Chink in the Armor?

Jumbo · « **on:** February 18, 2012, 11:38:01 AM »

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2012/02/18/espn-uses-chink-in-the-armor-line-twice-did-linsanity-just-go-racist/

Quote

Greg McNeal, Contributor

+ Follow on Forbes
Washington|2/18/2012 @ 11:14AM |572 views
ESPN Uses "Chink in the Armor" Line Twice-- Did Linsanity Just Go Racist?
1 comments, 0 called-out + Comment now + Comment now Linsanity just jumped the shark with the ESPN mobile website using the headline a “Chink in the Armor” to refer to the Knick’s loss to the Hornet’s. This came on the heels of commentator Walt Frazier making the same comment on-air Friday night.

Move up Move down
Time Magazine Picks Jeremy Lin For Cover After Five Games
Kurt Badenhausen
Forbes Staff
Linsanity Is Even Bigger Than That And So Are We.
Roger Groves
Contributor
I’m not a sports writer, so I tried to avoid the whole Linsanity phenomenon; my sense of it was that five stand-out performances in a long season did not make a trend, so now that the absurdity of Linsanity has taken a turn for the racist, I think we should pause for a second and get our bearings.

Was the on-air commentary a poor choice of words? Of course, but if you watch the video clip (it’s just 8 seconds long), I don’t think Frazier was trying to make a pun. Judge for yourself:

Now, the headline is a different matter. As anyone who has worked in digital media knows, the headline is what draws attention and hits. Editors and writers try to maximize visitors and shock value with their headlines (check out mine, it got you here didn’t it?). Unlike an on-air comment, most writers and editors obsess over the headline even after they click the publish button. So my sense of things is that whoever posted the headline thought about it, giggled, and clicked publish. In fairness to the writer/editor, the term “chink in the armor” has been used over 3,000 times on ESPN.com, but just because it is a frequently used term doesn’t absolve the writers and editors of responsibility to use common sense. But, the problem may be an institutional one, not an individual one, at least judging by ESPN’s track record and their inept statement in response to the outrage— Here is what they wrote after pulling the headline:

“Last night, ESPN.com’s mobile web site posted an offensive headline referencing Jeremy Lin at 2:30 am ET. The headline was removed at 3:05 am ET. We are conducting a complete review of our cross-platform editorial procedures and are determining appropriate disciplinary action to ensure this does not happen again. We regret and apologize for this mistake.

The initial comments may have been a poor choice of words, rather than racist or in poor taste, but you wouldn’t know that from ESPN’s statement. Note the avoidance in the language used by ESPN— ESPN.com’s “mobile web site” apparently did the posting, not a writer or editor. There is also no admission of wrong-doing or acknowledgement that this was a potentially offensive posting, just some regret and an apology for “this mistake.” How about a statement that this was insensitive or could be perceived as insensitive? How about some acknowledgement that this is not consistent with the values of the company? As a matter of crisis communications and public relations this statement is a failure.

SB Nation Sports Editor Brian Floyd nicely summed up the controversy when he wrote: “The headline was unintentional — it had to be unintentional. Someone is going to get buried for this, making it a hard lesson to learn. But dang, don’t plaster the word ‘chink’ underneath Lin’s name on a huge national website without understanding exactly what the backlash will be. It’s not edgy or funny; it’s a ridiculously terrible mistake.”

I agree with the fact that someone is going to get buried, but I’m not certain that the headline was unintentional. Let’s not forget ESPN has a bit of a record with inappropriate comments: Remember the “Trail of Tears” reference? How about the “ He’s out having a Taco” comment? Or the “ white boy wasted” comment?

Those three examples plus the two “ Chink in the armor” comments get us to five, and while five isn’t a trend, it’s certainly enough for Linsanity.

Townhallsavoy · « **Reply #1 on:** February 18, 2012, 12:34:52 PM »

Freudian slip.

And if it was someone being blatantly racist, they should be fired.

But I doubt that. This "you can say anything offensive without being lynched" society is wearing thin.

JR4AU · « **Reply #2 on:** February 18, 2012, 12:43:45 PM »

Quote from: Townhallsavoy on February 18, 2012, 12:34:52 PM

Freudian slip.

