Iowa announcer suspended for season for referring to Bruno Fernando as King Kong

A couple thoughts:
1. unlike the rest of us Schmoes, this guy is an announcer and he's paid to say the right thing (or not to say the wrong thing). He could have said a million things to get his point across and he grabbed the red-hot poker at the hot end. Its his job to not do that.
2. no college sports team is going to be very forgiving of a staff member using racially loaded language. Whatever his intent was, how do you explain this nonsense to visiting parents.
3. For the folks who don't see the problem, I wonder if you'd be willing to show the strength of your conviction? Send an email to everyone at your work comparing an African American to an ape or monkey. Of course do it in the most positive way that you can. I'm sure you'll get a lot of love for not being controlled by political correctness and, no doubt, everyone will love you event more. Please report back on your new hero status.
 

A couple thoughts:
1. unlike the rest of us Schmoes, this guy is an announcer and he's paid to say the right thing (or not to say the wrong thing). He could have said a million things to get his point across and he grabbed the red-hot poker at the hot end. Its his job to not do that.
2. no college sports team is going to be very forgiving of a staff member using racially loaded language. Whatever his intent was, how do you explain this nonsense to visiting parents.
3. For the folks who don't see the problem, I wonder if you'd be willing to show the strength of your conviction? Send an email to everyone at your work comparing an African American to an ape or monkey. Of course do it in the most positive way that you can. I'm sure you'll get a lot of love for not being controlled by political correctness and, no doubt, everyone will love you event more. Please report back on your new hero status.

I agree with most of what you are saying. However, I don't think the announcer was comparing the player to an ape or monkey. He wasnt comparing his personal or physical features/characteristics to an ape, rather his gameplay to a fictional character that went berserk. I do agree that he needs/needed to be more careful of his word selection, but I don't think the penalty fits the crime. A one game suspension would have sent the message to him just fine. A one game suspension says "be more careful with your words." A suspension for the rest of the season says "you just said something racist."
 

I agree with most of what you are saying. However, I don't think the announcer was comparing the player to an ape or monkey. He wasnt comparing his personal or physical features/characteristics to an ape, rather his gameplay to a fictional character that went berserk. I do agree that he needs/needed to be more careful of his word selection, but I don't think the penalty fits the crime. A one game suspension would have sent the message to him just fine. A one game suspension says "be more careful with your words." A suspension for the rest of the season says "you just said something racist."

Maybe, but given a choice -- I'd rather fire the guy than spend the year ahead explaining to parents of players and recruits that from now on were are going to be "more careful." The guy insulted a player on a live broadcast, and then said a bad thing. I've been in situations like this in my business and I'd say this is an easy call. There's no significant downside to firing him (as much as fans might bellyache about political correctness, do you they won't buy a ticket or a jersey cause this guy is gone -- and there's real potential risk of keeping him. Easy business decision, I think.
 

In describing the loss in the postgame:

"Twelve threes on 22 made baskets. That’s some pretty good long-range shooting," Dolphin said. "And then Fernando was King Kong at the end of the game."

Color commentator Bobby Hansen replied, "Yeah, he was. And they had done a really good job, Gary, for the most part rebounding."

Any rational human being would realize he was talking about why they lost, which was the 3's and Fernando being unstoppable......................oh, never mind!

Is Bobby Hansen being disciplined? He agreed with Dolphin. Oh wait, Hansen has the brains to know what Dolphin meant with King Kong. As do I, as does any other normal thinking person.

Carry on!

Be careful now you may confuse some people here with the truth of what he intended his comment to mean.
 

Be careful now you may confuse some people here with the truth of what he intended his comment to mean.

Nobody here questioned his intent. This guy wasn't suspended just for this comment. He was suspended because these remarks came after a prior suspension where he (and this time with bad intent) maligned a weaker Iowa player. He didn't know the microphone was on. He needs to be more careful. Like it or not, Dunceswithwolves was correct when he wrote: "unlike the rest of us Schmoes, this guy is an announcer and he's paid to say the right thing."
 


