Last week, I applied this post’s ‘Not Funny?’ framework to a Heineken ad as a way to consider how companies cannot fail at humor in the same way as individuals. When I was researching the ad, I thought it would be a good idea to look up some other racist commercials and see if I could gain some insights into this particular subset of advertising. I had a vague recollection of Nike putting out a questionable soccer commercial involving Japan around two decades ago (it was Pepsi, and it was close). I went on Youtube to start my investigation and I entered ‘racist japan nike commercial’ into the search bar. And I ended up with…
A Chinese detergent ad? Hey now, Youtube!
I’m not going to get all huffy and indignant here (well, to the extent that being here writing about it doesn't count as 'getting huffy and indignant'). This little search engine redirect is hardly An Event, just a result of a generic search tool on a big website. If needed, I'm sure I could even give a decent race-free technical explanation about why my search terms redirected to an unrelated detergent ad. But I suspect somewhere in the logic of linking my search to a Chinese ad is a loose association based on the shared racial grouping of Asian. To some degree, I suppose the logic of search is the logic of racism - both take a starting idea, apply a series of casual associations, and then lump as much as possible under the newly formed umbrella.
I'm not necessarily pointing an accusing finger at Youtube. In terms of its search algorithm, the part I’m referring to – ‘japan’ – likely wasn’t the main reason the search returned a Chinese result. My best guess is that the words ‘racist’ and ‘commercial’ explain most of the result. And although I reject linking ‘japan’ to a Chinese ad, this ad is a huge deal – at the time of writing, it had tens of millions of views. If Youtube gets even the vaguest hint of a reference to such a popular video, it’s going to include it in as many sets of results as possible. When it comes to search, the algorithm is always going to prioritize the most commonly watched videos because the most commonly watched videos are the most likely videos a given user wants to find via search.
This last point, I think, is the most important one. Youtube search is a lot like a mediocre journalist – just as the latter is never going to tell the boss that there is nothing to write about on a given day, Youtube is never going to return a search with an entirely blank page. Therefore, if the search terms don't return exact matches, the search algorithm is going to err on the side of returning a list of popular videos to which it can make any kind of casual association. It’s this reason, and probably this reason only, why my search for a soccer commercial returned a detergent ad.
Search is just like any other tool because understanding how it works makes it more likely to function properly – and less likely to create misunderstandings. No one accuses a hot stove of bigotry any time it burns someone because we all know how a stove works. Of course, there are more serious implications for this idea. As we incorporate advanced software into an ever-increasing number of our decision tools, it becomes critical for users to understand how their new tools work. This article describing the problems with facial recognition software is a great example. It’s not that we should reject such tools out of hand – rather, we need make sure the users understand how the tool works so that it can be deployed in the right situations and use its power to help people become better at their work.
Showing posts with label series - true/false/racist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label series - true/false/racist. Show all posts
Friday, June 21, 2019
Sunday, June 16, 2019
leftovers – true, false, racist, or… not funny?
I thought I would stop by today to follow up on this post and assess whether a recent incident fits into its framework.
Today’s high profile example comes from Heinekin. Back in the day, I enjoyed drinking both Heinekin and Heinekin Light. Those were probably among the first six packs I ever purchased. My tastes evolved quickly and I soon stopped drinking Green Beer except on major holidays like Saint Patrick’s Day. However, I continued to get a kick out of their sensationally silly commercials during UEFA Champions League soccer games. Recently, the Heinekin marketing department seems to have moved on from soccer nonsense based on this article that suggests the beer company is now producing thoughtful content for our times (at least according to those who feel commercials represent some important barometer about society).
Then… this happened.
The response was predictable – tweets, articles, posts, you name it, everyone in a mad rush to win the latest round of Spot The Racist. I gave brief consideration to how this commercial fit into my framework but I quickly realized that it didn’t fit at all. My premise was that an individual can say racist things as a sad consequence of failing at humor but a company is incapable of failing at humor in this way. At Heineken, I imagine humor is manufactured just like anything else at a large company. First, someone has an idea. Then, this idea is subjected to a long process involving committees, meetings, and discussions. Finally, there is a QA step, or something like it, and maybe the product makes it onto some bigwig's desk who makes a final decision about whether it will make it into the light of day.
