Is This Ad Racist?

castiron
August 17 2007, 4:51PM

Whether it's racist is debatable. At the very least, it is insensitive.

MidwestGuy
August 17 2007, 5:01PM

I agree, while it does seem extremely insensitive, I would not go so far as to suggest that it was racist. After looking at the ad, I had to read your article to figure out how the pic supported your headline. I can understand how some people would view it as racist but nah, wouldn't go that far.

Michael
August 17 2007, 5:05PM

Not sure if "it's racist" but the image certainly reflects a racist idea. Even if you understand that the Black men in the image are athletes and not slaves, it is still offensive. Why a white exec with all black athletes? I swear I wonder what is going on in some white people's minds. This ad had to go through an entire process, from it's conception, to production, to a board of execs sitting around a table all saying "Terrific!". You know somebody in that process must have found this offensive, but said nothing.
I hope they didn't just fire the idiot who created the ad. Everyone along that path should be out of work for that mess.

Anonymous
August 17 2007, 5:33PM

Racism is insensitivity.

Racism does involve offensive ideas, visual or otherwise.

The advertisement is especially prejudiced (us children of the 60s and 70s always said "prejudiced" and not "racist") because it comes from a corporation selling their wares. That's how the European enslavement of Africans started: selling the idea of black servitude.

By the way: long ago, as a person who came of age in the 70s and 80s, I decided never to call blacks "slaves" when refering to the European and American slave trade. Instead I call them enslaved Africans or European enslaved Africans (if that is the case; Africans were enslaved by others too). This puts the ounus on the enslaver and spells out that no one is inherently a slave; yet evil people enslave others.

So I am not hostile to terminological distinctions.

However, let's call something what it is: the advertisement's particular form of insensitivity is called racism, pure and simple.

xavier
August 17 2007, 5:35PM

not sure if I get the connection to slavery. The men are kneeling down in a position that is common for track and field athletes who run the 100 and 200 meters. What is offensive and therefore possibly racist, is the stereotype equating black male bodies, particularly those that are athletic, to a well oiled machine. In this sense, black men are dehumanized in the portrait, reduced to their ability to serve the white male figure. I see problematic racial stereotypes (and therefore racism) throughout this ad, but I am not sure it is quite antebellum in its symbolism.

Jeff
August 17 2007, 5:52PM

It's amazing to me that the advert even made it to the printer. Intel's marketing department and advertising agency must be full of dullards.

cmoney
August 17 2007, 5:53PM

That ad kind of took my breath away. WTF! How could this have gone though all the filters without someone standing up and saying something about the racially negative imagery in this ad? Someone had to deliberately insist upon Black runners (no image professionally prepared ads is there by accident). Didn't that ring a bell? The ad is so striking that I didn't even notice what product was being pushed, which kind of defeats the purpose of the ad. Both the ad agency and Intel are truly stuck on stupid. They might as well complete the picture and put a whip in the White man's hand.

keith
August 17 2007, 6:12PM

I think the problem is the lack of diversity in the marketing of the company. This is why color diversity is always important when it comes to adveristments of both large and small companies. Good Job Keith!

Keith Wilson

Seattle, Washington

Aaron
August 17 2007, 6:32PM

Communications, Media and Marketing are degreed majors in college from a Bachelors to a Doctorate these things are dissected to the 99th degree. Insensitive is for the uneducated, Racist behavior is well thought out.
What is frightening is our own inability to grasp the understanding of how racist/racism morphs in subliminal forms that would have Black folk disagreeing on what racism really is. Racism is a tool of oppression and symbolism is the most common form used post civil rights movements.
What does the company gain by this ad? More smug white(of all ethnicities) male customers who connect with "things" that promote superiority.

M
August 17 2007, 6:35PM

Thinking: Same ad with a team of all-Middle Eastern or all-Asian men, or all-female runners. Love to see how far that would fly. Not far, I'm guessing.

Diversity at Work: There's no diversity (age, ethnicity, gender, noticable physical ability - big miss with the accessability efforts in computing/technology) in the ads work force.

Team: The supervisor/boss should have at least been in athletic gear too as part of the team. His attire and posture help sink the ad.

