thinks EVERY white person is racist and harbors negative thoughts/feelings towards black people because EVERY white person views black people as lazy and aggressive... then yes, I get what you're saying.

But as a general statement, what he said is spot on. I try to explain to people the difficulty in an ENTIRE culture accepting a group of people that they had all collectively oppressed, and how that task is surely not going to be completed in just a few decades, and it has only been a few decades since segregation has been abolished.
 
If he's applying that literally... like he literally thinks EVERY white person is racist and harbors negative thoughts/feelings towards black people because EVERY white person views black people as lazy and aggressive... then yes, I get what you're saying.

But as a general statement, what he said is spot on. I try to explain to people the difficulty in an ENTIRE culture accepting a group of people that they had all collectively oppressed, and how that task is surely not going to be completed in just a few decades, and it has only been a few decades since segregation has been abolished.

What's amazing is that we're currently experiencing an entire generation of people growing up to think Muslims are violent and are all terrorists. What happened to blacks decades ago is now happening to Muslims in America.

For example--When you hear about terrorism, what do you hear first? Islamic terrorism. Whenever we hear about all the terrorist acts happening in the Middle East, we hear about the Islamic State being responsible for it. This new war we're facing. It's a war against terrorim, but they want to name is a war against Islamic Terrorim. The media is cleverly conditioning our minds to synomously relate terrorism to an entire religion. A religion that means peace!
 
If he's applying that literally... like he literally thinks EVERY white person is racist and harbors negative thoughts/feelings towards black people because EVERY white person views black people as lazy and aggressive... then yes, I get what you're saying.

But as a general statement, what he said is spot on. I try to explain to people the difficulty in an ENTIRE culture accepting a group of people that they had all collectively oppressed, and how that task is surely not going to be completed in just a few decades, and it has only been a few decades since segregation has been abolished.
What's amazing is that we're currently experiencing an entire generation of people growing up to think Muslims are violent and are all terrorists. What happened to blacks decades ago is now happening to Muslims in America.

For example--When you hear about terrorism, what do you hear first? Islamic terrorism. Whenever we hear about all the terrorist acts happening in the Middle East, we hear about the Islamic State being responsible for it. This new war we're facing. It's a war against terrorim, but they want to name is a war against Islamic Terrorim. The media is cleverly conditioning our minds to synomously relate terrorism to an entire religion. A religion that means peace!
Just like my last response, I get what you're trying to say, but this right here is nowhere close to accurate:

"What happened to blacks decades ago is now happening to Muslims in America."

Not even, man.

Yes, the overall perception/opinion of Muslims is extremely poor, (and not just in this country), but suffering the same thing as what black people went through for centuries? Nah.

As far as the religious angle... actually, I better leave that one alone or everyone's jimmies'll get rustled.
laugh.gif
 
 
Last edited:
Just like my last response, I get what you're trying to say, but this right here is nowhere close to accurate:

"What happened to blacks decades ago is now happening to Muslims in America."

Not even, man.

Yes, the overall perception/opinion of Muslims is extremely poor, and not just in this country, but suffering the same thing as what black people went through for centuries? Nah.

As far as the religious angle... actually, I better leave that one alone or everyone's jimmies'll get rustled.:lol:  

I didn't mean what's happening to Muslims now is what happened to Black decades ago literally. But the latent views and perception of racism is prevalent.
 
Last edited:
And the media spins it to whatever satisfies their internal views or agendas. Again though, this has been going in since the concept of news/media has existed. Chomsky laid out his propaganda model in 88 and I think it still applies today
 
OK, so you're saying the ability for people to lash back would be different, not so much that the exposure would necessarily be worse.

I agree. Sure, Rocker (and Marge Schott) got a lot of heat for their comments, but in 2014, the backlash would definitely be much worst because so many social vehicles are in place that weren't even an idea yet in 199_.

Agreed 100%

Had Rocker said what he said now, he would've been eaten alive by the media and probably suspended for the year :lol:

That fool about to be on celebrity survivor lmaoooo

I was a fan of that sexist/racist bastard for some reason. Rather you wear it on your sleeve so I know where you stand. The closet **** is for the birds
 
That fool about to be on celebrity survivor lmaoooo

I was a fan of that sexist/racist bastard for some reason. Rather you wear it on your sleeve so I know where you stand. The closet **** is for the birds

I agree with you on this. I'd rather you be upfront about your racism than hide it.
 
I think things would be vastly different for guys like Rocker/Romanowski had their incidents happened during the social media era. I think it makes a HUGE difference as far as the amount of vitriol directed towards some of these guys.

Idk why people keep bringing up social media for..go check out some youtube comments or better yet search the word "n_gger" on twitter to find out how these kids really feel about black people.

The majority of these people using social media are no different than the clowns that watch fox news all day.
 
Not sure what that 'debunked' from JJs comment...

One random note, I've always found it funny the outrage and surprise towards Fox News. I almost appreciate the fact that they do not hide their agenda and bias. At least it is known and I understand what side they are coming from. I'm more insulted by news organizations that parade this 'impartial' stance when that is impossible and you have to search for the hidden agenda. Just something that's always irked me with people


Final note I don't find the 'clowns' that listen to everything Fox says any more sad than the same that for it with MSNBC. Extremist annoy regardless of which side
 
Last edited:
Absolutely agree w/ those last 6 words, dmx, but I've seen enough Nancy Grace & Glen Beck in my day to know that Fox News definetly tries to convince their viewers that they are offering an unbiased opinion... but that's another topic.
 
I watch Fox News more than any other news network so I can know what that group thinks...comes in handy whenever I get in a political debate
 
Welp, now we shall see how the media handles Michael Phelps situation.

No offense to Phelps or what he does...but he's a swimmer. I get it, that he's one of the best ever, but let's be real. He only really matters once every four years.
 
Wow! Haha! Dude is arguably the greatest Olympian ever. He always matter. The media should be more outraged because this isn't his first time being in trouble, plus he represents the country.
 
I've seen it reported, what else are you looking for on this one? DUIs generally don't get much more than he initial story unless there was an accident.


And Olympic athletes only matter around the Games, otherwise nobody knows what they are doing nor care :lol:
 
Wow! Haha! Dude is arguably the greatest Olympian ever. He always matter. The media should be more outraged because this isn't his first time being in trouble, plus he represents the country.


I've seen it reported, what else are you looking for on this one? DUIs generally don't get much more than he initial story unless there was an accident.


And Olympic athletes only matter around the Games, otherwise nobody knows what they are doing nor care :lol:

Bingo!

ESPECIALLY for a sport like swimming. Sorry, but right now Phelps is nothing but a blip on the radar.
 
I mean, it is his second offense. And he was driving twice the legal limit. But aight, I guess he gets a pass because the Olympics is only every 4 years. Even though I'm sure he competes more than just during the Olympics.
 
Last edited:
I'm confused on what your looking for here? Media outrage? People outrage? Police outrage? It was a DUI with no accident. He'll lose driving privileges, pay a stiff fine...and that's about it.

It's in the front of Yahoo...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom