Jump to content

Why Am I Not Surprised ...


Loburt
 Share

Recommended Posts

I suppose it was just a matter of time ....

How could they make fun

of such a tragedy?

BY FRANK LOMBARDI

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Tuesday, January 25th, 2005

Hip-hop radio station HOT 97 has sparked outrage across the city by airing a twisted song that shockingly mocks the 200,000 victims of the South Asian tsunami.

The radio station, WQHT, was forced to air an apology yesterday after the insulting song - whose lyrics include racial epithets aimed at Asians - was played for four days last week by morning deejay Miss Jones.

"We are absolutely appalled, saddened, outraged and angered," said Kai Yu of Asian Media Watch.

The nasty parody, sung to the tune of "We Are the World," makes light of how the killer tsunami "washed your whole country away."

Some of the other tasteless lyrics refer jokingly to orphaned children being sold into slavery.

"You're sick," City Councilman Robert Jackson (D-Manhattan) fumed at HOT 97.

Before one airing of the song, the station's news reader, Miss Info, who is of Asian descent, objected to the song, only to be attacked by Jones and her cohorts.

"That song is really offensive to me, and I opted not to involve myself," Miss Info said.

Jones replied, "I know you feel you're superior because you're Asian, but you're not." Later, co-host Todd Lyn, incensed at Miss Info's criticism, said, "I'm going to start shooting Asians."

Councilman John Liu (D-Queens) said it was outrageous that the station, owned by Emmis Communications Corp., aired the song for four days.

"It degrades the more than 200,000 victims," Liu said.

Liu and other Asian leaders have called for the Federal Communications Commission to crack down on the station and demanded that Miss Jones, whose full name is Tarsha Jones, be fired.

Jones and program director John Dimick both read apologies on the air yesterday.

"HOT 97 regrets the airing of material that made light of a serious and tragic event," Dimick said. "We apologize to our listeners and anyone who was offended."

Jones and six people working on her show will donate a week of their salaries to tsunami relief, Dimick said.

But Dimick refused to say whether Jones would be fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have to admit that the song parody made me a little queezy as well. It was such a huge tragedy that struck close to home for me in the loss of an acquaintance. But I realize that this sort of thing will go on and as sad as it is I'm just going to chalk it up to stupidy and move on. Hopefully not, but one day the tables will probably be turned and they may realize the insensitivity of the skit. Let's hope we all have a little more empathy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I suppose it was just a matter of time ."

Maybe but the point is that it is way too soon for such a thing. The tragedy is ongoing and the actual event only a month old.

absolutely.

at some point really sick f**ked up humor is part of the healing process but we are waaaaaaay too close to it and this just comes off as callous and *ssholish.

if these *ssholes were about to be run down by a bus, i'd try to save the bus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While dark humor can certainly be part of a healing process, I'm not sure this song, if that's what you call it, will ever be okay, no matter how much time passes.

I think the comments by the DJ, etc., show this wasn't about lightening anyone's feelings. It was motivated by contempt, if not hatred, for others of a different race, and Miss Jones made that pretty clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing that makes ppl feel joy differently from feeling pains is that pain usually bonds people who face the same tragic together.

it is also easier to feel others' joys than to feel others' pains.

so, when someone has no relation to the cause of pain or to the pain, it is possible that s/he just couldnt be nobel about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before one airing of the song, the station's news reader, Miss Info, who is of Asian descent, objected to the song, only to be attacked by Jones and her cohorts.

"That song is really offensive to me, and I opted not to involve myself," Miss Info said.

Jones replied, "I know you feel you're superior because you're Asian, but you're not." Later, co-host Todd Lyn, incensed at Miss Info's criticism, said, "I'm going to start shooting Asians."

.

i haven't heard the song, but i think what they have said above may give some kind of insight to the type of ppl we are talking about ....... sick racist bigotted bastards r a few words that spring to mind ........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For anyone who want to know more about the story..

http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/01/26/quake.slur.reut/

http://www.real-hiphop.com/rh2004-headlines.htm

The whole song lyric

Lyrics:

"There was a time, when the sun was shining bright

So I went down to the beach to catch me a tan.

Then the next thing I knew, a wave 20 feet high

Came and washed your whole country away.

And all at once, you can hear the screaming chinks.

And no one was saved from the wave.

There were Africans drowning, little Chinamen swept away.