This means that over the long process of turning this idea into a commercial, some unknown but presumably significant number of people looked it over and gave their feedback. Any one of these people could have said ‘we cannot run this ad, unless we’re racists’. If someone had brought this simple fact into the discussion, it would have been incredibly difficult for others who may have felt the same way to remain silent. This didn't happen, for whatever reason, and that's why the commercial happened. These hypothetical people who failed to raise the issue weren't trying to be funny - they just didn't point out that the commercial might be a problem (or failed to point it out to the right people). In fact, this extended, deliberate process is almost entirely the opposite of my framework because when an individual says something racist in a futile attempt at humor, the individual never sits on the comment for months at a time - it comes flying right out in the briefest moment of misguided impulse.
My above conclusion, nice and neat as it is, doesn't clearly state what I feel is an important fact, so here it is - Heineken isn't a racist company. Or perhaps, I should say that this ad doesn't state anything conclusive about whether Heineken is a racist company. All it demonstrates is that Heineken is a huge company, one full of people who apparently cannot identify a problematic product in its pipeline. This is hardly a case of blatant racism but rather one of significant incompetence, and such incompetence at the corporate level is pretty frequent from my point of view. Isn't this why the helmet football league still has a team called the Redskins?
I have this thought pretty regularly these days - what is commonly ascribed to negative intent is often better explained as incompetence. And to take it a step further, it seems like most large organizations are bound to succumb to mass incompetence at some point or another. If incompetence is preordained, what should these large organizations do? I've got a wild idea - how about achieving some diversity in hiring results? It isn't a massive stretch to think that this commercial likely came out of a room with very little racial diversity (1). Quite frankly, I'm struggling to come up with many other viable explanations. It’s not like the CEOs of these companies come into work every day and announce that the goal is to hire one token minority a year – it’s more like the company isn’t talented enough to overcome the bias prevalent in recruiting and therefore ends up with the same type of people it hired the last time. It is, I suppose, just like any other negative outcome for a large organization - yet another manifestation of incompetence.
Footnotes / speculation...
0. I guess drinking too many Heinekens is also an explanation?
When I wrote the post about how I thought a lot of racist moments were explainable by someone’s failed attempt at humor, I should have emphasized the key word – someone. The framework applies to individuals, not multinational beer corporations. The interval between a person’s idea and that person’s mouth can be as short as a millisecond. Even if an individual carefully considers his or her words, it seems entirely natural to me that such an individual might fail to recognize an interpretation of an idea that will come off as insensitive. And if humor is involved, forget it. The rewards for being considered funny are so high and the shelf life of comedy so short that I’m certain unfunny people making inadvertently racist comments in their clumsy attempts at humor will long remain the cost of an ever-integrating and globalizing world. A company doesn't have this excuse - it takes so long to do anything that letting something 'slip' is hardly an acceptable explanation for this sort of error.
1. I included this thought here because I don't actually know about Heineken's diversity...
I've heard lately that the evidence of diverse teams producing 'better outcomes' is considered flimsy in certain very well regarded circles. I can see why this might be the case. It's hard enough to measure work as it is - how could someone measure performance by a 'diverse' team and compare it against a team of lesser diversity? Where is the control group? And yet, I can't help but think that it's examples like this that prove the point. Sure, maybe for a company like Heineken most of their work is completed equally well regardless of a given team or department's diversity. But I have a feeling this one PR blunder undid a lot of good work. It's possible the fiasco led some once loyal customers to boycott its products for life. It might be the case that the evidence of diversity leading to better work is flimsy, but I think it's hard to gather clear evidence about the types of blunders such teams might naturally avoid.
Today’s high profile example comes from Heinekin. Back in the day, I enjoyed drinking both Heinekin and Heinekin Light. Those were probably among the first six packs I ever purchased. My tastes evolved quickly and I soon stopped drinking Green Beer except on major holidays like Saint Patrick’s Day. However, I continued to get a kick out of their sensationally silly commercials during UEFA Champions League soccer games. Recently, the Heinekin marketing department seems to have moved on from soccer nonsense based on this article that suggests the beer company is now producing thoughtful content for our times (at least according to those who feel commercials represent some important barometer about society).
