I don't know this for a fact, but I think that golf writer Dan O'Neill (if that is your real name, Wanny) has probably written his last column for NBC. Why do I think that?
Well, Dan, in an attempt to discuss Sergio Garcia's on-course struggles kind of glanced at the proverbial line, started running, jumped over it and landed about 100 yards past said stripe.
See, O'Neil was attempting to draw a parallel between Garcia and Phil Mickelson. Lefty needed 42 majors played before he won one. Sergio just
You remember the No. 42. That was the number of majors Phil Mickelson played in before he won the 2004 Masters. That's the amount of frustration, heartbreak and second-guessing "Lefty" endured before he got that Jackie Robinson off his back.Now, technically, Jackie Robinson is a number 42. However, when you're discussing someone's inability to achieve something, you don't say, "Man, glad to finally get that 42 off my back!" You say "Whew! Glad that monkey is finally off my back."
Which means that, yes, unfortunately, Dan (and whoever the hell edited this column), you just made "Jackie Robinson" a synonym for "monkey". Which would probably be fine if the latter wasn't a term frequently used by people with bigoted predispositions.
Racism's not cool or acceptable in any form, even if it's unintentional, but when it's published on a major media outlet's website for millions of people to see, it becomes really, really ignorant. And when it involves golf -- a sport that is traditionally perceived as a one-toned athletic event (thanks for that, Fuzzy) -- it doesn't make it any easier to swallow.
So people, writers, editors: stop using language that could be racially charged. It's not necessary to the context, it makes people angry and in the end, people lose their jobs. Not saying ignore it, just use your brain.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-12-2008 @ 5:20PM
Adam Jacobi said...
Good question, Will--where's the editor to catch that and say, "regardless of how innocent your intentions are, that's a really unfortunate choice of words" and get that changed?
Reply
8-12-2008 @ 5:46PM
romegas314 said...
"Racism's not cool or acceptable in any form, even if it's unintentional[.]"
If it's not intentional, how is it racism? It would seem to me that this instead would qualify as a poor choice of words because of other people's racism. A reprimand and reminder to the writer and editor, yes; a firing, no.
"So people, writers, editors: stop using language that could be racially charged."
Seeing as how that could encompass, y'know, everything, I'd have to say that proposed rule is waaaay too broad.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:47AM
hootie_69 said...
How is it racist if its unintentional you ask? There is this magical thing called the subconscious, I suggest that you look into it.
8-13-2008 @ 11:20AM
Ben said...
You cannot be unintentionally racist.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:32AM
hootie_69 said...
Are you kidding? Of course you can be unintentionally racist. If a black person walks past you and you get the sudden desire to lock you car door, guess what, its racist. Its not the most horrible thing in the world and it wasn't intentional but if it was a reaction due to the color of someones skin it was a racist action.
Just because you aren't setting up crosses on peoples lawns it doesn't mean that you're not at all racist. Its not a black and white issue (excuse the unintentional pun) its a shaded issue with most people occupying the territory between the extremes. You can be just a little racist, that doesn't make you a horrible person. I would say thats where most people in this country would qualify and its much improved from where we were 50 years ago. I might also like to point out that having a friend of a different race doesn't mean that you're not racist, It just means that you're not at one extreme of the spectrum.
The word racist just has such a horrible stigma attached to it at this point that it make people overly defensive when the word gets used. Just calm down and remember that there is plenty of room in the space between Hitler and MLK.
8-12-2008 @ 7:59PM
Matt said...
Good point romegas. How about they just fire him for stupidity then?
Reply
8-12-2008 @ 7:24PM
KingGreat said...
You've got to be kidding me!!! He was CLEARLY referring to the number. Your overblown attempt to make a racial mountain out of the flattest of molehills highlights your stupidity and inability to reach past the ridiculous oversensitivity of yourself and like-minded people. People like yourself cater to the most snivelling, the unbearably whiny, weasely, petty, and most common denominator. I cannot believe that you would cast aspersions on what is an obviously tame attempt at obscure humor, and suggest that another human being was being racist in order to fabricate your column. It is widely held that those that are ignorant and intolerant are frequently racist. By virtue of your display of ignorance and intolerance, in addition to blatant attempt to stir the pot for no good reason, I will gladly announce that YOU are the racist, instead. I challenge you to put ANY of my points to rest. Until you find the balls to debate me, or rescind your asinine comments, you should be viewed as nothing less than an insufferable racist, and piss-poor columnist.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:44AM
hootie_69 said...
Racists often use exclamation points, you used exclamation points so you must be a racist. That is some amazingly sound logic you're using.
Thinking that something has racial overtones (even if it doesn't) doesn't make someone racist, it just means that they are overly sensitive to racial issues. Buy a dictionary, then use it.
8-12-2008 @ 9:07PM
Tom Ward said...
If it weren't for people like that scumbag "REV" Jesse Jackson (I'd spit on him if I ever saw him), people wouldn't use the race card as such a crutch --- EVERYTHING's racist according to those people...people are such pussies.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 4:14PM
Jesse Martinez said...
Tom we as a people are all racist. It's in our nature. We haven't evolved since we came out of the caves. When we belong to the a group of people we just can't find all good in another group of people.
You are still in the cave mentally if you would spit at another person just because it's in your nature to hate that person.
We had a Civil War a few years ago that almost half a million white Americans killed each other. Depending where your from that war still is not over. A Yankee and a Rebel were different races in the eyes of those who fought in that war.
Go back to your cave until you have overcome wanting to spit at a person.
8-17-2008 @ 4:35PM
j.howlett said...
what do you mean "those people"
8-12-2008 @ 8:01PM
scraphoops said...
I hate to say this, but I agree with everyone above. Where's the editor. He/She should have definitely caught that. But I also think it is fairly clear it was the number association he was going for. I think he is guilty of trying to hard to be clever more than anything.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:04AM
Shane Bacon said...
The truth is, a poor choice of words is the cross you bear as a journalist. No matter if he missed this completely, there are people in your inner circle that should have caught such a blatant faux pas.
No matter if you argue racism can be intentional or not, a person who works with words and gets paid to make intelligent, argumentative points within reason should not be so ignorant as to allow this to happen.
I'm sorry, the "42" point was solid, but ignorantly timed. Never should Jackie Robinson's name ever be mistaken for anything than the racial sword from the stone he was. If you are this dense, reap the consequences.
Reply