You can hear God laughing, 'Swim you ******* swim.'

[Chorus]

"So now you're screwed. It's the tsunami,

You better run and kiss your ass away. Go find your mommy.

I just saw her float by, a tree went through her head.

And now your children will be sold. Child slavery."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never seen the film about malcolm x but i read a bit about his life story and he certainly was someone worthy of being murdered.

they also made a film about the black panthers, a movement that believed that the rape of White women was a legitimate tactic in their so called struggle.

one thing that's clear, you guys are beating on straw men. you dont know enough about malcolm x and definitely dont know enough about the black panthers to have an opinion worth listening to.

taking something out of context and making a cartoon of it does not constitute making a rational case for something.

andy, some of the groups you describe are totally f**ked up, but you dont' know nearly enough about it and arent nearly objective enough to be the narrator of that subject. i've read up a little and i actually know black panthers and *i* dont know enough to be the narrator.

i have no interest in discussing the merits of malcolm x or the black panthers, but neither should you guys, you're just talking out your ass about stuff you dont know much about.

bottom line: you guys dont know enough about malcolm x or the black panthers to have an opinion worth hearing.

oh and ps celticcola: critiquing propagandistic films is fine, but it aint history. it's a movie. you cannot make conclusions about a historical figure based on a movie. they're called "fiction films" for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh and ps celticcola: critiquing propagandistic films is fine, but it aint history. it's a movie. you cannot make conclusions about a historical figure based on a movie. they're called "fiction films" for a reason.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Film-making class 1.01 is how to write a disclaimer like:

"events portrayed not based on any person living or dead" serve the purpose of dramatising a subject.

In the event of movies that do address actions that really did happen, there's another disclaimer.... but I cant remember its legal bull$hit at the moment - maybe ZBH still has his notes from that class, and can fill in this blank?

And then there's the mother of all disclaimers, that state categorically that the movie was "based on a true story" - and often followed by an update of what happened to the people involved during the time elapsed since the events depicted in the movie, and the time that the movie was shot....

Such disclaimers allow film-makers to have certain creative license to portray the subject/event from certain angles, which often can mean that the real truth can become slightly manipulated, and leave the viewer with a desired view rather than an impartial view.

A recent movie that certainly is a good example of such actions is Farenheight 9/11 - Michael Moore has made no secret of his dislike for the Bush Administration.... his movie was very pointed at humiliating Bush, by slightly manipulating - or perhaps more accurately, changing the contexts of real events in order to give people the same opinion of Bush that Moore has.

Just shows the impact, and the power that the media has over the consumers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh and ps celticcola: critiquing propagandistic films is fine, but it aint history. it's a movie. you cannot make conclusions about a historical figure based on a movie. they're called "fiction films" for a reason.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Film-making class 1.01 is how to write a disclaimer...

generally no disclaimer is needed, it is generally assumed that if you look at the screen and see denzel washington, you might figure out that it isnt actually malcolm x. disclaimers are solely about protecting the project from legal action and not at all about 'moral' responsibility.

And then there's the mother of all disclaimers, that state categorically that the movie was "based on a true story" - and often followed by an update of what happened to the people involved during the time elapsed since the events depicted in the movie, and the time that the movie was shot....

Such disclaimers allow film-makers to have certain creative license to portray the subject/event from certain angles, which often can mean that the real truth can become slightly manipulated, and leave the viewer with a desired view rather than an impartial view.

by virtue of it being a fiction film, there is a tacit assumption that someone wrote a fictionalized account. generally no disclaimer necessary.

the "no resemblance to persons living or dead" basically just means they dont own the rights to anyone's story, owning the rights doesnt mean they follow the actual events closely. "based on a true story" is more a teaser than a disclaimer, although "based on" strongly implies it IS NOT a true story, spot on, that. it functions as a disclaimer.

A recent movie that certainly is a good example of such actions is Farenheight 9/11 - Michael Moore has made no secret of his dislike for the Bush Administration.... his movie was very pointed at humiliating Bush, by slightly manipulating - or perhaps more accurately, changing the contexts of real events in order to give people the same opinion of Bush that Moore has.

this is a different case, as a non-fiction film, but there are a number of clues that it is a polemic and not necessarily objective. for one, michael moore inserting himself into his movies.

many people naively are outraged, claiming that it should be totally 'fair' to bush. "it's nonfiction! it should be objective!" they piss and moan, then go home and watch... rush limbaugh! a hint to these people: there have been polemics as long as there's been nonfiction. get used to it.