Then… this happened.
The response was predictable – tweets, articles, posts, you name it, everyone in a mad rush to win the latest round of Spot The Racist. I gave brief consideration to how this commercial fit into my framework but I quickly realized that it didn’t fit at all. My premise was that an individual can say racist things as a sad consequence of failing at humor but a company is incapable of failing at humor in this way. At Heineken, I imagine humor is manufactured just like anything else at a large company. First, someone has an idea. Then, this idea is subjected to a long process involving committees, meetings, and discussions. Finally, there is a QA step, or something like it, and maybe the product makes it onto some bigwig's desk who makes a final decision about whether it will make it into the light of day.
This means that over the long process of turning this idea into a commercial, some unknown but presumably significant number of people looked it over and gave their feedback. Any one of these people could have said ‘we cannot run this ad, unless we’re racists’. If someone had brought this simple fact into the discussion, it would have been incredibly difficult for others who may have felt the same way to remain silent. This didn't happen, for whatever reason, and that's why the commercial happened. These hypothetical people who failed to raise the issue weren't trying to be funny - they just didn't point out that the commercial might be a problem (or failed to point it out to the right people). In fact, this extended, deliberate process is almost entirely the opposite of my framework because when an individual says something racist in a futile attempt at humor, the individual never sits on the comment for months at a time - it comes flying right out in the briefest moment of misguided impulse.
My above conclusion, nice and neat as it is, doesn't clearly state what I feel is an important fact, so here it is - Heineken isn't a racist company. Or perhaps, I should say that this ad doesn't state anything conclusive about whether Heineken is a racist company. All it demonstrates is that Heineken is a huge company, one full of people who apparently cannot identify a problematic product in its pipeline. This is hardly a case of blatant racism but rather one of significant incompetence, and such incompetence at the corporate level is pretty frequent from my point of view. Isn't this why the helmet football league still has a team called the Redskins?
I have this thought pretty regularly these days - what is commonly ascribed to negative intent is often better explained as incompetence. And to take it a step further, it seems like most large organizations are bound to succumb to mass incompetence at some point or another. If incompetence is preordained, what should these large organizations do? I've got a wild idea - how about achieving some diversity in hiring results? It isn't a massive stretch to think that this commercial likely came out of a room with very little racial diversity (1). Quite frankly, I'm struggling to come up with many other viable explanations. It’s not like the CEOs of these companies come into work every day and announce that the goal is to hire one token minority a year – it’s more like the company isn’t talented enough to overcome the bias prevalent in recruiting and therefore ends up with the same type of people it hired the last time. It is, I suppose, just like any other negative outcome for a large organization - yet another manifestation of incompetence.
Footnotes / speculation...
0. I guess drinking too many Heinekens is also an explanation?
When I wrote the post about how I thought a lot of racist moments were explainable by someone’s failed attempt at humor, I should have emphasized the key word – someone. The framework applies to individuals, not multinational beer corporations. The interval between a person’s idea and that person’s mouth can be as short as a millisecond. Even if an individual carefully considers his or her words, it seems entirely natural to me that such an individual might fail to recognize an interpretation of an idea that will come off as insensitive. And if humor is involved, forget it. The rewards for being considered funny are so high and the shelf life of comedy so short that I’m certain unfunny people making inadvertently racist comments in their clumsy attempts at humor will long remain the cost of an ever-integrating and globalizing world. A company doesn't have this excuse - it takes so long to do anything that letting something 'slip' is hardly an acceptable explanation for this sort of error.
I've heard lately that the evidence of diverse teams producing 'better outcomes' is considered flimsy in certain very well regarded circles. I can see why this might be the case. It's hard enough to measure work as it is - how could someone measure performance by a 'diverse' team and compare it against a team of lesser diversity? Where is the control group? And yet, I can't help but think that it's examples like this that prove the point. Sure, maybe for a company like Heineken most of their work is completed equally well regardless of a given team or department's diversity. But I have a feeling this one PR blunder undid a lot of good work. It's possible the fiasco led some once loyal customers to boycott its products for life. It might be the case that the evidence of diversity leading to better work is flimsy, but I think it's hard to gather clear evidence about the types of blunders such teams might naturally avoid.