Ok, a few thoughts:

the culture has changed over the last 40-50 years. things that were more acceptable then are less acceptable now. you may not like it, but it's reality.

there is a history of people comparing blacks to apes or monkeys in a derogatory way.

Now, do I think the Iowa announcer is a flaming racist who was trying to disparage a black player? No.

But, like it or not, in today's climate, and in the age of the internet, every word you say is going to be scrutinized.

Are there people who go out looking for things to be offended about? Yes.

That does not give other people the right to dismiss potentially offensive comments by blaming everything on "political correctness." That is an excuse in and of itself.

And finally - I do not have the right to decide what another person thinks is offensive. I may think that calling someone a "retard" is fine. The parent of a child with developmental disabilities may have a very different viewpoint on the matter.
 

Ok, a few thoughts:

the culture has changed over the last 40-50 years. things that were more acceptable then are less acceptable now. you may not like it, but it's reality.

there is a history of people comparing blacks to apes or monkeys in a derogatory way.

Now, do I think the Iowa announcer is a flaming racist who was trying to disparage a black player? No.

But, like it or not, in today's climate, and in the age of the internet, every word you say is going to be scrutinized.

Are there people who go out looking for things to be offended about? Yes.

That does not give other people the right to dismiss potentially offensive comments by blaming everything on "political correctness." That is an excuse in and of itself.

And finally - I do not have the right to decide what another person thinks is offensive. I may think that calling someone a "retard" is fine. The parent of a child with developmental disabilities may have a very different viewpoint on the matter.

A most considered and thought provoking sermon today, Vicar. Thank you. God bless!
 

Ok, a few thoughts:

the culture has changed over the last 40-50 years. things that were more acceptable then are less acceptable now. you may not like it, but it's reality.

there is a history of people comparing blacks to apes or monkeys in a derogatory way.

Now, do I think the Iowa announcer is a flaming racist who was trying to disparage a black player? No.

But, like it or not, in today's climate, and in the age of the internet, every word you say is going to be scrutinized.

Are there people who go out looking for things to be offended about? Yes.

That does not give other people the right to dismiss potentially offensive comments by blaming everything on "political correctness." That is an excuse in and of itself.

And finally - I do not have the right to decide what another person thinks is offensive. I may think that calling someone a "retard" is fine. The parent of a child with developmental disabilities may have a very different viewpoint on the matter.

You encapsulated everything very well! I would add that this guy is a professional and paid to announce. He's not some random guy on the internet. I think any announcer, whether him or Dick Vitale should be careful about calling any players out of their names.
 

Ok, a few thoughts:

the culture has changed over the last 40-50 years. things that were more acceptable then are less acceptable now. you may not like it, but it's reality.

there is a history of people comparing blacks to apes or monkeys in a derogatory way.

Now, do I think the Iowa announcer is a flaming racist who was trying to disparage a black player? No.

But, like it or not, in today's climate, and in the age of the internet, every word you say is going to be scrutinized.

Are there people who go out looking for things to be offended about? Yes.

That does not give other people the right to dismiss potentially offensive comments by blaming everything on "political correctness." That is an excuse in and of itself.

And finally - I do not have the right to decide what another person thinks is offensive. I may think that calling someone a "retard" is fine. The parent of a child with developmental disabilities may have a very different viewpoint on the matter.

So who or why do people have a problem here?

Who or what people decided that saying something non-racist needs to not be said because it's racist?

Oh wait, it's now the country we live in is the answer. PUKE

I LOVE THIS COUNTRY! LMAO
 



Ok, a few thoughts:

the culture has changed over the last 40-50 years. things that were more acceptable then are less acceptable now. you may not like it, but it's reality.

there is a history of people comparing blacks to apes or monkeys in a derogatory way.

