Now that’s an interesting idea and questions. I think it’s always a problem when people start going to one extreme and take it as the holy truth, and if others describe their own perspectives and experiences and understanding of the world, then to deny that as reality because it’s not their reality. Really, nothing is absolute, and two opposing things are not mutually exclusive. In fact, I think they actually cannot exist without the presence of the other. There cannot be a north pole without a south pole. Just because one exists does not negate the other’s existence, and in fact, it’s the other way around. If one exists, then you can definitely be sure there has to be something else opposite in nature that has to exist for there to be a balance in this universe. We live in a dynamic homeostasis, where all forces sort of act upon each other constantly to keep things in equilibrium. I think if people understand this, then they would appreciate and thus respect the existence of opposing views because without these opposing views, they would not have their own views they believe in. I think Long Tail is good, but as long as the Head and Tail gets to meet each other every now and then, and are aware that at the end of the day, they all belong to the same body, and that the tail definitely can’t do without the head, and the head probably needs the tail for its functionality. They don’t have to mingle, but just co-exist.

I have not check Feldman’s video (probably will do after this comment) but the concept of racism is a rather sticky situation. It depends on how you define racism, and who defines it, and who interprets it. It also depends on the personal experiences of the individuals on the receiving end of it. Being a minority and an immigrant, it’s definitely right up my alley, but am I going to hold it against everyone who hasn’t had experiences exposing them to my own culture and race? There is a difference between arrogance, ignorance, and complete naivety.

But then, whose job is it to educate the other about your own culture and race? Is it the majority’s responsibility or the minority’s? Can we really erase all prejudices when it’s the functional way our cognition works to organize and make sense of the world?

I have watched the video and personnally I do not think much of it… I do not think it is funny and I think that it may offend a lot of people. Is it racist? I cannot answer, personnally I believe there is only one “human” race, with people of different cultures.

As for your other question, it is true that anything can be found on the internet and that it is possible to find any content that suits oneself. I also wonder how it may develop in the future… Hopefully, a majority of people are moderate and in the future the web will still be a place where a majority of people will be able to exchange ideas and knowledge with each other without falling into extremes.

I very much liked the way you applied the theory of the long tail to social ideas, David.

I honestly think that Feldman’s video was not intended to be racist. I think he was attempting to be funny by playing off of stereotypes, not insinuating that all black people are like that even though that’s the way it came across. He was playing a character and that character would use the word nigga for sure. I think giving negetive power to words needs to stop. We need to not be affected by mere letters strewn together. I guess after years of oppression and abuse one would get offended perhaps because they still hold onto that pain and associate it with words. Sticks and stones people!
If I saw a video making me look like a stupid ditsy slut because of my large breasts I would probibly laugh if it was done well…but it might bring up feelings of hurt associated with the discrimination I face everyday that I go out into public. I look different therefor I am a freak and people feel they have a right to point that out to me constantly - “you really have big breast you know!” is the nicest of coments I’ve recieved, as they fail to see me as a human being with feelings. In the end it is I who needs to be secure in who I am regardless of what others may think of me based on their own judgements.

People like to label people and put them into catagories that are easily recognizable, like exagerated stereotypes. Being classified into a stereotype based on mere physical characteristics can be oppressive and hurtful. When someone is doing a comedy skit they are bringing awareness to the stereoype not neccessarily perpetuating it. One must learn not to identify with those sterotypes if they do not apply to you, and be aware that comedy is meant to effect change of consiousness and bend the boundries of what is socially acceptable to talk about. Comedy is largely based on stereotypes and is at times telling the truth in an indirect way that can cause contraversy. Come on if you are a black stockbroker with a nice family and home and are tech savy how does that make a good comedy skit? It doesn’t so lets take a small percentage of black guys that are gangsters and flashy and easy to make fun of because they do exist and are charactures themselves. I think real gangsters who are pimps with hoes would find that funny but maybe not coming from a non black guy, which in itself is racist. If you don’t see yourself in a character then why are you identifying with it? Why get mad? He isn’t saying you Black man John Parker is a gangsta nigga he just playing what he thought was a funny stereotype. Perhaps he should not of used the word nigga, but from an actor’s standpoint it was appropriate to the character he was playing. Really if you don’t like the song or the show, change the channel! Freedom of expression is very important to maintain in this world and the internet is there for us all.

