2/9: Terrible MSNBC gaffe
 

http://cellar.org/2002/nigerinnis.jpg

In what must be one of the biggest gaffes in cable news history, MSNBC misspelled Mr. Niger Innis' name in their on-air graphics.

I should expect that somebody got fired over this one, which had MSNBC profusely apologizing of course. The fascinating aspect of this, to me, is that someone got a screen capture at all. People aren't exactly Tivo-ing 24-hour news channels. This capture was from a TV site that I enjoy, TV Barn, who in turn got it from a site that reports on local TV news.

Man. That's good Saturday morning humor. :)

That is pretty bad though. They don't generally misspell any names, really. Just so happens that they fudge it when the dude's first name is Niger... wow.

Obviously the webmaster of Time Canada is now out of his <b>second</b> job in 2 months... :)

Wasn't it Joe DiMaggio that they accidentally posted died a while back? (before he actually died, of course) I remember the crawler at the bottom of the screen came across and everyone was shocked, especially Joe (assuming it <i>was</i> him).
I'll see if I can dig up a link.

The N word
 

Let's presume that Niger has heard that one before. For all we know, he's got buddies that call him that all the time.

We all know that the hip hop culture has adopted the N word in a completely different context, often as a friendly term of endearment.

Harvard Law Professor, Randall Kennedy, has recently written a book on this subject.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/03...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Of course, it would be a major controversy if such a book were written by a white linguist. Even Randall Kennedy, a black author, is getting some criticism for use of the word. He's also getting some praise for writing this book.

His point, essentially, is that what's important is the meaning ascribed to the use of the word.

Language evolves. Right now, we are living in a time of transition of meaning of the word nigger.

Color me white but how do you pronouce out loud (as opposed to on the internet) the name Niger? :confused: I guess it would be the same as the country.

I agree with Nic's summary of Kennedy's book. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the word, only the meaning given to it. To me, all that nigger means is a person who has dark skin. And what's wrong with that. I personally don't use the word in everyday language because I theoretically don't believe that skin color makes any difference in life.

And if you accept what I say, then did the graphics guy screw up semantically? [let the flames begin, I don't care, it's only a word]

There is no nigger on the net.

Registrant:
NAACP (NIGGER4-DOM)
4805 MT. HOPE DRIVE
BALTIMORE, MD 21215
US

Domain Name: NIGGER.COM

Administrative Contact, Billing Contact:
Hawley, Tammy (TH1189)
NAACP
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215-9167
410-486-9167

It's too bad for Randall Kennedy, that he didn't have that domain name for his book.

Registrant:
NAACP (NIGGER2-DOM)
4805 MT. HOPE DRIVE
BALTIMORE, MD 21215
US

Domain Name: NIGGER.NET

Administrative Contact, Billing Contact:
Hawley, Tammy (TH1189)
NAACP
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215-9167
410-486-9167

Registrant:
NAACP (NIGGER3-DOM)
4805 MT. HOPE DRIVE
BALTIMORE, MD 21215
US

Domain Name: NIGGER.ORG

Administrative Contact, Billing Contact:
Hawley, Tammy (TH1189)
NAACP
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215-9167
410-486-9167

www.niggerjoke.com :eek:

It's a long I and a J sound instead of G. Assuming that's how he likes to say it.

Kinda like Nigel, but with an R on the end instead.

Nigeria used to be called "Niger"....

"There was a young lady from Niger
Who smiled as she rode on a tiger
They returned from the ride
With the lady inside
And the smile on the face of the tiger"


Of course, this stretches a bit on the "hard g"-"soft g" axis...

Is political correctness rewriting history and geography?
 

In 1967, 143 place names containing the word nigger were changed to Negro by order of the U.S. Board on Geographic Names.

Next to go ... Squaw Valley and Cripple Creek?

It may be better to change the import of words such as nigger, squaw, queer and heeb to align with changing norms.

Gay Pride has advanced to the level of acceptance that we have Queer as Folk on TV.

Will the influence of hip hop culture, BET, rap music lyrics and song titles lead to the acceptablity of nigger music groups and television shows in the future?

NIGGA Never Ignorant Getting Goals Accomplished (Tupac Shakur)

Recently, a jewish publisher in NYC launched Heeb magazine, The New Jew Review.

The times they are a changin'.

We'll know that prejudice has been eliminated when you don't have to be black to say nigger, gay to say queer, and jewish to say heeb.