Now, do I think the Iowa announcer is a flaming racist who was trying to disparage a black player? No.

But, like it or not, in today's climate, and in the age of the internet, every word you say is going to be scrutinized.

Are there people who go out looking for things to be offended about? Yes.

That does not give other people the right to dismiss potentially offensive comments by blaming everything on "political correctness." That is an excuse in and of itself.

And finally - I do not have the right to decide what another person thinks is offensive. I may think that calling someone a "retard" is fine. The parent of a child with developmental disabilities may have a very different viewpoint on the matter.

Great post. I just tortured myself by reading/skimming this whole thread, and this is the first time anyone mentioned that one demographic doesn’t get to decide what is/isn’t offensive towards another, completely regardless of intent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Great post. I just tortured myself by reading/skimming this whole thread, and this is the first time anyone mentioned that one demographic doesn’t get to decide what is/isn’t offensive towards another, completely regardless of intent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I disagree, sir!

Most all Indians want the Washington Redskins to keep their name. Intellectual elites(as they think of themselves) are telling them otherwise.

I hate to say this, but I think it's old, angry, white men who decide a lot of what is and is not offensive.
 

I disagree, sir!

Most all Indians want the Washington Redskins to keep their name. Intellectual elites(as they think of themselves) are telling them otherwise.

I hate to say this, but I think it's old, angry, white men who decide a lot of what is and is not offensive.

Not sure if I agree with this. A while back there were some protests, polls etc.,. Things didn't look good for Washington to keep their nick name. I take it you have information lately that this has changed?
 




So GoldTeam, you are doubling down now by saying racial slurs like Redskin are just fine for a pro sports franchise name because one poll in 2016 said so?
It’s okay to change who we are as a culture and be more sensitive. It doesn’t mean that things are going downhill if more people feel included.
Check out this native leader’s q & a to that poll you referenced for a little more background.
https://www.npr.org/2016/05/21/4790...der-responds-to-washington-post-redskins-poll
 

Interesting thread. If there's one thing I think we can all agree on, it's that when it comes to race, race relations, racial sensitivity, and racial slurs, middle aged white men undoubtedly have proven that they deserve the benefit of the doubt. In addition, the one thing we all must be aware of in these matters of race is how our responses to these issues affect the sensibilities of other middle aged white males first and foremost
 

I disagree, sir!

Most all Indians want the Washington Redskins to keep their name. Intellectual elites(as they think of themselves) are telling them otherwise.

I hate to say this, but I think it's old, angry, white men who decide a lot of what is and is not offensive.

This is what is discouraging for sensible people.

In a general statement, I suggest that offensive language shouldn’t be determined the out-group, but rather by the potentially offended.

Yet you disagree.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Interesting thread. If there's one thing I think we can all agree on, it's that when it comes to race, race relations, racial sensitivity, and racial slurs, middle aged white men undoubtedly have proven that they deserve the benefit of the doubt. In addition, the one thing we all must be aware of in these matters of race is how our responses to these issues affect the sensibilities of other middle aged white males first and foremost

Didn't St Olaf have a big racial issue a year or two ago? How did that turn out? I like how you use identity politics to group people together. It makes it much easier to divide that way.

I don't think the announcer should have used the phrase "King Kong" when describing an African American player. I know making that comparison would be very offensive to many African Americans, even though I don't believe that was his intent.

My goal is to try to be accepting of all people, regardless if they are different than I am as far as ethnicity, sexual preference and politically. It would be nice if we could look at each other without our difference in mind. I think what bothers some people is that acceptance and tolerance seem to go only one way.
 

Ok, a few thoughts:

the culture has changed over the last 40-50 years. things that were more acceptable then are less acceptable now. you may not like it, but it's reality.

there is a history of people comparing blacks to apes or monkeys in a derogatory way.

Now, do I think the Iowa announcer is a flaming racist who was trying to disparage a black player? No.

