THE RACIAL SLUR used in a headline by the Washington Post for a story about Yao Ming's impact on the NBA has generated a bit of discussion among journalists that may, or might not be, of interest to other people outside of that profession but it is something journalists talk about all the time, or, at least they should.
Media critic Richard Prince found the article on AsAm News, which has permission to reprint my posts. As a better known writer than me, he has the access that our all-volunteer effort doesn't have.
Prince was able to get in touch with the Slot at the Washington Post that approved the controversial headline. Prince writes in his blog, Journal-isms:
Barbers got a little snarky there, eh? That doesn't bother me, but never mind.
The AsAm News got to see the strongly worded letter to the WaPo from the Asian American Journalists Association that explained the AAJA's objection to the offensive term that was used in the headline.
As it turns out, according to Fred Barbash, who edits the Post’s “Morning Mix,” where the story appeared, the story and headline were written by a Chinese-American “who is quite sensitive to this issue.” She used the word “Chinaman” in her story as an example of the slurs to which Ming was subjected:
“During a Rockets game in 2004, former basketball player and TNT broadcaster Steve Kerr also referred to Yao as a ‘Chinaman,‘ a derogatory term dating back to the mid-1800s, when Americans feared that the ‘Yellow Peril’ would dominate the labor force. (Kerr later apologized.). . . .
Barbash told Journal-isms by telephone, “I realize that some people find it offensive. I found it germane to the story and avoided sugar-coating it.”
Barbash messaged later, “Having now read this, it’s way off base. The ‘author herself’— Yanan Wang (not Wong — which copy editor let that through?) is quite familiar with the Asian American community in North America (she’s from Canada, her family immigrated from China) and wrote the headline, which was approved by me. It was changed long after we went to bed (we work all night) by someone else.” Headlines are changed sometimes three or four times in the course of their web life, Barbash said.
There was no apology.
 |
| The offensive headline |
The AsAm News got to see the strongly worded letter to the WaPo from the Asian American Journalists Association that explained the AAJA's objection to the offensive term that was used in the headline.
In a weakly worded explanation, a WaPo spokesperson responded:
“The story deals with the bigotry Yao Ming encountered and had to overcome. The headline was an effort to convey that, and the story also makes it clear that this is a derogatory term.
“During a Rockets game in 2004, former basketball player and TNT broadcaster Steve Kerr also referred to Yao as a “Chinaman,” a derogatory term dating back to the mid-1800s, when Americans feared that the “Yellow Peril” would dominate the labor force. (Kerr later apologized.)
“In this case, the headline was modified to ensure clarity. Since there was no factual error, no correction was made.”
If that was truly the case, why was the offensive term removed in subsequent headline? WaPo's explanation and lack of an apology lit up the Twitterverse.
The Washington Post generally does a good job on stories about Asian/Americans and I understand the pressure of deadlines and making quick decisions. However, it makes me wonder if less thought was put into the headline's potential to be offensive because it referred to Asians instead of another ethnic group.
I have this sinking feeling that like this year's Oscarcast in which apparently everyone in the production thought it was OK to poke fun at Asians, in some sectors, it is still OK to offend Asians because people think, well ... we're quiet and, you know, we won't make a big fuss.
Is there even a chance for an admission of poor judgement - uh, even "a (racial slur)'s chance?"
###
No comments:
Post a Comment