And that our minds are truly open when we can handle the really filthy words.

All I can think of is what this guy must have gone through as a kid with that name! I assume he was born in America. WTF were his parents thinking to lay that moniker on him?

- NBN

Actually, it may have been prophetic that his parents hung Niger with this epithet. He wears it well. I think he'll be able to handle this faux pas by MSNBC. He's even been a guest on Politically Incorrect.

Advice to The President of the United States on matters of Race

i never did have to be "gay to say queer."

because that's not what it means.

and i still don't have a problem saying it around homosexuals, because it still doesn't mean "homosexual." and if they ever have a problem with me saying it around them, they'll get bitched at.

My, that's a queer interpretation. ;)

I find it really queer how a woman who's a bitch is considered to be spiteful or overbearing, whereas a man who's a bitch is considered to be weak or contemptible. :)

Not really. It's slang, and it does not mean "homosexual" any more than "jewish" means "money squandering". Just because some people use it that way does not mean that its definition is "homosexual".

You know, a lot of people misuse the word "ignorant". They go "my, that's ignorant" or "Quit being ignorant". You've heard it, I'm sure. What does the word mean? Unaware. Uninformed. Not erudite. Yet people toss it around as an insult, not at all meaning "My, what an un-learned fellow."

That doesn't mean that the definition has changed - it means that the one who uses it improperly is, well, <b>ignorant</b>.

For the record, I don't appreciate the hijacking of words such as queer, gay, fag, etc. Homosexual females have "lesbian" - why do homosexual males get to steal regular words? Why do people continue to support the misuse of these words?

Sounds ignorant to me. :)

It is senseless to argue that slang doesn't have meanings generally understood in the vernacular.

Lots of gay, lesbian and other sexual minorities have embraced the term "queer" for their *own* use, partly to rob it of it's negative power. Sorry if you straight people don't like it.

*Who* is speaking is inevitably a vital part of the context in which speech is understood.Remeber the scene in "Rush Hour" where Jackie Chan greets the bartender with the same phrase he's just heard his black partner use: "Whassup, my nigger?". Membership in an oppressed minority profoundly shapes the context of discourse; having words insiders can use without giving offense that are off-limits to outsiders is a powerful way of expressing solidarity.

To whine about words being "hijacked" is just plain silly. Will you stand there like King Canute ordering back the sea proclaiming "Queer doesn't mean homosexual"? "Nice" didn't used to mean "pleasing", either. Words grow meanings like ships grow barnacles, and *all* the users of a language participate in the process that gives meaning to words.

Lately, queer folks have had a heavy influence on the words used to describe themselves, because for the most part they're the ones doing the talking--something that's been long overdue. It's only now that we've started asserting some influence and control (instead of cowering in the closet) that we start hearing complaints from straight people about how "their" words have been stolen.

They were perfectly happy with "faggot" and "bulldyke" when they thought they were the only ones in control. Language is a powerful tool of opression...or liberation. As Humpty-Dumpty said to Alice on the subject: "The question is: which is to be the master".

Straight people complaining about homosexuals using words such as queer describing themselves is patently absurd. Once again, The Simpsons parodied it best:

John: Queer?
Homer: Yeah, and that's another thing! I resent you people
using that word. That's our word for making fun of you!
We need it!! Well I'm taking back our word, and I'm
taking back my son!

-- 4F11, Homer's Phobia


That's what I was remembered of when Dhamsaic wrote...

> For the record, I don't appreciate the hijacking of words such
> as queer, gay, fag, etc.

Which was either a very fine use of irony, or a Homerism. What do you have your money on? ;-)


X.

It's either a Homerism or he's being facetious, not ironic.

It would be ironic if he were queer and said that.

Well, you guys are going to have to carry the ball on this one--he said in another thread he was putting me on his ignore list. For my money it's a pure homerism on both their parts.

I don't know any use of "jewish" that ever implied "money squandering". I wonder if dham actually meant some other word than "squander".

:rolleyes: Maggie i think your intentionally misreading what dham is saying, he's complaining about the hijacking of these words from their origional meanings, not from thier bigoted corruptions.

Isn't that an incorrect use of the word appreciate and a hijacking of the word hijacking?

Not to be skeptical or anything, but did this really happen, or was that "screenshot" doctored up? I haven't seen anything about this in the weekend Philadelphia Inquirers or New York Times and, while I might have missed it, and it wouldn't necessarily be front page news, I'm kind of surprised such a gaffe would pass without mention from someone else in the press.