But, like it or not, in today's climate, and in the age of the internet, every word you say is going to be scrutinized.

Are there people who go out looking for things to be offended about? Yes.

That does not give other people the right to dismiss potentially offensive comments by blaming everything on "political correctness." That is an excuse in and of itself.

And finally - I do not have the right to decide what another person thinks is offensive. I may think that calling someone a "retard" is fine. The parent of a child with developmental disabilities may have a very different viewpoint on the matter.

well said
 


There's some serious problems with that poll:https://www.thenation.com/article/on-the-shameful-and-skewed-redskins-poll/

So if you believe all you say, why don't you start writing letters to the editors, emails to your co-workers, calling blacks by various complimentary references to apes and monkeys and such. Don't let the politically correct hold you back -- take control of your destiny. Call a spade a .... (well you get the point).
 

Didn't St Olaf have a big racial issue a year or two ago? How did that turn out? I like how you use identity politics to group people together. It makes it much easier to divide that way.

I don't think the announcer should have used the phrase "King Kong" when describing an African American player. I know making that comparison would be very offensive to many African Americans, even though I don't believe that was his intent.

My goal is to try to be accepting of all people, regardless if they are different than I am as far as ethnicity, sexual preference and politically. It would be nice if we could look at each other without our difference in mind. I think what bothers some people is that acceptance and tolerance seem to go only one way.

I know it's tough for white folks but black people have been grouped together since we've been in this country. Its always interesting watching white people lose their minds over being grouped with other folks. That's just a tiny taste of what it's like to be black and people have conniption fits over it lol
 

So GoldTeam, you are doubling down now by saying racial slurs like Redskin are just fine for a pro sports franchise name because one poll in 2016 said so?
It’s okay to change who we are as a culture and be more sensitive. It doesn’t mean that things are going downhill if more people feel included.
Check out this native leader’s q & a to that poll you referenced for a little more background.
https://www.npr.org/2016/05/21/4790...der-responds-to-washington-post-redskins-poll


It's not a racial slur to most Indians.

The Cowboys are going to play the Redskins.

We didn't figure it out that it was offensive until a few years back when some angry, old, white guys decided it should be racist.

You don't name your team to put down a group of people, you do it to honor them. Vikings, Cowboys, Redskins, Celtics, and on and on.

You are seeing things that aren't there.
 

I know it's tough for white folks but black people have been grouped together since we've been in this country. Its always interesting watching white people lose their minds over being grouped with other folks. That's just a tiny taste of what it's like to be black and people have conniption fits over it lol

You obviously didn't read my post after the first line. My post was about looking at people without seeing our differences...

Yours was about grouping people together because you think that makes me lose my mind or have a conniption.
 

You obviously didn't read my post after the first line. My post was about looking at people without seeing our differences...

Yours was about grouping people together because you think that makes me lose my mind or have a conniption.

My post wasn't about you personally which is why I used plural nouns. And my point still stands. And not seeing differences is a poor goal because that assumes people exist outside of things like race, gender and culture. The goal SHOULD be to accept and appreciate the differences not ignore them. Your statement is akin to the 'I don't see race' crowd. Truthfully for most they say that because it is easier than actually appreciating those differences. I don't want you to not see my blackness. It's a large part of who I am. Ignoring it does nothing for me, it only serves to make you more comfortable.
 


It's not a racial slur to most Indians.
>>>>>>>>

Here's a check on that poll and your certainty:

67 Percent of Native Americans Say ‘Redskins’ Is Offensive


"That now infamous 2004 Associated Press Annenberg survey – quoted ad nauseam by TV pundits, fans, and even NFL representatives – said that a majority of Native Americans believe the name “Redskins” is not offensive.

Well, according to a California professor, they’re all wrong. James Fenelon, Lakota/Dakota from Standing Rock, a sociology professor at California State University, San Bernardino, compiled his own data, and the results show that 67 percent of Native Americans believe that “Redskins” is a racist word.