Just shows the impact, and the power that the media has over the consumers...

yep.

interestingly, i think fahrenheit 9/11 backfired--it was released too soon if it was supposed to impact the election. if it were timed like the even less factual swift-boat ads, it would have likely influenced ppl against bush, but as it was, by the time of the election, all the discussion of the movie that i saw both on the street and in the us media was anti-moore backlash..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've heard theres a certain amount of racism against asians from blacks in the usa, dont know how true that is but i do remember when all that rioting and sh*t kicked off because of that arsehole rodney king, quite a lot of korean store owners were targeted by black mobs if my memory serves me correct.

maybe i missed something andy, but i thought the riots kicked off because of deep seated local resentment sparked off by police men beating 7 kinds of **** out of an unarmed black guy ........

some korean stores were taregted because around the same time a korean store owner shot dead a black teenage girl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep ciaran's right, and the situation between blacks and korean store owners in particular is complicated, has a long history, and you're turned into another cartoon.

and all "that arsehole rodney king" did was get beat up. how could he???

"hey! watch out!! he's writhing into me!! hit him again!!"

watch the tape at least before you pontificate.

andy you're really drawing a ham-handed, less-than-one sided cartoon of race relations in the US. since you clearly have mastered the situation here, please come on over and fix everything for us.

either that or stick to things you know something about. i live here in an american city, i'm in the middle of this stuff. your glib, innacurate sweeping generalization aren't quite working for me. can't wait for you to set the record straight on 9/11, i was 2 miles from *that* one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you read "Soul on Ice" Andy, or just some excerpts from a website.

I read the book way back in high school. Our whole class did. Yes, he was bad when he was young, and his actions were indefensible. He went to jail because of them.

But his views did change, and he admitted and accepted that what he did was wrong, and that his whole worldview had been wrong.

He paid for his crimes, matured as a person and contributed something valuable and positive to society and race relations with his writings.

You need to look at someone as a whole, their entire life, before you condemn them.

After all, from your earlier post in this thread we could all condemn you as someone who condones murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont care where you live in the US it makes you no less or more a good source of info on any amount of subjects that pertain to the life or culture in the US.

I know you're a bit ticked off about Zeus's tone with you CC, but he is right. He lives in a big American city in the middle of all this and he knows more about it than you. I lived there most of my life also, and I can tell you that it is more complex than you're making it out to be.

Both you and AC do lack a significant amount of knowledge when it comes to this stuff in America. That's understandable. You don't live there. I wouldn't presume to tell you what's what when it comes to Ireland and the situation there. I'd voice some opinions, as you have the right to voice yours about race relations in America, but I'd have to give what you say a lot of weight and credence even if it seemed off base to me, because you're actually there and live in it.

The same goes for Zeus (and me) when it comes America.

So the quote I took from you seems pretty ridiculous. But I think you were a little hot when you wrote it.

One thing I would like to say as far as Rodney King is concerned: the police went way too far in what they did to him, but Rodney King did a helluva lot to bring that beating on himself. You take cops on a high-speed chase through city streets (during which they could easily crash and get killed) and I guarantee that when they get out of that patrol car they will be some angry pissed off people. Furthermore, if the tape is viewed in its entirety, King does lunge at them before they've got him down on the ground. You make a move towards a cop, you are going to pay the price. Their lives are on the line, they're scared too, and they will come back at you with full force.

Having said all that, we still hold cops to a high standard, (as we should) and once they had King subdued, any beating after that was morally wrong and illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah Loburt is right.

Unless you can quote chapter and verse of "Soul on Ice" you just dont understand

The guy was a saint and a scholar. Should have won the nobel prize for peace and his work in race relations. Malcom x was also a god like figure who had super natural powers and we just dont see it. Osma bin lade is also a peace activist! it is just that the white mans media and american imperialists who have hoodwinked the ever guilable western people into believing the fantasy that this christ like figure [with Kalasnikov!] is the saviour of humanity.

Oh and 9/11 never happened! It was all a vast cover with the major hollywood studios paid to put on a fake attack and make it seem real. There was no man on the moon either that was another cover up propaganda exersise by the american devils.

try telling the kids that today and they wont believe you!

Well, now you're just being a jerk, CC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...