Offensive remarks indeed.

People are often dismissive about the rhetoric and perception the media uses and implies. “Oh they say this oh they say that.” We are the consumers of their product. Should we accept inferior reporting? Is it okay to let even one person feel alienated and ashamed by their use of words, when it was unnecessary and avoidable in the first place? I don’t think it’s a fair trade-off. They already walk a fine line between astute reporting and entertainment. I think it is irresponsible and ignorant. If there wasn’t a problem, why was somebody fired?

Your opinion is that the phrase is commonplace, therefore it is acceptable. I’m not speaking for any particular person, but if you were Asian and had been called a “chink” your whole life, and flipped over to ESPN to see/hear that, when they are SPECIFICALLY referring to somebody of Asian descent, I think you would view it a little differently.

Just because SOME people WEREN’T offended, doesn’t mean it ISN’T offensive.

South Park doesn’t offend me, I’m used to their shenanigans. But that show if offensive.
Because I’ve learned to tolerate their style and their spin on, well, everything, I’m not ever caught off guard. ESPN is supposed to be non-discriminatory. They aren’t supposed to be biased. Yes their bias slips through with this team or that. But if they are biased based upon race, there is a problem. It seems they solved it in their own way, but you can’t say it was acceptable, because the ESPN themselves knew it was wrong.

Reminds me of the name of one of books by timeless author Clayton Bigsby…

Right, because Rick Santorum not correcting a woman who said that Obama was “an avowed muslim” was about his policies, right?

Many republicans dislike Obama because he is a democrat. But, just as it was pretty easy to tell when snide comments made to Hillary Clinton were about her gender, it is pretty easy to tell when attacks on Obama are about his race or his being an “other” in general. And they do happen. Fairly frequently.

Just because you choose to stick your head in the sand and say that, because you have the privilage to ignore something, it doesn’t exist, doesn’t make it true.

It’s the same reason why nothing gets done anymore in Washington until the shit hits the fans. Everyone is too busy posturing to recognize, “Hey, this guy over here has a good-ass idea. Let’s get this shit done. I don’t give a fuck what letter precedes his name”.

We hear in sports about how owners and executives protect the brand first. Roger Goodell protects the shield. Jim Irsay protects the horseshoe. Well, guess what, the AD and president at PSU protected the brand when they heard about Sandusky, and look at how well that turned out.

Politicians aren’t about getting shit done anymore. They’re about protecting the brand and reaping the reward.

Mostly it’s his principles, but the whole Birther nonsense strikes me as having more to do with him being “other” than it does anything legitimate. When did we ever see something so ridiculous last for so long with a President before? Do you think that watermelon-patch-at-the-White-House email had nothing to do with Obama’s race?

The whole think would have been avoided if the writer and/or editor were not lazy and relying on trite, over-used expressions.

I agree, which is why the headline doesn’t make much sense without the awful play on words. So you can tell me the author didn’t know exactly what he was doing when he wrote it. That may be just my opinion speaking, but common sense tells me if the guy was dumb enough to write it, he was dumb enough to think he could get away with it, and probably doesn’t deserve to keep his job anyway.

But at the same time, we should never be ignorant of how something COULD be perceived as racist.

Just plain irresponsible. And frankly if you are that ignorant of social issues (as the people that allowed this to happen) you should not have the power to reach as of society as that headline and that comment did.

Either way, I think we’ve become so sensitive, that we now see racial overtones where none are intended.

I think this is a problematic outlook on the situation. Intended or not, this was people of privilege putting out something that can easily be seen as offensive and alienating to a specific group of people. Ingrained bias can be just as bad as straightforward bias. Just because the person in a position of privilege isn’t trying to be racist doesn’t mean that some 14 year old Asian kid reading ESPN won’t take the slur to heart. The people responsible for the content on ESPN have a responsibility to be better at their jobs than that.

sportswriters are known for recycling tired old expressions and making God-awful headlines out of them as a double-pun. They must think it’s clever or something.

The knock on Lin is that he turns the ball over too much. His high in TOs (9) comes in the Knicks’ first loss since he’s been a starter. Not having seen the game, I don’t know how much his TOs actually affected the outcome of the game. The 6, 7 and 8 TO games were all Ws. But still, the phrase fits the scenario as far as the sports story goes. “Overnight sensation is finally exposed for the TO machine he is”.

But you can’t, CAN’T, use that phrase when said overnight sensation is Asian. It’s beyond dumb.

but it’s still relevant AND prevalent. Trust me. So many people try and “relate” to me on race issues because I’m white and they think that I think what THEY think. Especially with what I do for a living and what side of town I am on.

They are quickly proven wrong, and generally end up insulted when I tell them how I actually feel. There is no place for that bullshit in my mind, in my heart, or in this country.

If you think its still bad here…go to France.

You’re not being accused of privilege. If you are a male, you have privilege. If you are white, you have privilege. If you are straight, you have privilege. No way around it. The accusation is that you are failing to recognize that and failing to understand how it colors your perception of what people who do not have that privilege deal with.

but then it was a commercial break and I had to wait 15 minutes to get the answer."

The Haitian guy did take some offense, even if only a little. If he said, “Dude, are you serious?” he was obviously pointing out your brother’s offensive misstep. He didn’t ignore it. Now he didn’t overreact, which I think is your argument (and a good one) but he still brought some bit of attention to an inappropriate word or phrase, did he not?

In a personal example like the one with you and your brother at the bar, attention was drawn to the situation, your brother realized be was wrong, apologized and you moved on. It was an appropriate response to that situation

In a situation like the one with Lin, where an international media outlet is using a slur like that, the appropriate reaction is multiplied by the scope of the offense. ESPN didn’t just say one offensive thing that one guy could see or hear. They said it 3 times (Web, TV and Radio) on a platform where millions could hear. It’s a totally different scenario than your bar example and the reaction need to be different.

So, you’re right. You can’t crucify every person that utters a racial slur. But you have to be clear that it won’t stand. The best way to accomplish that depends on the individual situation. You and your brother handled it appropriately in the bar. National outrage and firings are the appropriate way to handle the Lin situation.