During a news conference in January, when NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said that nine out of ten Native Americans “prefer” the name “Redskins,” he was quoting that 2004 survey of 768 people who identified themselves as American Indian.

“Of course it is both disgusting and predictable,” Fenelon told ICTMN about the 90 percent figure that Goodell quoted. “It is a major reason why I agreed to take this [study] on… The dominant society knows on some level that it is bogus to run these uncritical polls, and then reproduce results that don’t resonate with real experience.”

https://newsmaven.io/indiancountryt...redskins-is-offensive-fOsUcarY9kGSU9jpfLospg/
 

>>>>>>>>

Here's a check on that poll and your certainty:

67 Percent of Native Americans Say ‘Redskins’ Is Offensive


"That now infamous 2004 Associated Press Annenberg survey – quoted ad nauseam by TV pundits, fans, and even NFL representatives – said that a majority of Native Americans believe the name “Redskins” is not offensive.

Well, according to a California professor, they’re all wrong. James Fenelon, Lakota/Dakota from Standing Rock, a sociology professor at California State University, San Bernardino, compiled his own data, and the results show that 67 percent of Native Americans believe that “Redskins” is a racist word.

During a news conference in January, when NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said that nine out of ten Native Americans “prefer” the name “Redskins,” he was quoting that 2004 survey of 768 people who identified themselves as American Indian.

“Of course it is both disgusting and predictable,” Fenelon told ICTMN about the 90 percent figure that Goodell quoted. “It is a major reason why I agreed to take this [study] on… The dominant society knows on some level that it is bogus to run these uncritical polls, and then reproduce results that don’t resonate with real experience.”

https://newsmaven.io/indiancountryt...redskins-is-offensive-fOsUcarY9kGSU9jpfLospg/

A sociology professor at California State.................why of course!
 

Dave Kingman’s nickname was King Kong. He hit home runs and struck out a lot.
 

Ok, a few thoughts:

the culture has changed over the last 40-50 years. things that were more acceptable then are less acceptable now. you may not like it, but it's reality.

there is a history of people comparing blacks to apes or monkeys in a derogatory way.

Now, do I think the Iowa announcer is a flaming racist who was trying to disparage a black player? No.

But, like it or not, in today's climate, and in the age of the internet, every word you say is going to be scrutinized.

Are there people who go out looking for things to be offended about? Yes.

That does not give other people the right to dismiss potentially offensive comments by blaming everything on "political correctness." That is an excuse in and of itself.

And finally - I do not have the right to decide what another person thinks is offensive. I may think that calling someone a "retard" is fine. The parent of a child with developmental disabilities may have a very different viewpoint on the matter.

Well done.
 

I'm sorry that some folks on here are so aggrieved that the announcer has been suspended for the last couple of games of the season for comparing a black player to an ape monster. There are a million ways that he could have described the player's dominant performance that would not have carried historic racial undertones. As a couple of other posters have referenced, would he have referred to a large, dominant white player in the same way? I've never heard it. At best, he was lazy. People who label the response as "PC" are lazy. Words do matter. Given the historic racist connotations, comparing African Americans to apes or monkeys straight up pisses a lot of people off and it's a ridiculously easy thing to avoid if someone is halfway trying.

A three game suspension seems proportionate.
 

It's not a racial slur to most Indians.

The Cowboys are going to play the Redskins.

We didn't figure it out that it was offensive until a few years back when some angry, old, white guys decided it should be racist.

You don't name your team to put down a group of people, you do it to honor them. Vikings, Cowboys, Redskins, Celtics, and on and on.

You are seeing things that aren't there.

Chris Rock had a whole bit about the Redskins name on Weekend Update in the mid-90s. My friends and I talked about that for weeks. I couldn't find video, but:

https://books.google.de/books?id=6W...ins that's like calling them new york&f=false
 




Top Bottom