Sun sets on racism?


by Sunny
31st January, 2007 at 12:19 am    


Is the Sun turning over a new leaf?
Update: Obsolete sums it up for me.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Media






79 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Clive Davis

    STREET OF SHAME…

    Madame Arcati, on the ugly face of journalism:The same editor on another occasion was heard saying, as he loomed over a picture of a group of black youths: Which of these will be robbing my house in ten years’ time?…




  1. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:30 am  

    Not sure the Sun has ever been racist, or if it has it’s probably scousers as have the most valid complaint. What the Sun always is is sensationalist, so I don’t see this as a new dawn of any sort.

  2. douglas clark — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:40 am  

    Sunny,

    Here I go, confused again.

    On your copy I can clearly see words like Chinky, Paki, Terrorist, Half Breed, etc, etc.

    On the Guardian site I see just British and Pakistani.

    What the hell is going on here?

  3. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:42 am  

    I saw that cover it bugged the shit out of my in Somerfields. I wanted to puke up, the fucking hypocrisy was almost too much for me to take in. It was like my brain was short-circuiting.

  4. douglas clark — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:46 am  

    Anas,

    So did the front of the actual newspaper show people with placards saying Pikey, Jakey, etc? I share your sentiments, btw.

  5. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:47 am  

    Yep, D. That was today’s front cover.

  6. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:48 am  

    The Scottish edition should have had an extra one for Ned. And what about the goths?

  7. douglas clark — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:51 am  

    Anas,

    Well could you check this out, if you don’t mind?

    http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/graham_dudman/2007/01/the_sun_also_rises.html

    Which is disingenuous, at the very least. You have to look at the placards.

  8. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:54 am  

    Anas wrote: “I saw that cover it bugged the shit out of my in Somerfields. I wanted to puke up, the fucking hypocrisy was almost too much for me to take in. It was like my brain was short-circuiting.”

    Surely it would only have been hypocritical had there been a bloke in an onion necklace holding a sign saying “Frog”?

  9. douglas clark — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:56 am  

    I think goths are OK, but a bit weird. They like classical music and hang around GOMA. Or is that another sub sect? Interesting that weird defies the ‘i’ before ‘e’ except after ‘c’ rule, don’t you think?

    Anyway, waiting, waiting.

  10. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:56 am  

    Anas, rest easy:

    Murdoch enterprises present: http://godhatesgoths.com/

  11. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:05 am  

    Douglas – did the Guardian really censor the image?

  12. Sunny — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:06 am  

    No, I think the front page image was the one above, while inside the kids are holding placards saying they were British.

    Saying that, I think the Sikh kid has a bizarre style pugh (turban) on.

  13. douglas clark — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:07 am  

    Jesus,

    This is so complicated to do. Bert, are you there?

    On the CiF site they have a picture. Read the placards:

    http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/graham_dudman/2007/01/the_sun_also_rises.html

    Whereas, the Sun has this. Again, read the placards:

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/

    There is something odd going on here.

  14. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:08 am  

    Yeah it’s weird that they don’t have the front cover on the CiF which is the cause of the controversy but instead go with the inside page 2-3 spread. I think the point of the placards having changed on the inside is to emphasise that the kids are all really British.

  15. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:09 am  

    on the CiF *site*

  16. douglas clark — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:12 am  

    Sunny,

    Against the principles of a lifetime I’m going to have to buy their bloody newspaper. Your explanation makes sense, but the Guardian was being economical, I think. Sensibilities, or what?

  17. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:14 am  

    I just see them on the Guardian link holding placards saying “British”. Which doesn’t make for much of a headline really, and makes me suspect the SUn version is the original.

  18. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:15 am  

    I reckon I could lay claim to four of those titles – can anyone beat that?

  19. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:22 am  

    No way BP. What four? I’m guessing terrorist is in there.

  20. Sunny — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:27 am  

    Grrrr, let me try and explain again. The image above, with all those cuss words, was used on the front page (I think, I didn’t actually see yesterday’s Sun). Inside the paper, where they have a feature on the cuss words with the kids talking about their experiences, the kids are holding placards saying ‘British’. Geddit?