Oh it happened all right...

As I expected, Innis handled the gaffe with good humor.

i am a straight person. i do not think that the word "queer" is my word. or a "straight person word." it's everyone's word, as everyone is free to speak the english language. however it bothers me that when i am around homosexuals, they gawk if i use the word "queer" in its actual context. as if it's horrible of me to say "and how queer is it that john would feel that way, seeing as..." or something of the sort. it's not like i was calling a homosexual a queer to be insulting, or consider myself one of the "insiders." if they want to use the word to describe themselves, that's A-ok with me. however, i have the exact same right to use it the way it was originally intended to be used. and in my opinion, it's really stupid to get pissed off at someone for using a perfectly fine word in the way it was intended to be used.

i do. infact, i know a guy whose own mother told him "you're just like your father, you're such a jew." to imply that she didn't like what he was doing with his money. and i've heard it many times.

maybe he just doesn't like feeling like he can't utter those words around homosexuals. maybe he'd rather just use those words how they're meant to be used.

The stereotype of jews that *I'm* familiar with is one of parsimony, not squandering (which means to spend lavishly). "He jewed me down." around here means "He drove a tough bargain, demanding my lowest price."

Your friend's mother may not have *liked* what he was doing with his money, but I really doubt that "squandering" was the issue. Were any of the people involved in this story in fact Jewish?

yes. the guy is "half-jewish", i will say. his father is jewish.

i know what "squander" means.

There's a world of difference between "how they're meant to be used" and "how they were formerly used".

"Queer" simply meaning "odd" is so unusual now as to almost constitute an archaic usage in everyday speech. If it hadn't been used as a derogatory term for homosexuals, it might still be in use with it's former meaning. Now it's so loaded with connotations in modern daily speech that the old meaning is no longer available, unless you're clearly speaking an archaic voice: "Zounds, what a queer thing is this!"

"NIce" used to mean foolish, simple, silly, effeminate, trivial, overscrupulous, delicate, refined or dainty. In other usage it meant "apprehending slight differences or delicate distinctions". But if you say it today, it means pleasing, agreeable, satisfying or delightful. If you say somone is "nice", they'll take it as a compliment. If you use the phrase "that's a nice distinction", you're hinting that a former meaning is intended.

What if somone you'd callled "nice" bristled that you'd impugned his masculinity? After all, by your lights above, that's "how the word is meant to be used".

So by "you're such a jew" did you think his mother meant that he was squandering his money?

(I"m desparately trying to avoid a pun about "The Squandering Jew" at this point.)

Well, you can think what you like, of course. The original complaint was not being able to use the words around queer folks for fear they'd take it personally...or conversly insiting on the right to say whatever you like even when you *know* it's likely to be misunderstood, and then blaming your listener for the resulting confusion. Whatever the case, slang continuously assigns new meanings to old words. Probably better get used to it.
Don't think of it as hijacking, think of it as "functional overloading". :-)

No, it's not.

I'm not going to answer the second part, because you used the word in the same way I did.

Hey, dham', you just made post 5000 in IotD.

A milestone, surely. Congrat's...

- NBN

or, unless i was using it to mean odd, like i do. it's not such an uncommon thing to use the word "queer" to mean "odd." really. also, by "the way they were meant" i mean their dictionary definitions, which is what i generally go by.

maggie: yes, i am positive that she meant it in such a way as to suggest that he was squandering his money.

if this is in reference to what i said...

i don't expect it to be misunderstood when i say "queer" around homosexuals. i just think it's stupid that it has been. i don't expect them to assume that it is wrong of me to use such a word in a normal sentence. i don't give a shit if it insults them, because "queer" does not mean "homosexual." and like i have said, if they make a big deal about it i won't apologize for speaking properly. i will blame the listeners for the resulting confusion, because they should know that "queer" originally means "odd" before they use it in any other context. it's really not that hard to pick up a dictionary and look the damned word up.

i understand that not all words are used how the dictionary states they are to be used. we use the word "cool" to describe things that we think are agreeable. that's slang, and that's fine. i think, though, that it is silly for a group of people to get riled up about the use of a certain word that EVERYONE is free to use. the word queer has been adapted. it's not as though i am using it to insult them. my point was that if i want to use a word to describe a situation, someone else should not think that it can only be used to describe a person. that's basically it. i don't mind if people use the word "queer" to describe their sexual preference, really. i couldn't care less. when they tell me that i cannot use it the way it's written out in the dictionary, though, is when it bothers me.

