Controversy over a Super Bowl adFollow

Gbaji has the same genetic mutation that Stephen Colbert has that doesn't allow him to see people's color.

Therefore, no issue in America is color based.

















Ever.
















Seriously, you guys!

I can see why it might be considered controversial. I find it humorous that people get a massive rage on over it, though.

Yes. Are you saying that there is no difference between the idea of people of different cultural origins and languages joining together and forming a common culture/language versus them living in the same geographical area, but all speaking different languages? Because those are two radically different approaches. Ignoring those differences and playing strange label games is really stupid.



Why is this about me? WTF? I pointed out why people would be upset with the commercial. And frankly, it's a valid point. As I mentioned above, there are two radically different and competing approaches to immigration. One where people of different origins come to the US and "become Americans", and one in which they remain what they were before and demand that the rest of the country adjust to their language and customs. We kinda have to start with a recognition that those are different things.

We should then also recognize that the modern idea of multiculturalism is the latter form and is relatively recent. And whether you agree or not, there is a legitimate argument over whether that's a really good way to manage immigration and cultural assimilation within a nation/society. Simply painting anyone who disagrees with the "everyone speak their own language" form of multiculturalism racists is not particularly helpful. Look at the actual issue at hand. Labeling anyone who disagrees with you a racist or bigot is a waste of time.



Huh? This is not about equality. You're making bizarre associative arguments. It's about the ideal of America being that people come here and change to "become Americans" over time. No one's saying that a citizen who does not speak English is less "equal". That's insane! Where the hell do you get that idea? The point is that citizens who do not yet speak English should be striving to learn it, and making sure that their children do, so that they can make the most of their citizenship.

It is not bigotry, or racism, or any other form of hateful "ism" to say that ideally people should learn a common language if they want to join a common culture. If we want to be a nation of "Americans", that's not a bad thing. It's a good ideal to strive for. And that's why making a very deliberate show of having people sing "America the Beautiful" in as many different languages possible sends an incredibly mixed message. It's saying that American isn't about a common culture or language. It's just a collection of different people, all thinking different thoughts, having different ideals, and speaking different languages.

Agree or disagree, but a hell of a lot of people don't agree with that view of America.



And if they'd chosen a different song; oh perhaps one about teaching the world (note: World) to sing, in perfect harmony even, having people from all different walks of life singing in all different languages would have been perfectly fine. Great even. Why pick that song though? Out of all the songs they could have picked to have sung to their ode to multiculturalism, they picked America the Beautiful? That's not accidental. It was an intentional jibe at anyone who disagrees with the modern multiculturalism view of America.

They were picking a fight. And they knew that the hordes of useful idiots who can't see past simple word association would just jump on the "anyone who's offended is just a bigot!" bandwagon. Sheesh people. Try to have an understanding of the issue beyond that simple surface level. Just this once? There's a legitimate cultural argument at hand. Ignoring it by just declaring one side to be bigots only makes you ignorant.

Oh. I'm sure that coca-cola company didn't want to **** anyone off. However, I'd be shocked if the guys on the ad team who sat in a room brainstorming ideas for a coke ad didn't know that this would **** off some people, and chose to do it because it would garner controversy. In fact, I'd put money down that said ad company is spinning this to Coke execs right now on the "but look at all the people talking about the ad!" angle.

Also realize that Coke has long played up its "worldly and caring" image (since the aforementioned teach the world to sing ad run). I'm sure there are a number of folks praising them for "raising the issue" of multiculturalism in the US. It may have stirred up slightly more negative response than they wanted, but I assume they wanted the message. And the kind of people who think up these sorts of ad campaigns tend to think Progressively (not just in the political sense). They know they'll get negative reaction this time. But they also know that lots of people will rise to attack those who react negatively, labeling those people as bigots. More importantly is that there's a public message that "people who disagree with this sort of thing are racists and bigots".

They know that by doing an ad like that today, then when the do another one in ten years, if they've been successful at demonizing the opponents, they wont get as much negativity. That's how they move the chains. Keep putting offensive things in front of people and then attacking them for being offended until each successive generation becomes less offended by it and more accepting of it. That's how progressive movements work. And this ad was part of that kind of movement, even if some of the folks at Coke didn't realize it.

Gbaji, are you wearing your tinfoil hat?

The only opponent coke has ever been making ads to beat down is Pepsi.

Take your politics out my soda!

To some people I guess. Xenophobes and jingoists, mainly.

Edited, Feb 5th 2014 8:51am by Jophiel

In the context of Western Civilization, it's modern. As in "in the last 80 years" modern. History occurs (and changes) in periods longer than a decade or two.



20 years is also well within the period of the "modern liberal progressive movement". Multiculturalism is part of that. Getting people to think that multiculturalism is "good", is something that liberals have been working on for like 50-80 years or so. Think longer term.



Yes. Great. No one's debating that. The point is that prior to perhaps the latter half of the 20th century, it was broadly accepted that immigrants should learn the language of the country they have immigrated to, and at the very least make sure their children learn it. That was how you became a part of the new culture/nation you were joining. It was part of the process of immigration. Today? The Left pushes this idea that it's not just ok for immigrants to isolate themselves into enclaves within their new country, but it's encouraged as a sort of "all the world in one border" approach.