  21. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:27 am  

    Along with pikey, chav scum and spic. What do you score?

  22. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:29 am  

    Sunny – I saw the front page and it had all the words.

  23. Nyrone — on 31st January, 2007 at 2:34 am  

    I don’t think the sun gives a shit.
    Like all media and especially tabloids, it’s transient.

    The first thing I learnt doing some work in the media was this: They are there to make money, not help humanity.

    It’s a good gesture and may provide some debate, but the Sun will go back to being toilet paper 3 seconds later. I simply cannot forgive them for what they did during the Michael Jackson trial and printing something thoughtful once cannot erase all the years of destructive garbage they have injected into the public consciousness.

    As if Murdoch actually cares about people’s rights…
    watch them counter their own front page in weeks to come…

  24. Nyrone — on 31st January, 2007 at 2:42 am  

    That is a brilliant piece on obsolete!
    Totally hits the nail on the head.

  25. Refresh — on 31st January, 2007 at 3:25 am  

    I am with Obsolete too.

  26. Sid — on 31st January, 2007 at 8:56 am  

    Nyrone’s right. Shouldn’t be too long before we see a Sun headline which shouts
    “Could a Queer-Paki-TowelHead-Terrorist ever be British?” sometime soon.

  27. El Pickey Chav Spicko Guirri Manuel Onion Tortilla Half-Arab — on 31st January, 2007 at 9:35 am  

    Chatterati alert!
    Look, did Obsolete say anything we didn’t already know? NO. What a waste of effort.
    Let’s recognise The Sun for what it is: a rag that seeks to maximise revenue by pandering to the lowest common denominator. And if that means being racist, sexist, crude, amusing, then so be it. Pure capitalist logic. So it’s hypocritical — big deal. Take today’s edition for what it is — a welcome sign that the lowest common denominator has become just a little less racist.
    It’s still the lowest common denominator mind — but that’s another matter. Some of you can’t see the woood for the trees man. *scarpers back to work*

  28. Kismet Hardy — on 31st January, 2007 at 11:07 am  

    I briefly worked at East, George Galloways’s pro-pakistani British Asian rag that briefly had bhutto as editor (why does no one ever mention it?) and they started out with the twattiest ‘my first controversy’ style campaign, featuring a turbanned chap kicking an NF skinhead in the balls. Naturally, no one ran it.

    Whoever came up with that piece of tryhard sensationalism is clearly alive and well and working in The Sun

  29. Anon+1 — on 31st January, 2007 at 11:10 am  

    The sun is a disgusting tabloid, where I used to work there would be only a copy of the sun to read on lunch breaks and after reading it id come away feeling depressed, thinking for people to buy this everyday they must be just as low themselves.

    3 Mil+ readers… scary.

  30. sonia — on 31st January, 2007 at 11:12 am  

    Hilarious! Bert’s right – the Sun’s sensationalist – that’s what they are. They also like getting down to the lowest common denominator. at the end of the day, that’s what their stories are all about. I thought that was common knowledge! {Not much point getting worked up about is there} – this particular headline is making me giggle. they’ve missed out a person with a placard #i’m not A Racist# ;-)

    “What do we all have in common?” We like finding labels and nasty things to say to each other..

    But shilpa’s not british in case the SUn’s forgotten..so if we’re going to restrict ourselves to the ‘what we have in common is we’re all british”.. heh that’s not going to include ALL of us! jade and shilpa haven’t got that in common. They’ve lots of other things in common – i.e. they were stuck in the same house, they both thought celebrity big brother was a good idea, they’re both female, and oops..look, they’re both human.

  31. Billy — on 31st January, 2007 at 11:19 am  

    The Sun isn’t as bad as the Mail.

  32. sonia — on 31st January, 2007 at 11:23 am  

    yeah you know what i agree with Billy. the mail’s much worse – they take themselves much more seriously. sun’s got a silly edge to it.