Kyon Saucier
August 17 2007, 6:38PM

It is racist I suppose after reading your explanation and I could see a connection to the this all powerful white man with the brains over the stupid but incredbly physcially fit black buck thing, I can see even a connection to slavery but it seems tenous.
And of course the ad was approved because most likely no one in advertising is of African Descent or or of color for that matter.

Ron Lee
August 17 2007, 6:39PM

I find the ad insensitive & cheap. Insensitive because Intel would never shoot a commercial with all black employees in an office setting. Cheap because such a megga company as Intel should not have to computer generate the image of one man to appear as six. That being said, I do beleive our activist friends should enquire about Intels Marketing dept.,just how diverse are they? And I don't mean orientals & arabs who many times seems more appeasing to the establishment. It's ashame that a well know brand corporation will stop to soft racist images to keep their brand in the light. PEACE OUT.

Wes
August 17 2007, 7:18PM

Sorry Keith, but I think you are overreacting (and I am a gay black man and also a liberal).

Perhaps the use of black men was intentional. Why read such sinister intentions into what could arguably be a compliment? Black men ARE the predominate group in track and field. Besides, these men are every bit as beautiful as the ones you promote on your site.

And what's wrong with being a well oiled machine? That's just so much Deconstruction clap-trap from the late 1980s. And the rest of you guys seem to be more anti-corporate America than genuinely sensitive to racial bias in advertising.

The more pressing issue are how frequently black men kill each other, and how many of us don't make it to the starting line in real life.

indastix
August 17 2007, 8:03PM

I'm with Aaron on this... the marketing people for a company this size are highly educated, and they usually look at these things with a very critical eye. At the bare minimum, the execs would have eyeballed this. Giving the benefit of the doubt, the fact that no one saw the problem with this is indicative of there not being enough Blacks/diversity in the company. But I have a feeling that this was intentional, as some have been saying. All this could have been avoided with a Black man in a business suit in the pic or even a group of people standing in the middle, for instance.

CPAPhD
August 17 2007, 8:25PM

Three wowing articles in one day (not all on this site). I'm pretty shocked that this one made it through, but I think Keith hit it on the head, diversity in the board room may be the cause. Surely employees at lower levels had problems with it, but may have been scared to speak up. That happens too... But, on the flip side, there may be black or other minorities in the boardroom. When you're outnumbered, if that be the case, then presence doesn't mean much...unfortunately.

john
August 17 2007, 8:26PM

The ad is profound; it reads " TEAM, POWER, HIGH EFFICIENCY ".

Ostend Street
August 17 2007, 8:33PM

Who said racism was dead! The moment we take a breath racism is there with all of it's ugly messages. No, the powers that be in the company that produced this ad weren't insensitive. They didn't care what we thought. Unfortunately, we're still looking at this world through rose colored lenses and listening to the polyanna bull crap about staying positive. Being positive has it's place, but we must also recognize the negative and call it what it is.

Sandy
August 17 2007, 8:35PM

Tacky yes, racist no, and why would the "sprinters" pose for it? Oh yeah, they were getting paid a few coins and didn't care about the consquences like most of these black folks today who also don't care about the image they are spreading around the globe.

MidwestGuy
August 17 2007, 8:36PM

Interesting comments.

-If the issue is how the black men are being represented and what it suggests, how different would the offense be if you replaced the master with a black woman/man in a business suit? Wouldn't the ad still be offensive? They are still being represented as subservient, well-oiled machines? Or does the race of the master in the ad make all the difference? Does the whole concept change? Why?

Just questions

David
August 17 2007, 9:09PM

This society is terrified of Powerful Black Men, unless those men are under control in some way.
Are the Black men in the ad powerful. Obviously
Do the Black men look like they are under control.
I say yes.

J
August 17 2007, 9:09PM

The question should be,"How are we going to organize a devastating boycott?"

belonb
August 17 2007, 9:21PM

the ad is totally racist. it simply says; white man brainy, superior and totally in charge. black man regardless of numbers, lower, inferior, can work hard under white supervision but still brainless. why not use muscular white men as athletes. people like Wes need to read between the lines and stop feeling uncomfortable with confronting racism. Keith u ROCK!

elg
August 18 2007, 12:28AM

I assume nobody forced the black men to appear in the ad and they got paid. Do they think the add was racist? Are any of the people criticizing this ad going to pay their rent/mortgage, car payment, child support, etc. for them?