You will certainly not agree with everything you find on the internet, but if it is not hurting anyone physically, like child porn does, then it is not a big deal. If someones religious beliefs are say, going to condem you to hell if you are not like them, it is up to you to decide if that is true or not. I find that statement to be wrong and very offensive yet millions of people in the world will preach that statement with glee and it is perfectly acceptable. That is discusting and hateful to everyone yet I have no choice but to disagree and keep my own head on my shoulders while those relgious bigots preach their hatred in full force and spectrum in the world. It does not hurt me because I am aware of my own truth and I believe in freedom of expression. How would we find the real truth without opposing viewpoints to debate?

In all Feldman is trying to be funny…not succeeding very well. He does bring light to sticks and stones and perhaps we need to live in a world where no words have the power to hurt! A world where we can all be our unique selves in contrast and empathy. The problem is that we are not all treated equal, and if we were we would be able to leave the hurt of stereotypes behind. Once the world if flushed from all descrimination, simple words will not evoke hurt feeling, because the hurt will no longer be present and a daily part of life.

It is time that we move beyond associating words with emotions if those emotions hurt us. We need to focus on being in control of our emotions not letting them or other people control how we feel about ourselves or our day. I say we remove the negetive conotations of words and say whatever we feel in the moment, and leave others to decide their own emotional well being and belief systems.

The internet is a free place to share thoughts and ideas…allow it to remain that way and put your shields up if neccessary. If you feel something is wrong then go do something that will contribute to the solution instead of focusing on idiots who contribute to the propblem. Ask your self what have I done For the Cause, to promote what is right? Focus on Truth. Who cares if others don’t get it, and if you think they should then go out and teach them, do your part…but don’t complain, refrain from giving them your attention.

I saw the video and do believe it was meant to be satirical…only it wasn’t funny. I didn’t see the humour in it, only the stupidity. I guess the point of the video was to bring awareness to racial stereotypes and inequality but it was done poorly and without intellectual contribution. In contrast, I found the New Yorker magazine last week dipicting Barack Obama as a terrorist offensive but I also understand the satire and applaud the efforts of the magazine editors in pointing out the growing fears that people may have about Obama. The media plays a large part in the decisions that we make concerning politics and race relations (good or bad…not sure) as it places fear at both ends of its spectrum. Keeping people isolated through fear as the tail gets longer. The only problem is that the tail and the head start to pull toward the center creating stereotypes and infecting/affecting those on the border of true sanity!
I’m all for freedom of speech. It’s what allows us to communicate and work on problems and connects us to a central goal. IMO we need to take the “N” word out of our vocabulary (Jesse Jackson, Don Imus, Michael Richards…whether black or white is using it)and learn new ways to comunicate our anger and fears. Words are powerful and the way we use them can cause waves of aggression in those who normally would refrain from giving it attention. If there’s a bandwagon, those with the slightest twinge of fear will jump on because there is power in numbers.

I enjoy following those mediums with a similar point of view to mine(eg. Bill Mahrer…who by the way does satire brilliantly)…but I will occasionally turn to the Fox channel for a good laugh and a “WTF did they just say? Are they nuts?” (sorry to offend those who like Fox). It’s a good idea to know what you’re up against

Natasha, Julie, Victoria and Yvette bring up such great ideas. I’ll ad that a comedian named Russel Peters is a master at ethnic humor and does it in a tasteful and inoffensive way. Search him on youtube and you’ll see what I mean.

As for the long tail of ideas, because of their variety and complexity, I believe it will lead to neither division nor understanding. It will simply lead to a multitude of social microcosms that have common human values.

Being exposed to different ideas, such as through blogs, helps diminish ignorance. The result of being interconnected so easily and quickly with strangers enhances diversity and understanding. The web, just like a city, has high traffic public places (Youtube for example) and slightly more private/niche places (blogs). Being able to travel freely and conveniently between both allows us to learn more and be exposed to new ways of thinking. This probably wouldn’t happen as easily or effectively in a traditional way.