  33. Kismet Hardy — on 31st January, 2007 at 11:39 am  

    The Mail is a cross between upper class ignorance and arrogance but even they have their moments, like when they put all five of the Stephen Lawrence ‘suspects’ and branded them guilty on the front page despite the court’s decision to free them

    It’s the Express that’s pure unadultared racist evil

  34. El Pickey Chav Spicko Guirri Manuel Onion Tortilla Half-Arab — on 31st January, 2007 at 12:45 pm  

    I read The Sun, now and then, and I don’t care who knows. Actually, that’s a lie — I normally hide it inside the pages of my Guardian, Times, FT, or Indy. Actually, come to think of it I stopped buying it after my daughter said: “Daddy, why has that woman got her boobies out?”
    OK, so it’s only the online version these days, for the sports, you understand.

  35. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:33 pm  

    Re post 21. Just a paltry two I’m afraid. I’ve been called Paki and terrorist(though to emphasise I am not a terrorist and in no way condone terrorist actions, in case Jagdeep is reading). Do you really have gypsy blood in you, BP?

  36. El Cid — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:36 pm  

    Ha, he ain’t got spanish blood!

  37. El Cid — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:37 pm  

    actually, I’ve been called an Ity — now that’s really offensive!

  38. Clairwil — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:38 pm  

    I can’t help but worry that the kid with the terrorist sign is going to find himself on the wrong side of an angry mob of Sun readers. ‘Fuckin’ terrorist, front of Sun, bold as you like- get him!’

    Or am I failing to credit those fearless anti-paediatrician campaigners with enough intelligence?

  39. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:41 pm  

    There is one problem with the inclusion of the Chav Scum. The thing is no-one is questioning their Britishness. I mean, you could argue that they’re too British.

  40. Jagdeep — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:47 pm  

    though to emphasise I am not a terrorist and in no way condone terrorist actions, in case Jagdeep is reading

    Phew!

  41. El Cid — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:47 pm  

    That’s a fair point Anas, albeit a racist one

  42. Jagdeep — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:49 pm  

    El Cid I thought you would be filed under ‘Spic’

    I met an Italian who grew up being called Paki because of his black hair and olive skin colour.

  43. Jagdeep — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:53 pm  

    Yeah I agree with El Cid, that is a racist comment by Anas because it conflates being British with being a Chav and says that Chav behaviour is one and the same as being British in the same way that one could say that being a terrorist is interchangeable with being Muslim.

    Naught naughty Anas.

  44. El Cid — on 31st January, 2007 at 1:54 pm  

    Funny enough, I get called the opposite when I’m in Spain — Pirata, Guirri, hijo de la gran puta. I’m rarely offended though, as it’s between mates.
    I’m fair headed myself — like Mendieta I guess — but two of my darker fellow-spics sometimes also get confused for ‘pakis’ when they go up north. V amusing

  45. Kismet Hardy — on 31st January, 2007 at 2:57 pm  

    Whatever happenned to wop and coon and jungle bunny and faggot?

    You don’t hear them anymore, which just goes to show words aren’t quite so indestructable as some think

  46. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 3:54 pm  

    Saying that anti-social chav behaviour is a British problem is only racist to the extent that saying that the English are notorious football hooligans and the Scots are tight bastards is, i.e., not very. I does not, strictly speaking imply that all Brits are chavs. And even if it did, it’s not really on the same scale as saying Muslims are terrorists, I mean come on. Jagdeep was having a go at me yesterday for exagerating.

  47. Anas — on 31st January, 2007 at 3:57 pm  

    Sorry that should be “It does not, strictly speaking imply that all Brits are chavs”. I’m not turning rasta.

  48. Kismet Hardy — on 31st January, 2007 at 4:05 pm  

    Sly and gobbo the gremlins replaced gollywogs in Noddy. And that Big Ears has become more affable and less of a sadistic paedophile these days. It’s a clear case of what I like to call ‘the times they are a changing’

  49. Chairwoman — on 31st January, 2007 at 4:06 pm  

    It depends where it’s being said, doesn’t it? If these are epithets being hurled angrily and unjustly., ie ‘You blanking English blanks are all blanking football hooligans’ or ‘You blanking tight Scots blank, all the blanking same’. Said by people of a different ethnic group, sounds pretty racist to me. As does accusing people of being a ‘Dirty (fill in ethnic group of your choice)’.