*shrug* Must be some *massive* cultural differences involved, then.

Certainly "You're such a jew, spending your money so freely." sounds to me like it came from some other planet .

But I will acknowlege hearing friends from more southern latitudes (Richmond? Raleigh?) use "queer" to mean "odd" more often. It *will* get you a "queer" look the first time you use it around a Yankee.

But being squarely in the middle of the Bos-Wash axis, up here it's a dead usage...and confusing things further, amongst younger folks up here we sometimes hear "Oh, that just so *gay*!" intended to mean "That is oddly stupid.", which just about brings the whole excursion full-circle.....making current usage of "gay" almost match what you mean when you say "queer".

Pardon me, but yes, it does. See:
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition.

to me, maggie. i don't use those words as slang. and i'm from carroll county, maryland. born in DC.

how about the verb "gyp" - ever hear that one? bad racial usage.

My favorite is "niggardly". Remember a few years ago... when some poor (white) guy on the DC city council used the word and hilarity ensued?

&lt;beavis&gt; Heh heh... he said niggardly... heh &lt;/beavis&gt;

The only time you need be concerened only with what words mean to you is when you're talking to yourself.

Lexicographers tell us that their work is descriptive rather than prescriptive. I pointed you to a dictionary entry that explains how the word is used by many people today; and you're free to ignore that, of course. But you're not entitled to (in your own words) "bitch" about it if confusion or misunderstanding ensues.

Orwell wrote volumes on the political power of language. I get the feeling that your position is one of politics rather than semantics or diction.

Yeah, that was a mess. The word in fact is not at all derrived from the same roots as "nigger"...it's as least as old a Chaucer. But to use it in the context of DC politics is just plain stupid, it's *asking* for trouble.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Why?

not stolen, more like assigned
 

I don't think gays ever decided as a group to co-opt words like gay or queer.

These were given to us by the straight world, for whatever reason. My guesses:

gay - overtly happy? Seems apt, most gays don't share the cares of the straight world.

queer - oddly different? Same, the straight world sees us and goes "..the heck?" they don't get it, so we seem strange indeed.

fag - Flaming? I think this predates my time, but there are (or were) some gays that dress flamboyantly, in costumes that would put a Vegas show to shame. For the record, I'd say 95% of gays dress so normally that they blend in with everyone else.

Any of these could be derogatory or not, depending on the speaker. I don't know who had the guts to do "Queer as folk" but that show is the coolest thing I've seen on TV in years. The level of production is awesome. Hats off to Showtime for that one.

Because Maggie said so.

No, because race is a constant issue in DC city politics, and lots of people don't know there's no actual connection between "nigger" and "nigardly" *Chaucer* would have understood that, but I'll bet you the average DC resident doesn't.

Re: not stolen, more like assigned
 

You must have missed that meeting. :-)

Makes the average resident of DC seem a bit thick, doesn't it?

"My goodness, Gramma... what big, patronizing ideas you have!"
"The better to oppress you with, my dear!"

So... let me get this straight... not only are we not supposed to refrain from using words that have a genuinely offensive/pejorative/insulting meaning for fear of offending certain minority groups, but now we must also refrain from using their homophones for fear of offending stupid people? Yikes! When did morons become a minority group?

I wish.......

Is there any reason you need to be so confrontational? Maybe you want to answer to Maggie's actual points, instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks? (I won't even refer to your screams of 'Fuck off' in another posting)

About the actual reason 'why' it's stupid for that politician to use the word 'niggardly' the way he did:
It's fairly obvious why: if you are surrounded by people who will - mistakenly - get offended by something, and you knowingly say something that will offend them, you are quite stupid.

Yes, you read that right. You are stupid. They may be dumb and uneducated for not knowing the etymological differences between 'nigger' and 'niggardly', but as an educated man, well-versed in local and national politics, you need to be aware of how those people will react. Why? Because it's your job.

To sum up:

1. They are wrong.
2. You are right.
3. You know that even though they're wrong, you doing something right will cause a shitstorm.
4. Causing that shitstorm has no deeper moral cause or value. You aren't defending human or civil rights or saving any whales by doing that 'right' thing. You have nothing to win by using the word 'niggardly'.
5. You do it anyway.
6. You are stupid.


Sure, an overly sensitive approach to political correctness isn't really what your founding fathers were fighting for; but in the end, you have to take responsibility for your actions.