A recent article indicates that almost half of the murders in the United States in 2005 involved black indivduals. That to me is far more important then some guys in an ad.

Reggie
August 18 2007, 12:58AM

I'm actually very surprised this type of ad got through the channels at Intel. Considering that the last CEO and the co-founder have retired from the company, I wonder what the diversity is like there now. When they announce a reduction of work force, are the latinos, blacks, and Native Americans the first to be part of that "reduction"? Do they not have any blacks or other minorities(don't wanna start a flame war but I don't consider East Asians and East Indians minorities in the Tech sector anymore.walk through the halls of even the top 5 software/hardware companies in the US and you can count the number of blacks you'll see amoung every 100 employees with one hand easily)in their marketing department, especially in the upper management and decision making? Clearly, this corporation must not have any blacks who have any veto power when an advertisement of this caliber is presented for final approval. I hope the media does an investigation regarding the diversity at Intel now since this ad sheds some light

KBJr.
August 18 2007, 1:17AM

GIVE.ME.A.BREAK.KEITH.

Racist? I suppose when you break much of anything down like you have today you could find questionable results. Oversensitivity is a dangerous thing folks. It will stagnate the creative process if creaters have to fear a backlash because they aren't adhering to the billions of oversensitive groups and peoples.

I SEE where you can get the image you've illustrated Keith, but I think it's more of something you want to see than what it really is. It is amazing how we humans, driven by our own agendas can form arguments about things we see and hear that we WANT, nevermind how illogical, oversensitive, and downright ridiculous the argument may be. Folks heard racism from Don Imus because they wanted to, not because he actually said something racist (is 'nappy' racially derogatory? How about 'hoe'?). Same thing applies here, this is nothing more than hypersensitivity Keith. You know good and well.

jas
August 18 2007, 3:34AM

that's bs kbjr. don imus was racist, and this ad clearly is too. the question is how could anyone think that this would be acceptable. also i don't think it's a technically good ad. it's a demeaning way to portray your employees, even if they had been white guys, and it looks like they're about to run into each other. i'm surprised at intel for allowing this to go through so far, it screams unprofessionalism

Brandon
August 18 2007, 4:50AM

This ad is racist, but not in some subtle hidden way, it is pretty blatant. Intel did issue a mea culpa, said that they didn't approve the ad, pulled it from print but some still got through blah blah blah. It's still a racist ad and it has to make you wonder how it even survived in the system long enough to make it to print, accident or no.

With that said, I have a problem with some of the comments about subliminal messages. Most of that thinking comes from some bullshit freudian theory that comes down to guessing what the meaning of something is regardless of the intent or the truth of the matter. There is no reason to use some freudian post-modern theoretical palm reading to know that this is a racist, possibly even white supremacist, ad. Let's stick to the facts and avoid pretentiously looking for things that may or may not be there.

TITI
August 18 2007, 11:37AM

Only black men and women with keen sight and clear mind like yours are able to notice this kind of offences this todays.Our individual lack of responsability has much to do with it.we are always eager to let our guard down.We lulled ourself into apathy regarding our responsabilities in race issues.I bet those black men on the picture are very pride to be part of this project.That fact of course is about to distress reflective souls.In fact apathy and self abasement is what we are suppose to challenge aggressively..Even if white folk decide to honestly embrasse blacks people today, we're never going to forgive ourself.The psykological warfare has left an irreparable damage with a self distructive culture.our psykological state ough to be our main focus.Because the enemy is within each and everyone of us.WE ARE A MUCH TREAT TO OURSELF than anything else.Our self-abhorrences comes in many forms for the world to see and treat us accordingly.The message we send to others will always tell them how to treat us.

MidwestGuy
August 18 2007, 1:17PM

Brandon, following your lead, here are the facts: The headline is "multiply computing performance..." Beneath it is a white man who is surrounded by 6, identical, physically fit black men. Those are the only facts in the ad. That means that you have to look at it for a deeper(subliminal) meaning. You have concluded that it means the ad is racist. I have concluded otherwise. Most importantly, we are two people, looking at the same ad, drawing opposite conclusions.