I’d like to believe that getting large numbers of people together, who would have not met in real life, leads to growth and discovery and will benefit humankind in the long run. But maybe that’s just because I’m an optimist and believe that the majority of people are good lol.

So I finally watched the video and read related websites, though not all.

I personally find the video funny. Maybe because I’m not Black. In any case, I do wonder though how some of the things Feldman said are rather controversial, and of course, very very based on stereotypes that are not necessarily true. I think this is what is unfortunate. For those of us exposed to diversity, and understand that satire and comedy stem from making fun or even being sarcastic, and sometimes acting out in the very role of the focal thing the actor opposes or at least questions, we probably can see the humor and the well meaning behind this pun, and that he’s completely exaggerating these stereotypes because we know they aren’t true. However, if we aren’t exposed to diversity and do take things literal (which I don’t think it’s how comedy nor satire is supposed to be seen) then we will miss all the depths that it has to offer, and instead find it offensive. Now that is interesting, because here when we talk about racism, prejudices, stereotypes, etc., we are discussing how these notions are the injustice that are based on superficial or the surface value of what a race or group of people represent or present in society. These dynamics occur because the oppressor (I do not like this word, but for lack of better word for now, I shall use it) does not see beyond these superficial presentations, and take time or empathy to understand the multi-layers beneath the issues.

So I think it’s rather ironic that people who get offended by such satirical comedy are responding only to the face of the jokes and not trying to study the underlying depths or processes that the artist is intending. We understand it when a Black person is saying “Nigga” that he’s not degrading his own kind because he’s assuming power by using that word that was derogatory to him. Yet when an actor or artist, given a role that would put him in that position as a character, does so, he is deemed disrespectful.

Now I’m not saying it’s OK to use such words so generously and frivolously without thought. But if it’s used not to put down anyone, but rather, to draw attention to the issues associated with it, then I think it’s appropriate.

Having grown up in my own heritage and my family’s values, I do not use swear (4 letter) words in my conversations with people, nor arguments. But I am fine with others saying it in front of me, and I don’t find that offensive (as long as it’s not directed towards me), and as a writer, I use it whenever I see the context calls for it, in my writings, to make a certain point, or emphasis something. I think it’s the same for labels and how they could be used in such an artistic or activist way.

I am on the same page with everyone here about equality and respect and sensitivity. But I think that’s an idealist way of thinking. Maybe it’s the existentialist in me or the Buddhist in me, but I don’t believe that humans can escape our own nature or selves as having both the ‘good’ and the ‘evil’ sides. Whether we like it or not, we have both, and to say that we should all just get along, it’s not going to happen, because that means the other side or conflicts will have to cease existence, which it will not, because it’s in our nature. We need acceptance of this reality.

And yes, it would be great if we are all so psychologically aware that words can’t hurt us, and that we shouldn’t let them because only we can hurt ourselves by believing in them, and that we should feel empowered by our own strengths and ability and goodness. Yet reality is not so, even if we wish it to be, and so instead of saying this “SHOULD” happen, let’s just deal with reality and say, well, these are the cards we’re dealt with, what can we do with them? There are going to be people who are ignorant, unaware, insecure, and in pain. There are going to be struggles in power. So given these contexts, what can we do so that we still keep our own dignity, while not degrading others?

I think, what’s more important, is how can we accept others, not just those different from us or those that are treated with inequality or those we feel empathy for, but even more so those who are seemingly ‘evil’ or prejudiced, racist, oppressive, hurtful, and those you just love to hate.

If we want to stop prejudices and racism, I think that’s where we could start with first, by accepting and being empathic to those who we think are ‘racist’ or hurtful. It’s not to say we agree or approve or condone such acts or what they represent, but to say, we understand why they would say or act the way they do and where they’re coming from, and because of that, we can be kinder to them. They have no more power, because we have the power to go beyond them and their way of hatred, even when they’re hurting us. It is only when we see that we are in this together-both oppressed and oppressor, that we are both the head and the tail, all in the same body, and in fact, probably all the same in some weird way, that we can show them how prejudices and discrimination can be stopped.