And if it was someone being blatantly racist, they should be fired.

But I doubt that. This "you can say anything offensive without being lynched" society is wearing thin.

A Freudian Slip, by definition, belies one's true feelings and thoughts.

Btdub, I think you meant "you can't say anything offensive without being lynched".

Since the offender here is ESPN media, I doubt they'll lynch him. He'll be given a pass. Let someone on Fox News say something like that, and they'd be burned at the stake.

Townhallsavoy · « **Reply #3 on:** February 18, 2012, 01:48:23 PM »

Quote from: JR4AU on February 18, 2012, 12:43:45 PM

A Freudian Slip, by definition, belies one's true feelings and thoughts.

I ain't no psychology shrink.

Quote

Btdub, I think you meant "you can't say anything offensive without being lynched".

That is what I meant.

Quote

Since the offender here is ESPN media, I doubt they'll lynch him. He'll be given a pass. Let someone on Fox News say something like that, and they'd be burned at the stake.

Buzz Killington · « **Reply #4 on:** February 18, 2012, 02:02:48 PM »

Lincidental contact

Kaos · « **Reply #5 on:** February 18, 2012, 02:48:40 PM »

We've gotten ridiculously sensitive.

Five or six police officers in South Alabama are going to lose their jobs, be forced to retire or be suspended (one's already resigned and another was fired) over an alleged racial incident.

What happened? Sitting around the squad room shooting the shit. One used the expression "please throw me in the briar patch" in reference to a task they wanted.

The black guy said he didn't understand the reference. The effort to explain what it meant eventually led to YouTube where they watched a few minutes of the Br'er Rabbit story from Song of the South.

Complaint filed. People fired.

It's a DISNEY MOVIE. I loved this movie when I was a kid. I tell Br'er Rabbit and the Tar Baby to my kids.

It's asinine to pretend that things didn't happen.

JR4AU · « **Reply #6 on:** February 18, 2012, 03:34:43 PM »

Quote from: Kaos on February 18, 2012, 02:48:40 PM

We've gotten ridiculously sensitive.

Five or six police officers in South Alabama are going to lose their jobs, be forced to retire or be suspended (one's already resigned and another was fired) over an alleged racial incident.

What happened? Sitting around the squad room shooting the shit. One used the expression "please throw me in the briar patch" in reference to a task they wanted.

The black guy said he didn't understand the reference. The effort to explain what it meant eventually led to YouTube where they watched a few minutes of the Br'er Rabbit story from Song of the South.

Complaint filed. People fired.

It's a DISNEY MOVIE. I loved this movie when I was a kid. I tell Br'er Rabbit and the Tar Baby to my kids.

It's asinine to pretend that things didn't happen.

Christ Almighty! Tell me you're kidding!

AUChizad · « **Reply #7 on:** February 18, 2012, 04:35:11 PM »

Quote from: Kaos on February 18, 2012, 02:48:40 PM

We've gotten ridiculously sensitive.

Five or six police officers in South Alabama are going to lose their jobs, be forced to retire or be suspended (one's already resigned and another was fired) over an alleged racial incident.

What happened? Sitting around the squad room shooting the shit. One used the expression "please throw me in the briar patch" in reference to a task they wanted.

The black guy said he didn't understand the reference. The effort to explain what it meant eventually led to YouTube where they watched a few minutes of the Br'er Rabbit story from Song of the South.

Complaint filed. People fired.

It's a DISNEY MOVIE. I loved this movie when I was a kid. I tell Br'er Rabbit and the Tar Baby to my kids.

It's asinine to pretend that things didn't happen.

That is absurd.

The "lynch" thing in reference to Tiger Woods was absurd too.

I'm convinced that the on-air slip-up was nothing more than a hilariously unfortunately poor choice of words.

This "Chink in the Armor" headline thing? I mean, come on, how is that an accident? ESPN.com is known for using punny captions. Why use that phrase if they didn't mean "Hey, this chink is kicking ass in basketball, but has shown to not be invincible"?