Thursday, April 5, 2018
introducing: the fortune cookie power ratings
I've always been more entertained by fortune cookies than logic would dictate. Why? Not sure, exactly, and I don't really care, but I thought up some possible reasons just for you, bored reader.
1. I've always liked clever quotes.
This does not always apply to fortune cookies but I think the hit rate has been high enough historically for me not to care too much.
2. I've always liked finding hidden things.
Again, I know where the fortune is (editor's note: inside the cookie) but sometimes my brain stops working after eating seventeen Peking raviolis in one sitting, making it seem like I discovered it. (Of course, I'm not sure why I remember to break the cookie open first if I do indeed suffer temporary amnesia in these moments but...well...these mysteries make life more fun, do they not, forgetful reader?)
3. I've always enjoyed reminders of home.
I learned recently that these originated in 19th century Kyoto-
(3a...'home' being used loosely here...)
-and this Kyoto thing was an unexpected revelation but, upon reflection, makes sense because something as ridiculous as a fortune cookie could only originate in Japan.
But as much as I delight in the clever witticisms or optimistic predictions printed on these little slips of paper, I must acknowledge an important fact: most fortunes suck.
Here's an example:
'Good health will be yours for a long time.'
What the hell? I just ate a bucket of fried cream cheese and sucked down a carton of grease seasoned with noodles and beef. Good health, my foot - I'm lucky I've lived long enough to get to dessert!
The lack of self-awareness oozing out of the above 'fortune' made me want to Take Immediate Action. But of course, I didn't actually do anything, perhaps due to thefood coma aforementioned amnesia coming in again sudden onset of type 1 and type 2 diabetes at the same time heart attack general sluggishness brought on by the recent meal.
For now, I've settled on the least physically challenging response possible: every once in a while, I'll come on here and give a quick breakdown of a recent fortune. Not very frequently, mind - contrary to what this post implies, I don't eat Chinese food all too often - but I need something to replace the 'Hello Ladies' updates around these parts and this seems like it will do nicely for a few posts per year.
How will it work? I think I'll dust off an old trick here - for each fortune, I'll try to decide if it is True, False, or Racist. Now, maybe this format seems petulant on the surface. But it's hard to read some of these - even if I do enjoy them in the aggregate - without being reminded of the 'Confucius Say' undercurrent in many of these messages. I mean, have a look at this example (1).
So, keep an eye out for these breakdowns in the future. And in the meantime, heed the lesson from a favorite fortune I've kept tucked into my wallet over the past few years:
'Happiness is often a rebound from hard work.'
Footnotes / oh come on, not everything is racist...
1. But sir, don't you think this is just a typo?
I do, actually. So to extend this example a little further out to the True-False-Racist concept, I would conclude this fortune was...FALSE!
That's the point of the game - not everything I run through the TFR algorithm comes out as racist, folks.
But seriously, folks, as it regards 'Confucius Say', I'm not going to sit here and laugh it off. It is immaterial to me that some untalented comedians back in the day fooled the white world into believing making fun of pidgin English was the highest form of humor and I don't see much need to carry on the tradition any further.
1. I've always liked clever quotes.
This does not always apply to fortune cookies but I think the hit rate has been high enough historically for me not to care too much.
2. I've always liked finding hidden things.
Again, I know where the fortune is (editor's note: inside the cookie) but sometimes my brain stops working after eating seventeen Peking raviolis in one sitting, making it seem like I discovered it. (Of course, I'm not sure why I remember to break the cookie open first if I do indeed suffer temporary amnesia in these moments but...well...these mysteries make life more fun, do they not, forgetful reader?)
3. I've always enjoyed reminders of home.
I learned recently that these originated in 19th century Kyoto-
(3a...'home' being used loosely here...)
-and this Kyoto thing was an unexpected revelation but, upon reflection, makes sense because something as ridiculous as a fortune cookie could only originate in Japan.
But as much as I delight in the clever witticisms or optimistic predictions printed on these little slips of paper, I must acknowledge an important fact: most fortunes suck.
Here's an example:
'Good health will be yours for a long time.'
What the hell? I just ate a bucket of fried cream cheese and sucked down a carton of grease seasoned with noodles and beef. Good health, my foot - I'm lucky I've lived long enough to get to dessert!