That's what is meant by "multiculturalism". And there are a host of very valid arguments as to why it's might just be a horrifically bad idea (one of which is that it actually encourages and perpetuates hatred and animosity between people of different ethnic origins within a nation). So yeah, when people take offense at what is clearly a multiculturalism message, they aren't saying "we hate people who speak different languages, or have different skin colors, or come from different cultures". They're saying "multiculturalism is a bad idea, and we shouldn't sneak in images of acceptance of it without some debate on the subject".



Yup. And they learned English and/or made sure their children did. So today, you aren't stuck living in an immigrant enclave within your own country. The multicultural movement encourages the opposite. That's what people are complaining about.



The cowards are the people who call those who disagree with them "bigots" and "racists" rather than actually addressing the issue at hand. This is not about racial/ethnic/whatever hatred. It's about addressing different ways of handling immigration. And those who are saying that the ad was offensive, do so because they believe that intentionally creating and maintaining differences between people, while sold on the "one happy world" concept, almost invariably results in more hatred and more problems.

Would your life today be better or worse if your grandparents had refused to learn English or allow their children to learn English? Seriously. Think that entire process through. Where would they live? What job opportunities would they (and your parents, and by extension you) have? They'd have to isolate themselves in a neighborhood full of other Italian immigrants who spoke a language they understood. They'd have to rely on Italian versions of the news and other forms of media. They would effectively be cutting themselves off from the larger culture around them.

Is that really a good thing to do? Multiculturalism says "yes". And that's what the ad was promoting.


You know what would have been a perfect message of "coming together"? If they'd shown the exact same ad, with the same array of people from all different ethnic and cultural backgrounds all singing "America the Beautiful", in English. Because that would send a message of all of these people joining together to form a common culture. To share something in common. And to sing in one voice the virtues of the nation they call their own. Now that would have been a positive message. It would have been about how even though we all started out somewhere else, we've all come together to be "one nation".

By breaking the song into parts and having them sung in different languages, it sends the opposite message. It send a message of distance and separation. It says that we should celebrate what makes us different rather than what makes us the same. And that's why people took offense at it.

Great great grandparents from the boat only spoke German and Russian.
Great grandparents spoke English, German and Russian.
Grand parents spoke English, with a smattering of German and Russian.
Daddy only knew profanity in German and Russian.
I only know two curse words in German, and none in Russian.

Edited, Feb 5th 2014 7:35pm by Catwho

Yeah something like that. I'm the first generation not to learn any German myself. The relatives made a family business for a reason, you have a couple of people who know English well, and the rest can speak whatever in the shop. I dunno, part of the transition process. My wife still has immigrant family members from her Chinese side, the Grandma doesn't speak more than a few words of English, people translate for her. In a couple of generations that'll likely all change.

I mean English happens, give it time, so it takes 50 or 100 years for a family to integrate, that's the way it's always been. In the meantime the city adds cinco de mayo and chinese new year celebrations to the list of excuses to party, things go both ways.

Wow, the Left must suck at this stuff then. Because current immigrant populations are learning language faster than previous predominately European immigrant waves. The old saw used to be that you saw English proficiency by the third generation of an immigrant population. But the rate of English proficiency for second generation Hispanic populations today is 92%. For Asians, it's 96%. There's some variance in those groups (for instance, for Hmong it's 87%) but this boogey-man of immigrants forever living in enclaves speaking only their parent's native tongue is -- to put it bluntly -- bullsh*t.

Incidentally, I didn't see easy numbers for Arab Americans but I did see reference to Arab Americans in the Detroit & Deerborn areas (the largest enclaves of the sort) going to college within 1% of the general population and going to post-graduate education over 10% higher than the average so I think we're safe from a nation of Arab-only speaking people.

This shouldn't really surprise anyone. Unlike back in the olden days, today's youth from any ethnic background are bombarded with English-centric media and messages. Sure, there's a handful of Spanish language television and, if you speak something else, you might find one or two stations catering to your language in the expanded channel list. But teens still want to be able to talk about what happened on True Blood or whatever kids are watching these days. They still see shows about wealthy English speaking people working for English speaking corporations and know that the same opportunity doesn't exist for someone who only speaks Farsi. English saturation today is so much greater than it was in Irish or Chinese enclaves in the early 20th century.

So, yeah, it is xenophobia and jingoism driving these fear movements. Because the supposed "problem" doesn't exist. One thing that does happen today is a greater amount of bilingualism where Hispanic kids learn English but still retain their Spanish skills as opposed to previous generations shedding their old languages entirely. So the kid who learns English and can live well outside the Latino neighborhoods but can also still listen to the same radio, watch the same TV and read the same advertising as his parents or new immigrants. I think this is part of what upsets people so much. They don't really want "those kids need to learn English so they can get real American jobs", they want the kids to learn English and then sever connections to their old family because REAL Americans only speak English and the idea of someone who speaks both threatens them. Again, xenophobia and jingoism.

Edited, Feb 5th 2014 7:54pm by Jophiel