Well said Dabetswe. Human doesn’t mean perfect. There is not a horrible or wonderful act or emotion that each one of us is not fully capable of given the right circumstances. Freedom of speech is all too often interpreted as free to agree with the politically correct majority. Hell, many of the people spouting politically correctness go home to their near and dear to express just the opposite. People are afraid to express their beliefs in public, but just because we don’t hear it doesn’t mean society is becoming more understanding. One of the people I respect most is a friend. I’m from an interracial family and bisexual and she’s racist and homophobic. We get along and I respect her because she makes no bones about her beliefs. Quite simply, she thinks I’m wrong and ignorant and has no issue with expressing it. That said, she has no intention of offending anyone, she just refuses to apologise for her beliefs (for which she shouldn’t, as I won’t mine). The reason we can express our beliefs to each other without offending is that neither of us try to force our beliefs on the other. We simply agree to disagree.

While I don’t find Feldman’s video entertaining I don’t see it as being any different or frankly any more potential offensive than what is aired on 102.1 The Edge every weekday morning. Let’s not forget that tuning in is our choice.

I feel it’s important in our ever more insulated world that we not only refrain from shutting down opposing messages to our beliefs, but actively seek them out. We don’t learn anything from having our own opinion/perception mirrored back at us. If that causes fringe/racist groups to thrive (on the internet or otherwise) than so be it. If it turns out there is a large group of people somewhere who strongly believe is something that threatens or scares us, I think we need to acknowledge that, not tell them to be quiet and hide our eyes hoping it will go away. The only reason Hitler progressed as far as he did is because most the world spent a long time trying to ignore it and hoping it would go away. In light of current world events it seems all our political correctness hasn’t taught us much at all. Yes I think we can all make an effort to be kind to our fellow inhabitants of the planet, but since when is telling people to shut up being kind? In trying to be kind to one we are being mean to another. What makes us think we have the right to decide any one person should be treated better than another?

To answer David’s question, I think the long tail of the web will continue to divide and lengthen. We are a scared species who find comfort in our niches. The web can be a great tool to support understanding but only if we first get past our complacency and fears and choose to use it in that way.

That video isn’t racist, neither amusing nor an excellent satire. Rather it reminds me clowning teens. Despite this, the real racists and other minorities exist in the web, no doubt! And they’re not so in the tail, but on the periphery.
I think that the niches-insulation isn’t a really problem of the social media, it’s a decision of every single person - to stay open for different views and ideas or not.
The freedom of word and of choice in the web allows us to be more all-round than if we would have only few streams of information, that define our view.
If we’ll be able to jump from niche to niche, finding out new ideas and other (different from our) opinions it will definitely lead us to understanding.

I think racism exists in the tail more often than not. We have grown considerably but there are still those that are ignorant to what is racist and what is not. One may consider themselves not racist but hold prejudices unknowingly out of ignorance. The web allows people to gain knowledge through experiences of others, within and out of their own realm or niche.

I see what you mean about gravitating to niches that represent your current world view, but I think you’d have to be pretty uneducated or closed-minded to really isolate yourself. Plus, is that *really* even possible on the web?

On the first point, I pull in feeds from a lot of blogs I strongly agree with. But I found them by sifting through a bunch of material. I don’t strongly agree with them because I read them, I’ve read a variety of opinions and I’ve found sources that I trust. Also, I pull in some feeds that are pretty niche (e.g. this) and some that are pretty general (e.g. Google News Canada). Sometimes, even some feeds that are opposite my own views (usually just for sampling, can’t stomach something I strongly disagree with on a daily basis, gets too aggravating).

Second, feeds aren’t the only way I get content online. I use Facebook a lot, and, though the news feed has preferences, it doesn’t target a subject matter niche. The niche is my friends or acquaintances. It doesn’t filter them based on agreement. An example of this playing out in practice… I got into a big debate with my cousin on Facebook the other week based on an article about Mortgentaler that I posted to Facebook.’

Anyways, I don’t think selecting your sources is inherently negative. I tend to believe that thoughtful people will also actively seek a counterpoint often enough. And I don’t think you can ultimate hide from views you disagree with on the web anyway. If anything, the sheer volume of content may make up for the lack of force-feeding in the sense of getting exposed to a wide variety of things.