It doesn't make your conclusion any more valid than mine mainly because it is only your opinion. We are left to draw conclusions based on our intepretation of something that was not explicilty stated.

If you consider that freudian theory then ok.

Again following your lead, let's stick to the facts and avoid pretentiously looking for things that may or may not be there.

bubba
August 18 2007, 1:58PM

Offensive? Yes. And also wildly inaccurate, probably. Would you even find that many people of color on one FLOOR of an Intel workplace?

Dean
August 18 2007, 2:24PM

I don't know if the ad was racist, but I do know that your calling Tiger Woods African American is racist. Tiger Woods is not African American. He's mixed. (His Wikipedia entry notes as follows: "This makes Woods himself one-quarter Chinese, one quarter Thai, one quarter African American, one-eighth Native American, and one-eighth Dutch.") He's more Asian American than African American. That so called "one drop rule" is racist in its genesis and must be rejected. Please reject racism and all its permutations. Saying that Tiger Woods is an African American is racist!

Derrick from Philly
August 18 2007, 4:46PM

Dean:

I understand what you're saying and I sorta' respect the way you said it, but that line of thinking is why people of color in places like Brazil are powerless today--nobody wants to be black.

elg
August 18 2007, 5:27PM

Derrick from Philly:

The way that you have on more than one occassion referred to yourself as "yella", do you want to be "black"?

Derrick from Philly
August 18 2007, 6:16PM

elg:

In the United States "black" includes yella', brown, red, and black. My family has all those hues, and I'm proud of that. My bringing up my skin complexion is an attempt to understand why the fuck the gay-bashing seemed a little rougher for me than it was for many other "queens" back in North Philly--why the nigguhs seemed a little harder on me. Elg, I'll be fifty next year, and my experience being black among black people goes from South Georgia to North Philadelphia. Any black gay "queen" of my generation will understand why I say the things I do, and why I still have the anger I do. I don't have to explain nothin', darlin'. And don't forget, elg, I may describe myself as yella' "queen", but I never had a problem servicing a juicy jet black dick...brotha'.

Now that I think about your question "do you WANT to be black": It really doesn't matter what I want, I don't really have a choice now, do I, elg?

Derrick from Philly
August 18 2007, 8:01PM

Well, you did touch a nerve, elg, 'cause it's Saturday night; I should be home lookin' at my new DVD of "Before Stonewall", but instead I came back to add one more thought: the issue of intraracial conflict about skin complexion within black communities has only come up a few times on Keith's blog--usually accidentally, as is the case now; but it is a topic that is still pertinent, and many black folks don't like to discuss it. I didn't become "color conscious" until the 1980s when the gay bashing intensified. It seemed to be the only weapon I had against the insult of "faggot" on the streets of North Philly. And I used it. I used it, but never believed my skin complexion made me better than anybody--certainly not my grandfather or my Great-Grandma' Eva who were as dark as you could get. I tried to "be nice", spoke to everybody on the block--all that shit, but the gay bashing intensified. Finally,I figured nigguhs just hated faggots, and especially "yella" faggots, but those are just bad memories now

elg
August 19 2007, 2:09AM

Derrick from Philly:

"Finally, I figured nigguhs just hated faggots, and especially yella faggots"....

This should go without saying, but "dark skinned" black gay men (bgm) NEVER had it better than "light skinned" bgm. In fact, being a dark skinned bgm myself, I always thought that light skinned bgm were more "accepted" by society at large. The two groups moved on different levels: for example, light skinned bgm were more sought after as sex/love partners and had that boost in "self-esteem" as a result (or so I thought). But "homophobia in the hood" was rough if you were "clockable" no matter what your complexion.

It must be human nature to feel that others have it better than you do. These thoughts serve to divide us (bgm) from each other and conquer.