It's a bit like walking into a group of fanatical, heavily-armed right-wing Christian militia members, telling them that they are intolerant and dangerous.

You might be right.

They may be wrong.

But you'd still be stupid.

And that's what Maggie was talking about. (I think. Maggie?)

X.

Bluntly, yes. Especially holdovers from the Marion Berry administration, who were the people he made the comment to.

Look...when an official of a large East Coast city speaks , he'd better be aware of who his audience is, and think about how he sounds to them. This guy was (and still is, he got his job back when the uproar died down) director of the Public Advocate office. He's a *politician*, fercrissakes.

It was a *dumb* move. There's any number of archaic words he could have used to express the same idea (although "squandering" isn't one of them) and he decided to use that one. If he didn't know it would cause trouble, he certainly should have.

I'm not saying he should be *prohibited* from using the word, but that he should think a moment and realize that it's ripe to be misunderstood.

Oh, by the way...he's gay. :-)

Probably because I was raised an angry young man after being molested by your father when I was five.

I have Maggie on my ignore list because I find her frustrating to debate with, even though I agree with her more often than not. Therefore, I do not read Maggie's actual points - except when they are quoted. I'll respond, how I see fit, to what I see. If you don't like that, maybe you should consider putting me on your ignore list. It's quick, easy and will save you time in the future.

Well I'll refer to them anyway, even though it was more some <b>bold text</b> and not at all resembling a "scream". You made a comment out of ignorance and I told you to, in your ignorance, fuck off.

I think I'll put you on my ignore list too. Your idiotic drivel always manages to go on for close to a page length; my browsing experience will be much greater with a little "This person is on your Ignore List" message instead.

oops, just did.

That's the major drift. I don't think for a minute the guy was a racist. But he *was* guilty of speaking without thinking. As a political appointeee, it's not in his (or his boss's) interest to be pissing off the citizens for no particular good reason, and that's exactly what he did.

As for dham's sticking his finger in his ears and singing "la, la la, I can't hear you!", I think his browsing experience might be maximized by surfing to file:///dev/null, where he'll never read anything that bugs him, even if he does agree with it more often than not.

It's actually very funny to read his previous posting; not only does he completely ignore what I said (in order to resort to some more personal attacks), but he misattributes who he told to 'Fuck off'. I guess it's easy to forget who you've insulted and then added to your ignore list.

Really, it's the oldest trick in the troll book from the BBS/Usenet days: insult someone, then killfile them and tell everybody in a smug tone of voice how you have ignored them, and how you've seized the moral high ground.

Then there's of course the 'amusing' crack about having been abused by my father. The sheer stupidity of that comment aside, I guess he doesn't live in a country where <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,224326-412,00.shtml"> lynch mobs</a> run through the streets murdering pedophiles.

His points were also entertaining in themselves: he will ignore you because he agrees with what you say yet finds you frustrating to argue with. Which is why he threw a profanity-laden fit over in the thread regarding drugs and alcohol.

It's just sad to see the mental maturity of a twelve-year old express itself in such aggression. Oh well. I guess there's always his 'weblog' where he posts about how pimped his many computers are, and how ordering pizza is great, and how he likes his ass to be clean. (no, really)

Luckily, he can't read any of this, though, otherwise I'd ask him why he again completely ignored the refutation of his points, just to go on about Maggie, and about how long my postings are.

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. I guess he's the 'see no evil' monkey.


X.

PS: I am actually sorry this degenerated into a flame. (and I'm addressing this specifically at Tony. I just get frustrated at snotty kids too easily, I guess.)

i think maybe david just doesn't want to waste his time trying to explain his points repeatedly to people who don't understand, or aren't willing to at least acknowledge those points. reason being, said people seem to think they are right about everything, and will not change their minds about anything, no matter what evidence or thought is put into the opposing argument.

and you posted this because...? you are making a reference to something that is totally irrelevant, in the hopes of making him somehow look silly. you are no better than you say he is in those regards, then.

i know this because i have known dave for 19 years; he uses profanity to emphasize things. as do i. as do millions of other people. if you can't understand why someone would say "that is wholly fucking irrelevant", maybe you ought to familiarlize yourself with that person before you make comments.

i personally think it's a waste of time to sit here and quibble back and forth about someone. you don't like them for certain reasons, that's fine. but to actually drag a thread completely off topic because you have more fun picking at insignificant details is lame.

And you posted this because.......?