  50. Kismet Hardy — on 31st January, 2007 at 4:08 pm  

    I know what you mean Chairy. Noddy used to get in to big trouble with big ears for being dirty. Look at your room Noddy. Bend over.

  51. Jagdeep — on 31st January, 2007 at 4:18 pm  

    Chairwoman were you ever called Yid or Kike to your face? Do those words hurt Jews as much as if someone calls an Asian a Paki or a black person a Nigger?

  52. Chairwoman — on 31st January, 2007 at 4:58 pm  

    Jagdeep – I have heard it said behind my back. Interestingly, racists can make the word ‘Jew’ sound just as offensive, and that has been said to my face. And yes, it hurts exactly as much.

  53. Jagdeep — on 31st January, 2007 at 5:03 pm  

    Thanks CW. I think I know what you mean about making ‘Jew’ sound nasty by the way they say it.

  54. Kismet Hardy — on 31st January, 2007 at 5:23 pm  

    Jew know the time, Pakit in you two, stop s-niggering

    And that was just my maths teacher. Ah, public school

  55. Don — on 31st January, 2007 at 6:20 pm  

    Thta’s not really enough from The Sun. I want to see Rebekah Wade have her Jade Goody moment.

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=2zsi2DZ8ZDk

  56. Bert Preast — on 31st January, 2007 at 6:51 pm  

    This actually a bit brave of the paper, as it’s not the first time The Sun has tried it’s hand at being anti-racist. A year or two back I remember a full two page spread they did where they sent a black reporter to a Millwall game, and he was appalled to see literally thousands of apparent nazis chanting “sieg heil” at him.

    Seems he’s not a football fan (and nor are his editors) – Millwall were entertaining Brighton that day, who’s nickname is the Seagulls. His job was to find some racism and he misinterpreted disastrously.

    The Sun had to print an apology to the fans and clubs and eat quite a lot of crow. :D

  57. SajiniW — on 31st January, 2007 at 8:40 pm  

    The Sun is ridiculous. Reason #1 – the offensive piece of tripe that is John Gaunt.

  58. ZinZin — on 31st January, 2007 at 8:57 pm  

    “Jew know the time”

    Who’s been watching Annie Hall recently?

  59. Refresh — on 31st January, 2007 at 9:23 pm  

    Chairwoman, racists always find a way to hurt you. But like we all know, never never ever let it show that it might have.

    I think I told you about the incident with my mum – and how she would not let it show.

    I feel agitated just thinking about it.

  60. sonia — on 1st February, 2007 at 10:35 am  

    56- bert – that’s quite funny :-)

  61. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 9:48 pm  

    Actually Senora Chair

    When it comes to ‘yid’, as I’m sure you already know, there is a football-related peculiarity in north London. Spurs fans are called yids and they, in turn, call themselves yids. Spurs fans rythmically chant “Yids” with a 2-second gap at games, and I’ve sometimes heard Arsenal fans sing — not yesterday mind :) — “The yids, the yids, we gotta get rid of the yids.”
    It’s embarassing, tiresome , clearly wrong, and occasionally downright horrible. But there’s a greater chance of Sharia Law being imposed on Barking or of Jeremy Paxman falling for Jade Goody than there is of this sub-culture ever ending.
    The odd thing about it is that Arsenal has the most multicultural fan base in Britain, and Spurs aren’t far behind. Both teams have Jewish owners and a large Jewish fan base to boot. I have a Jewish Arsenal-supporting hospital consultant mate who wouldn’t hesitate in calling Spurs “the yids”. I also know black, turkish, english, irish, and asian Spurs fans who call themselves yids.
    There is no doubt that the history behind the term is racist. I reckon many travelling fans going to White Hart Lane in the 1950s/60s would have gone through Stamford Hill where there is a large and very visible Hassidic Jew community — and that’s how it started.
    Attempts — sponsored by both clubs — have been made to try to eradicate it. But to no avail. It seems the term yid has acquired a new life of its own. So when people say yid, they think Spurs and not Jewish people. It’s almost post-racist.
    I have long stopped using the term myself. But that’s as far as I can get. Bizarre but true.