Yevgeniy
August 19 2007, 2:53AM

i am sorry. i am not American. i did not grow up with all your race issues. but i really think Keith is overreacting.

it happens that world's best runners are black. is this a fact? yes. can people have a white supervisor? yes. can a best runner be a symbol of efficiency? yes. what is the problem?

yes i do understand that it IS POSSIBLE if someone WANTS to, to find racist motives. technically black men are kneeling in front of a white men. does this mean it is automatically demeaning to them? nowhere in the world do black runners start running in that position in front of a white judge??? it is something unheard of? no one in this world has a white boss? PLEASE.

being denied job or housing because of your race. being called names. being stereotyped as dumb or unable to do something because of your race. THAT IS RACISM.

being used as a symbol of something positive? you have a problem with THAT? the rest of the problems in the world are solved so you are going after THIS?

bemused
August 19 2007, 9:33AM

ahh come on this ad is just a distraction.racism is going nowhere as long as there is money in it. so leave them to it just observe and use your dollar wisely. you can look up Rosewood or Greenwood avenue for inspiration, we need our own intel

School deaths that stunned black America

After four model students were gunned down in a playground, outrage spread: if the brightest and best are not safe, then who is? Paul Harris in New York reports on the killings that have galvanised a community

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2151747,00.html

MLee
August 19 2007, 9:37AM

To avoid stupid arguments of “one drop of black blood” is why I always liked term “Colored People” used in the 1950s for “African American” and “Black”. “Black” and then “African American” evolved from James Brown’s song in the 1960s “I am black and I am proud”. I guess less than 5% of African Americans have pure African Blood. Think about it. One of the reasons I like being Black is that I have a whole rainbow of people, from ivory white thru high yellow to ebony black, to love without going outside of my race. Derrick from Philly, you are like me. Once someone strikes a nerve you don’t let up.

Anonymous
August 19 2007, 9:41AM

Yevgeniy:

Let me make these observations to you with respect and gentleness. I think I understand your frustration, maybe not. I hope you will at least find my reaction to your comment meaningful on some level.

(1) Eastern and Western Europe (I am assuming that you are from Russia) has been and still is bigoted towards darker skinned people. I have been to Russia (and all over the world) and seen bigotry towards American blacks firsthand.

(2) Racism thrives on visual symbolism, stereotyped language and all sorts of expressive bias; it is found in advertisements like this as well as housing and other forms of bias. Denying this is simply incredulous: how do you think hate, ignorance and insensitivity is disseminated? It's spread in our expressive and communicative forms.

(3) Keith Bokin's blog actually engages global and local issues that relate to African American homosexuals. Media issues are one of his beats.

What do you think about my reflections, Yevgeniy?

Yevgeniy
August 19 2007, 10:23AM

i agree with 1. but what does it have to do with my comment? or being from the region makes me racist automatically? i read the comments above and it looks like i'm not the only one who is surprised with Keith's reaction.

my friend (a black guy) and I were on a bus. and there was a sign "do not stand in front of the yellow line". my friend stepped over that line. i said to him "go back. know your place." meaning "you are a passenger, you should obey the rules". i had no idea that my words could be interpreted as racist. the driver was black and was pissed at me for saying that. he thought i was putting my friend down as a black man. so in HIS MIND i was a racist. but that is not what i meant.

there are situations that could be interpreted in several ways. does it mean we always have to presume the worst and expect the worst motivation of people? what a lovely approach!

bemused
August 19 2007, 12:03PM

anon black people are not only found in america

yecgeni "being denied job or housing because of your race. being called names. being stereotyped as dumb or unable to do something because of your race. THAT IS RACISM."

how do you think these stereotypes and prejudices are formed, maybe advertising?
or maybe you're right there are no racist people it's in our heads
fool

PS Thought
August 19 2007, 12:03PM

You would think they would know better. Thank you Keith. This is what needs to happen if we want things to change. Name and shame. When you know better, you do better.

Yevgeniy
August 19 2007, 12:45PM

bemused: right. let's start name calling, shall we...

i never said it was all in our heads. it exists unfortunately. don't turn my words upside down.

my point was - if you want to find hidden meanings... you will always succeed. even when there is none.

i never said my words were the ultimate truth. don't hate. yes, maybe i do not understand some stuff. i will admit that. i was sharing my opinion.

but what do i know, right? i m from Europe, living in the US though. my opinions do not count. let me step back and let you keep hating each other. i'm outta here.

J
August 19 2007, 3:59PM

It's sad that there seems to be a whole generation of black people that would find some reason to dismiss a white man spitting in their face, and who laugh at klansman jokes.