The lack of self-awareness oozing out of the above 'fortune' made me want to Take Immediate Action. But of course, I didn't actually do anything, perhaps due to the
For now, I've settled on the least physically challenging response possible: every once in a while, I'll come on here and give a quick breakdown of a recent fortune. Not very frequently, mind - contrary to what this post implies, I don't eat Chinese food all too often - but I need something to replace the 'Hello Ladies' updates around these parts and this seems like it will do nicely for a few posts per year.
How will it work? I think I'll dust off an old trick here - for each fortune, I'll try to decide if it is True, False, or Racist. Now, maybe this format seems petulant on the surface. But it's hard to read some of these - even if I do enjoy them in the aggregate - without being reminded of the 'Confucius Say' undercurrent in many of these messages. I mean, have a look at this example (1).
So, keep an eye out for these breakdowns in the future. And in the meantime, heed the lesson from a favorite fortune I've kept tucked into my wallet over the past few years:
'Happiness is often a rebound from hard work.'
Footnotes / oh come on, not everything is racist...
1. But sir, don't you think this is just a typo?
I do, actually. So to extend this example a little further out to the True-False-Racist concept, I would conclude this fortune was...FALSE!
That's the point of the game - not everything I run through the TFR algorithm comes out as racist, folks.
But seriously, folks, as it regards 'Confucius Say', I'm not going to sit here and laugh it off. It is immaterial to me that some untalented comedians back in the day fooled the white world into believing making fun of pidgin English was the highest form of humor and I don't see much need to carry on the tradition any further.
Tuesday, January 9, 2018
the philosophy/anthropology/sociology book i'm not working on
Genre: Who knows?
Title: True, False, or Racist?
Estimate publication date: I'll start work on this the minute after this blog is accused of being racially insensitive.
This would be a series of short chapters where I describe an idea or observation and determine if the example is true, false, or racist. Overall, not much to the concept.
One thing I really like about this idea is the way the title explains the premise. And it is possible that I am a leading expert, pioneer, or both in this field. I've simply never heard someone describe comments with these somewhat ridiculous choices before.
One example of the sort of 'concept' I'll explore in this book is a local 'all you can eat' restaurant deal I came across in 2017. The name of the deal was 'Miso Hungry', a play on words involving 'Miso Soup' (a Japanese dish and, if I may say, a rather important one) and the whole 'Confucius Say' line of jokes which trivialize the difficulty some non-native English speakers have with a new language.
I looked up the phrase in preparation for this post and found all sorts of other uses (restaurants, a documentary, a podcast). No doubt, many find this a cute little expression. So, 'Miso Hungry'- true, false, or racist (1)?
The more I consider it, the more I think there might be something to this idea. Perhaps I will test run it with a recurring series on this blog. Let's see how this cookie crumbles, fortunate readers...
Footnotes / a reason to come back again
1. The first edition of true-false-racist, coming soon!
So, uh, so come back soon!
Title: True, False, or Racist?
Estimate publication date: I'll start work on this the minute after this blog is accused of being racially insensitive.
This would be a series of short chapters where I describe an idea or observation and determine if the example is true, false, or racist. Overall, not much to the concept.
One thing I really like about this idea is the way the title explains the premise. And it is possible that I am a leading expert, pioneer, or both in this field. I've simply never heard someone describe comments with these somewhat ridiculous choices before.
One example of the sort of 'concept' I'll explore in this book is a local 'all you can eat' restaurant deal I came across in 2017. The name of the deal was 'Miso Hungry', a play on words involving 'Miso Soup' (a Japanese dish and, if I may say, a rather important one) and the whole 'Confucius Say' line of jokes which trivialize the difficulty some non-native English speakers have with a new language.
I looked up the phrase in preparation for this post and found all sorts of other uses (restaurants, a documentary, a podcast). No doubt, many find this a cute little expression. So, 'Miso Hungry'- true, false, or racist (1)?
The more I consider it, the more I think there might be something to this idea. Perhaps I will test run it with a recurring series on this blog. Let's see how this cookie crumbles, fortunate readers...
Footnotes / a reason to come back again
1. The first edition of true-false-racist, coming soon!
So, uh, so come back soon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)