  62. Chairwoman — on 1st February, 2007 at 10:02 pm  

    As much as I support any team, Spurs has always been ‘my’ team. It is the team nearest to where I grew up, though my father thought Watford was nearer as the crow flies. I used to go to Stamford Hill and Tottenham for entertainment when I was a teenager. In those days, although there was a small Hassidic community, the majority of Jews there were anglised, like my family. Most of the Jews from that area, and Hackney were Spurs supporters, although there were a few who supported Arsenal. Yids in a Spurs context is generally not offensive.

    I think I have mentioned before that European Jews tended to call themselves Yidden, but that’s probably dying out now as less and less of us speak Yiddish. I myself only have a bit, although I can understand it, but most of my contemporaries can’t even do that.

  63. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 10:50 pm  

    Spurs, Watford, same thing :)

  64. Bert Preast — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:00 pm  

    Oh come on. The chant beginning “Singing I’ve got a foreskin, do you too?” is clearly artistic brilliance.

    No, I’m not being sarcastic. Sorry.

  65. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:04 pm  

    It may be mildly amusing on the surface but not it’s not really if you’ve heard it x number of times. C’mon Bert, I’m sure you see that too.
    So come on — you’re a hammer or a CXXXxxx ?

  66. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:12 pm  

    One last thing on the CBB front: Jermaine was an excellent example of how quiet, peaceful, spiritual Islam can be like. As I’m sure you’ll agree, Islam gets a bad rap cause what we see is so damn politicised.
    Give unto Caeser that which is Caeser’s, I vaguely recall some Pope saying. It’s frigging true.

  67. Bert Preast — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:19 pm  

    “C’mon Bert, I’m sure you see that too.
    So come on — you’re a hammer or a CXXXxxx ?”

    I’m just happily simple minded. Stick yer opera, I like a rousing chorus of “3 dirty Germans”.

    And my tackle is intact. I’ll live with the early ‘accident’ for full sensitivity every time. \o/

  68. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:23 pm  

    Oh, you got one of dem too. Fair dos. Ahem. I’ll stop there.

  69. Bert Preast — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:23 pm  

    “Jermaine was an excellent example of how quiet, peaceful, spiritual Islam can be like. As I’m sure you’ll agree, Islam gets a bad rap cause what we see is so damn politicised”

    But that’s the trouble. He needs less quiet and peaceful introspection and more biting the noses off those giving his ‘hood a bad rep. The christians got their arses kicked by the secularists for the same sort of reasons so if islam wants to avoid the same fate, get filing them teeth.

  70. Bert Preast — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:26 pm  

    “Oh, you got one of dem too. Fair dos. Ahem. I’ll stop there”

    D’you see? Lop off even a small part of it and the will to fight is gone, man.

  71. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:34 pm  

    You’re so Machiavellian and so right re #69

  72. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:37 pm  

    BUT, perhaps the door is not hard to push open for moderate christians, moslems, etc. It’s all about tolerance, moderation, easy come easy go, may your God go with you, etc

  73. Bert Preast — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:52 pm  

    Yeah, maybe. But you have to admit it’s more fun biting noses off.

  74. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:54 pm  

    If you’re young and up for a rumble

  75. Bert Preast — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:57 pm  

    Gah. Mira mi barriga. :(

  76. El Cid — on 1st February, 2007 at 11:59 pm  

    I hope you’ll sponsor me for the London Marathon then! I more Hummer than Lotus Espirit

  77. El Cid — on 2nd February, 2007 at 12:00 am  

    I’m I’m I’m I’m

  78. Bert Preast — on 2nd February, 2007 at 12:14 am  

    Christ, this marathon already costs me 50 quid a year at a tenner a time for people I never met. Frankly it would be cheaper to machine-gun the whole proceedings. Don’t tell me you want to cure cancer and thus bring down civilisation, but link me in to whatever do-gooder money-sucking cause you’re going to make yourself ill for and I’ll have a gander.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.