Even worse is the "Something New" trend among those of us who want to call themselves progressive. Between disease, "opening up dating options," and the murders as a result of poisoned minds it might not be long before the world looks like the hell that is most Spanish enslaved nations or the hell England will become.

Sprinkle the effects of SUV drivers, cell phone addicts, and real estate developers/forest murderers over that and we have a wonderful steaming pile of a future.

curious887
August 19 2007, 4:22PM

I think this ad is extremely insensitive and yes racist. I can't believe an ad agency would think that it is OK to reduce black men to nothing but their bodies--well-oiled machines. The problem I have with this ad and some of these comments is they seem to condone the myth/stereotype that we are nothing but machines--bodies and big dicks without heart and brains. Would we ever see an ad where a black man/boss was standing in the middle of a room surrounded by half naked white men essentially bowing to him and his authority? I think not. This ad is made worse by the fact that all the runners/slaves are black. If there was a mix of runners in this ad--black, white, Asian--and perhaps the master in the middle of the room was not a young white male, those of us with issues about this ad, would feel differently. I'm quite frankly appalled.

Anonymous
August 19 2007, 6:35PM

Yevgeniy:

Why do you overlook the respectful & accepting manner in which I approached you and dialogued with you in this comment thread?

Why do you assume that someone doesn't want you to comment on this blog?

My manner certainly did not imply that you have no right to be here.

On the contrary:

- I dialogued with you and engaged your ideas and even made sure to express a sense of respect.

- Nor did I assume that your skin color was one way or another. One can be from a European country and be of African descent. I only rightly assume that you're from Russia because of your name and because you said you weren't raised here.

So I am going out of my way to say: keep commenting & thanks for responding to my reflections.

American blacks, be they gay or straight, need to build good relationships with Europeans & others from all over the world, be those people from the African diaspora or from the European diaspora; be they white or black.

Peace.

Kola Boof
August 19 2007, 8:11PM

DEAN wrote: Saying that Tiger Woods is an African-American is racist.

KOLA: Dean, like so many people from the African continent...I agree with you 100% I find it EXTREMELY disrespectful to "black people" when Americans refer to WHITES, Multi-racial and anything short of a "Guppie" as being....a black person. Many AFRICANS feel this way, because we were never slaves and are INSULTED that just anybody can be us (it's VERY racist), and people like Derrick from Philly should realize that it's time for "BLACK PEOPLE" to represent themselves and stop expecting everyone else to carry our burden. I especially hate it when these "nearly white women" stand up to give a "speech" on MY behalf. Black Americans were forced to accept this for hundreds of years, so they don't see how disrespectful it is.

Diamante
August 19 2007, 8:41PM

I usually don't pull the race card, but this is very racist and insensitive. I think Black People need to banned Intel for advertising this shit!

Aaron
August 19 2007, 10:57PM

Corporate America is run like a political campaign on steroids. I can tell you with the limited experience I have had in political campaigns that politicians are extremely calculating for jobs that dont pay half of what most of them made before running for office. (Why is another story)

Who would believe a COMPANY that brings in a few BILLION dollars is not more calculating?

Anyone believing that Keith is oversensitive is so trapped in their own ego, that they cant even believe a man whose profession it was and is to monitor public opinion, needs to get a clue from someone other than themself. Liberal, foreigner, or otherwise, your feedback is important to understanding why we can't get a hold on this racism monster but for your own sake, wake the hell up!

GQ
August 20 2007, 2:53AM

The way I see it. Before I read Keith's column, I saw the ad first. I already felt that the runners, who were preparing for the race, were "bowing" before good ole massa. And we are not talking the "master and servant" sex games here either. It wasn't overt but it was subtle. It's interesting that there are different opinions about this. Some say it's offensive and some say it's no big deal. to the folks who don't think is offensive, you may want to do a little research about slavery in America. And maybe after that, you can think twice about telling anyone to "Know your place." right Yevgeniy?

ChicagoANgel
August 20 2007, 3:47AM

I do not think this ad is racist or all that intentional on Intel's part. I do think its insensitive givent the racial backgound of the USA of the white master and Black slave. I do not know a thing about runners but I think it would have been better if they were on a track than an office building looking at the floor with a white man in the middle. It comes off as they are low and he is tall.

