| 0 |
Subject: Political Correctness on the Right
Posted by: Perm Dude
- [58450299] Thu, May 29, 2008, 10:52
Right wing bloggers force Dunkin Donuts to pull ad because of Rachel Ray's scarf
The loony Right is every bit as PC as the loony Left. |
| 1 | walk
ID: 181472714
Thu, May 29, 2008, 11:05
|
Oy. To think, maybe if folks were more cool it'd make Americans look more cool...I don't think any Americans are going to misconstrue Ray as a terrorist or terrorist supporter for wearing a Keffiyeh (as if anyone would really know), but maybe some others who do know, might be like, oh, whatever...wingnuts.
|
| 2 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Thu, May 29, 2008, 11:10
|
i think it was good move to pull the commercial the scarf looked terrible, what a fashion faux pas. what was Rachael ray thinking it is good thing the PC police were there to save her.
|
| 3 | Perm Dude
ID: 58450299
Thu, May 29, 2008, 11:16
|
God forbid the Right would let the free market make the determination.
I think Dunkin should have held fast, if for no other reason than right wing bloggers being forced to wean themselves off dunkin donuts coffee is probably itself a patriotic act.
|
| 4 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Thu, May 29, 2008, 11:19
|
I really want a Duncan donuts ice latte now, i think they are living up the free publicity of pulling the ad.
|
| 5 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923
Thu, May 29, 2008, 12:02
|
God forbid the Right would let the free market make the determination.
Seems to me that's exactly what happened - kinda like Imus.
|
| 6 | Perm Dude
ID: 420241913
Thu, May 29, 2008, 12:25
|
Not at all. Imus was fired after making a racist remark. Dunkin Donuts was under fire for an ad in which the spokesperson was wearing a scarf which made her seem "Muslim." Hardly the same at all.
|
| 7 | Perm Dude
ID: 58450299
Thu, May 29, 2008, 12:46
|
Michelle Malkin forgot to get her keffiyah out of the picture, apparently:
Tool.
|
| 8 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923
Thu, May 29, 2008, 12:48
|
PD - What I said was that in both cases a large corporation responded to market pressures to make a change. i'm not sure what question #6 was answering.
|
| 9 | Perm Dude
ID: 58450299
Thu, May 29, 2008, 13:09
|
Fair enough. That's not, however, the free market.
My point was that the free market didn't make the determination in this case. In Imus' case advertisers started pulling out after the remark (which is an example of the free market). In the Dunkin' case bloggers threatened to boycott unless the ad was pulled.
|
| 10 | Boxman
ID: 337352111
Thu, May 29, 2008, 13:30
|
In the Dunkin' case bloggers threatened to boycott unless the ad was pulled.
How is that not the market in action?
|
| 11 | Perm Dude
ID: 58450299
Thu, May 29, 2008, 13:38
|
Because they didn't actually boycott. This is a threat of using the free market, not actually the free market.
This is like threatenting to hold a vote to get the other side to concede. This doesn't make it a result of a vote.
Some more fodder for Malkin, et al: Nazis wore pants!
|
| 12 | Boxman
ID: 337352111
Thu, May 29, 2008, 13:40
|
Because they didn't actually boycott.
Humor me with this example.
I hate my cable company, Comcast. I tell them to shape up their service or I'm switching to the dish and telling all my friends to boycott their services.
In response, Comcast improves their services. Therefore, I stay with them and do not encourage a boycott.
That is the market in action. A consumer group threatening to take their business elsewhere if a company doesn't shape up.
|
| 13 | biliruben
ID: 33258140
Thu, May 29, 2008, 13:47
|
I find this to be more the case of the squeaky wheel getting the oil.
It could be that 1% of the DD costumers care enough about the garb to do the whine-online. Likely 99% think she can wear what's she wants, or likely don't care.
But because the busy-bodies have nothing better to do then harass DD, they get listened to.
Happens all the time around here in local government decisions, and makes for some very poor decision making.
|
| 14 | Perm Dude
ID: 58450299
Thu, May 29, 2008, 13:49
|
Well, putting aside the fact that right wing bloggers are not a consumer group on their own, I'm not saying that the bloggers aren't using their status as consumers in any insidious, illegal, or unethical way. Merely that the threat of a boycott isn't the same as an actual boycott.
|
| 15 | walk
ID: 181472714
Thu, May 29, 2008, 13:53
|
Plus, to be real here PD, it was a pretty douchebag thing to do...this outrage and threatened boycott. I mean, a dunkin donuts ad by Rachel Ray?
|
| 16 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923
Thu, May 29, 2008, 15:11
|
Also - the complaint wasn't that wearing the scarf "made her seem Muslim" that's just asinine. Pretty disingenuous of you to charecterize is that way.
While I could care less about Lefty fashion ironies - the Kaffiyeh carries a whole lot of political baggage for people who do and who do not support Palestinian suicide bombers.
|
| 17 | Perm Dude
ID: 58450299
Thu, May 29, 2008, 15:16
|
I'll grant you that, MBJ. Rachel Ray was lambasted for being a tool of terrorists for wearing the scarf, not be looking Muslim with it.
Apparently, many US soldiers wear the scarf as well, but we probably best not get into that, as it might add context and value to the thread.
That said, slamming someone for wearing a scarf because some people are sensitive to its use is the very kind of thing the Left is being accused of all the time, with speech codes and so on. The uproar by the bloggers is nothing more than political correctness.
|
| 18 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923
Thu, May 29, 2008, 15:23
|
but we probably best not get into that, as it might add context and value to the thread.
Oh, I don't there is any danger of that in a thread about Dunkin' Donuts, Michelle Malkin and Rachel Ray. You're safe.
|
| 19 | Perm Dude
ID: 58450299
Thu, May 29, 2008, 15:28
|
Heh.
I'm no "foodie" but Rachel Ray is, according to many, the Dunkin' Donuts of chefs.
|
| 20 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 56118297
Thu, May 29, 2008, 21:55
|
putting aside the fact that right wing bloggers are not a consumer group on their own, I'm not saying that the bloggers aren't using their status as consumers in any insidious, illegal, or unethical way. Merely that the threat of a boycott isn't the same as an actual boycott.
Have to disagree with PD on this. CBS (or maybe it was MSNBC, who aired the video simulcast) pulled Imus after Sharpton threatened a boycot. Mine and your opinion of whether outrage in each case was warranted doesn't impact the question of whether it was market forces at work.
|
| 21 | Razor
ID: 504132820
Thu, May 29, 2008, 23:32
|
Threat of a boycott is definitely a market force. But this story is so absurd. A loveable TV personality in a freaking fast food commercial? Come on. Complain about Sean Penn or George Soros, not this.
|
| 22 | Tree
ID: 9452917
Thu, May 29, 2008, 23:35
|
Wag the dog Razor, Wag the dog...
|
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|