JR4AU · « **Reply #8 on:** February 18, 2012, 04:55:38 PM »

So this is what PC has come to? Well worn phrases with no, none, nada, ZERO racial connotation to them, now are instantly "offensive" in the wrong company?

Saniflush · « **Reply #9 on:** February 18, 2012, 04:56:25 PM »

but the tar baby, he say nothin'

AUChizad · « **Reply #10 on:** February 18, 2012, 05:02:19 PM »

So wait, you guys don't think the ESPN headline was intentionally racist?

wesfau2 · « **Reply #11 on:** February 18, 2012, 05:03:02 PM »

Quote from: AUChizad on February 18, 2012, 05:02:19 PM

So wait, you guys don't think the ESPN headline was intentionally racist?

I think they're talking about the tar baby thing now.

JR4AU · « **Reply #12 on:** February 18, 2012, 05:05:40 PM »

Quote from: AUChizad on February 18, 2012, 05:02:19 PM

So wait, you guys don't think the ESPN headline was intentionally racist?

Do you think it was intentionally racist?

wesfau2 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 18, 2012, 05:11:57 PM »

Quote from: JR4AU on February 18, 2012, 05:05:40 PM

Do you think it was intentionally racist?

I certainly do.

JR4AU · « **Reply #14 on:** February 18, 2012, 05:30:03 PM »

Quote from: wesfau2 on February 18, 2012, 05:11:57 PM

I certainly do.

So you think he just thought it would go unnoticed, he'd be given a pass, or he just decided to tank his career and retire?

wesfau2 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 18, 2012, 05:52:31 PM »

Quote from: JR4AU on February 18, 2012, 05:30:03 PM

So you think he just thought it would go unnoticed, he'd be given a pass, or he just decided to tank his career and retire?

Probably thought he'd be given a pass. The newsroom probably chuckled about it. Lots of "probablies" in my post. Probably too many.

Townhallsavoy · « **Reply #16 on:** February 18, 2012, 06:04:15 PM »

Quote from: JR4AU on February 18, 2012, 05:05:40 PM

Do you think it was intentionally racist?

There's no way to know.

ESPN will say it was a slip. And if a black guy's responsible, the story will be dropped in its entirety.

And there's always this:

JR4AU · « **Reply #17 on:** February 18, 2012, 06:06:48 PM »

Quote from: wesfau2 on February 18, 2012, 05:52:31 PM

Probably thought he'd be given a pass. The newsroom probably chuckled about it. Lots of "probablies" in my post. Probably too many.

Call me naive. I think it was just a mistake. Maybe at worst a Freudian slip. Hard for me to believe it was intentional. But, I could be wrong.

AUChizad · « **Reply #18 on:** February 18, 2012, 06:19:27 PM »

Right now, the college basketball home page caption says "True Blue" with a picture of the Kentucky basketball team. See what they did there? They took a "well worn phrase" and applied it to Kentucky's blue uniforms. The NHL home page says "March of the Penguins". See what they did there? A witty pun that uses the title of a well known movie and applies it to the Pittsburgh Penguins. The NCAA Football home page reads "B1G Bang Theory". See a pattern yet?

I swear to God, as I was writing this to prove a point, the exact same story & picture on the NFL home page changed from "Open Air" a pun using a "well worn phrase" and applying it to these players' open contracts. Now it's changed to "Where to Next?". Covering their tracks, perhaps?

Edit 2: The Kentucky basketball and Penguins hockey examples have been taken down and replaced with other headlines, also in the time it took me to write this post. Perhaps anything to similarly punny has been removed in an attempt to quell arguments like the one I'm making now?

Obvious doesn't begin to describe it. There's no reason to go with that headline if not for the play on words.

AUChizad · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2012, 06:25:59 PM »

Quote from: Townhallsavoy on February 18, 2012, 06:04:15 PM

Jesus, that's insanely ignorant.

I'm not arguing that people don't often overreact to these kinds of things. I've said that every example mentioned in this thread has been ridiculous, except the ESPN.com headline. That not withstanding, you cannot seriously believe that that headline was a "slip of the tongue". Not if you're being honest.