Its just insensitive. How come the runners couldnt be black, white, asian, if people think we need to move toward equality? I think a little more attention should have been paid to that but most blacks go into sport and rappin and most whites finish school and go on to run things so what are afro americans gonna do?

I just think the ad was insensity and Intell pulled it and apologized. Over reacting huh? I guess when we see things that rasies a red flag in our minds we are supposed to just shut up!

Equalnox
August 20 2007, 7:37AM

Looks to me like every gay white bottom's ultimate fantasy: to be surrounded by a group of hot, muscular black men. Looks like he can't wait for those fine ebony stallions to throw him down and gang bang him. Racist? No. Racial? Yes. I wasn't offended. Somebody in that company is a gay white man with jungle fever. Holla!

elg
August 20 2007, 7:48AM

Anonymous said that "racism thrives on visual symbolism" and "it's spread in our expressive and communicative forms". After reading Anonymous' comments, and thinking about it, I've changed my initial opinion about the ad somewhat, but not totally. OK, the ad is insensitive but I still don't see it as racist.

I've applied Anonymous's insights (I hope he won't mind) to black male representation in "interracial" gay pornography. In sex scenes involving a white male and a black male, the black male is usually an aggressive (often rough) "top" and the white male is usually a passive "bottom" getting f....d. Does black male representation in gay porn (since black gay/bisexual men are rarely seen in other kinds of gay media) influence how white gay men "see" and/or treat black gay/bisexual men? Just a thought/question I had.

MidwestGuy
August 20 2007, 9:46AM

ELG, racism can be objective and rarely subjective. If you had taken the same ad and replaced the glistening black runners with very light-complexioned (but noitceably black) runners, people would have taken a step back. For obvious reasonings, the image of a glistening, dark, black body is akin to a slave.

Same ad - different black image - different initial conclusion.

Maybe we have our own issues with color.

titi
August 20 2007, 10:40AM

I HAVE ONLY ONE SUGESTION FOR TIGER AND HIS SUPPORTERS IN THIS MIXE RACE NONSENSE:
WHY DOESN'T TIGER GO TO ASIA AND SEE THE CONDITION AND FATE OF THOSE POOR UNKNOWN MIXE RACE BLACK KIDS LIVING IN THAILHAND,COREEN, CHINE ETC...HE WILL LEARN A GREAT DEAL OUTSIDE HIS VERY WELL SHELTERED LIFE OF CELEBRITY. HE IS RICH AND FAMOUS SO ASIANS CAN EASILY ACCEPT HIM. LIKE MANY BLACK MEN RACIAL APATHY WAS HIS SOLUTION TO A CHALLENGING REALITY. WE BLACKS DO NOT RESPECT OURSELF.. WHY SHOULD ANYBODY CARE????

Anonymous
August 20 2007, 12:43PM

elg:

I extend my respect to you.

Comparing the Intel ad's racism (or lack thereof) to gay male porn is problematic. The ad is one instance that we can analyze. Gay male porn contains many agendas & it's hard to generalize.

But, we can be sure about this:

1) Black men are paid less on average than their white counterparts.

2) There are no tip-top, well-paid, black male gay porn stars in white-owned gay porn (Matthew Rush does not count because he has never definitively identified as African American).

3) White-run gay porn is loath to ever depict 2 or more black men having sex either alone or with others.

4) Interracial sex, period, is fetishized and not normalized.

5) In black-own gay porn, black men are frequently sexualized as criminal types (or thugs).

6) Black-owned gay porn is just as unelightened as white-run gay porn.

7) Despite progress, even Bjorn and Michael Lucas' porn fails to have a truly, consistent parity of races.

8) Black male depictions are not as bad as that of Asian males.

bemused
August 20 2007, 1:19PM

anon - seems like your looking for your "white" master to validate your worth. So what if there are no "tiptop well paid" black gay porn actors/victims?

PORNisFAKE RUBBISH made by criminal which should be a guilty pleasure at best. The moment it becomes second nature or something you analyse you're in too deep

Anonymous
August 20 2007, 1:50PM

Bemused: Calm down.

