Fox Sports Does Humiliating Whiteface Routine

[Bucky]

[tone]

wow its already down -

good commentary bucky - sad but true state of the US, still racist as hell if by racist you take it to mean not just using epithets but attaching caricaturish expectations to people based on their racial appearance

[IparryU]

wow its already down -

good commentary bucky - sad but true state of the US, still racist as hell if by racist you take it to mean not just using epithets but attaching caricaturish expectations to people based on their racial appearance

nope... just watched 30 sec of it before i just got sick of it... they also have a link with an apology to asians now...

[tone]

weird - seems down for me - you're also accessing from a japanese IP?

[Taro Toporific]

...a certain group makes you inherently buffoonish. Hey, Colorado and Utah..

But, but[color="Silver"]t[/color], that certain group from Utah and Colorado is inherently buffoonish.

[sublight]

Not just Fox Sports, why does all of Fox News insist on caricaturing whites as incorrigible racists?

They're not caricaturing? Then why on earth do all their reporters act that way?

Oh...

[Socratesabroad]

This is a Fox Sports segment making a joke about how schools from America's interior West are joining the previously mostly-coastal conference formerly known as the Pac-10. Students on the West Coast are not like students in Colorado and Utah, you see.

Wow, some people really see things that aren't there if they try hard enough.
I say this based on two, count 'em 2, facts:
1. Deadspin, the source of the original article, is to sports journalism what the Trabant was to auto engineering

This is abundantly apparent just from glancing at the site's headlines...

Roger Goodell Is Waving His Dick Around Only Because He Loves Us So Much
[and]
Holy Balls Christina McHale Is Ripped Too

Woodward and Bernstein, best beware, you face much stiffer competition...


And then there's the small fact that no one in the video is ever in blackface/whiteface, which means the headline is patently false.

They certainly we're thinkin' when they aired this. . . or, maybe they were:doh:

So if the headline was a lie, let's move on to Fact 2: what was the content of the video?
Well, viewers saw a bunch of Asian nerds, many of whom were bespectacled, spoke some degree of English, and had absolutely no idea what the announcer was talking about, much less an interest in football.

Clearly, the point of the video wasn't a "flagrant racial caricature" but to poke fun at the nerds (who just happened to be Asian) on the West Coast who could give a rat's ass about the PAC-10. I say "just happened to be Asian" since at the U of Southern Cal 30% of the student population are Asians (Amer-Asian + Inter. stud).

So Fox Sports was merely highlighting the fact that major changes were taking place in historic college football conferences and yet a third of campus had no idea the changes were taking place, much less what they meant.

Racism=No, Lack of passion for football=Yes

[sublight]

(who just happened to be Asian)

The odds of a random sample of 24 people (the number highlighted in the video) all being in the same 30% of the student body just by chance are 5219 to 1.

[Coligny]

The odds of a random sample of 24 people (the number highlighted in the video) all being in the same 30% of the student body just by chance are 5219 to 1.

Happenstance sometimes have to prevail in front of statistics...

(/hate stats... and numbers...)

[Socratesabroad]

The odds of a random sample of 24 people (the number highlighted in the video) all being in the same 30% of the student body just by chance are 5219 to 1.

Umm, sorry, I'm not buying it.

For starters, each person approached has roughly a 1/3 chance of being Asian. And like a coin toss (1 in 2, regardless of whether the previous flip was heads or tails) the probability remains the same for each person, i.e. 1 in 3.

Second, there weren't 24 people interviewed, there were only about 7-8, with some individuals appearing more than once. But no, you might attempt to reply, I was talking about anyone shown in the vid. And you'd be wrong yet again since some whites appear in the opening shots.

Third, there is no way to know if the sample is "random," but given the extremely small number of interviewees (7-8 out of a student pop of XX thousand) the likelihood is that it isn't. And there's also the question of just who was on-campus when the reporter did his interviews.

I'll confess that I'm bored and don't want to watch the vid yet again to further trounce your argument. Moreover, I don't want to expend any more brainpower determining how you came up with the mysterious "5219 to 1."