KeithR
August 20 2007, 3:13PM

One of the saddest things about this ad is the fact that 6 Black men actually agreed to pose for it. It seems that many Black people under a certain age are really very naive about what racism is and how it operates. Perhaps because they came of age AFTER the civil rights era they (like many White people) seem to think its no longer an issue. In a way they are like animals that live on islands where there are no predators. Such animals become so tame that they fail to recognize predators for what they are when they do appear. The success of civil rights has allowed many younger Black people to believe that racism is no longer much of an issue. And because they've made this basic assumption they simply don't recognize racist things as racist things even when they are presented to them on a silver platter, as in this ad.

Blue
August 20 2007, 4:41PM

I don't think it's really racist ... I just don't really see what the hell it has to do with the product. It seems like a mismatch. But what do i know?

Xavier Johnson
August 20 2007, 4:44PM

Just look like a regular professional sports team to me and probably what the Intel ad guy thought too

DDC
August 20 2007, 10:09PM

It did make me draw back a little and I'm not comfortable with it. But as some people have mentioned here, isn't there really only ONE black guy in the ad but he's computer duplicated (the identical outfit & hairstyle would seem to make that clear)? That's supposed to be the joke right, "multiply performance". It's interesting to note that if some people aren't able to pick up on that simple little sly joke, then your minds aren't sophisticated enough to see beyond the mere imagery of a picture. Because of that and the bad history the ad alludes to, it was not appropriate.

geishaman
August 21 2007, 12:23PM

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the possible, deliberate association with the common computer terms "master & slave".

I'm just sayin'.

Kent Gash
August 22 2007, 12:15PM

Hey! I just thought that you and your readers would like to know that I wrote immediately to INTEL and they wrote back saying they regretted the advertissment and had pulled it from circulation. They also wrote that they were increasing "diversity training and involvement in marketting". I'm paraphrasing their response and will try to forward the E-Mail. I did feel the ad was at the least offensive and at the worst blatantly racist, so I went to the source to express my rage and disappointment. Than you for all that you do in making both the LGBT community and the communities of color aware. We appreciate your good work. Peace.

Mahari
August 22 2007, 9:29PM

I would say "yes, it is racist". However, it is the kind of racism that can pass for most people. And it is the kind of "subtle" racism that is typical of today's American media. It is this kind of subtle racism that is found in commercials all the time. It is the kind of "closeted" racism that allows individuals like Don Imus to call black women "ho's" and "nappy-headed" because "he insults everyone". So he can get away with it for lots of people because it falls within this area of tastelessness which allows him to hide it.
Ostensibly, in this ad the black men are bowed to start a race and the white man is just standing there. But to the racist white man he stands above "them", superior, in charge and directs their actions. So they hope to have it both ways - or every way possible.

miyna
August 23 2007, 10:26AM

I don't even consider myself politically active in this respect, and I saw it at first glance, without even reading your article. In fact, the picture is what drew me to this article, and not the title.

I'm not sure I understand how people disagree. I mean, the symbolism, whether intentional or not, is obvious. Just because there were no ad executives with the stones to stand up and say, "Uh, HELL YEAH that's a problem!", doesn't mean there was no problem. They should have looked twice and looked again, and then hired some consultants to look at it for them just one more damn time.

@ DDC :: And yes, it's perfectly obvious that there's only one runner. It was most likely stock photography, too, so this ad wasn't posed for specifically. However, I'm sure that's not the point Mr. Boykin (or anyone else) is making here.

@ EqualNox :: OMG, you're funny! :D

Johnwater
September 4 2007, 11:58AM

Idiots.

1. The ad is not racist.

2. In a world where young black men don't seem to like college, education and ambition; this nonsense is the least of our worries.

Where are the posts on self-destructive black behavior?

The house slaves of old order leftism are alive and well--ready to distract blacks with sideshows like this post.
Has any class in America, any group, ever succeeded without education?
Then how are we to succeed if we don't make it our focus?

Let us flood graduate programs all over the country (based on merit and a change in black attitudes towards education) and then we can talk about nonsense like this all day long (although being educated-- hopefully in fields other than "humanities" an other "uselessnesses"--we probably wouldn't).

3. It is not black MEN. There is only one black MAN in the ad several times over.