Shocker of the week: council votes to demand apology for Maclean’s “Too Asian” article
The one genuine surprise from last night’s marathon session was the results of the motion, put forward by Mike Layton, to demand an apology from Maclean’s magazine and “dissociate” council from its contents. Most observers assumed that the motion a) wouldn’t get the 2/3 vote it needed to be considered, and b) would then die somewhere in the executive committee.
Well surprise, surprise. In one of the very last pieces of business that council took up late last night, not only did they vote to waive referral, councillors then voted to endorse the motion, 27-14. Not surprisingly, Rob and Doug Ford led the core of council’s conservatives in voting against the motion, but the left and middle seem to have mostly voted for it.
The reaction is about what we’d expect: Maclean’s employees like Andrew Coyne and Paul Wells are against it, while some in the Asian-Canadian community seem happy with it. As a magazine’s blog, we can’t say we’re wild about the state deciding it has business in the newsrooms of the nation, but this does open all sorts of opportunities for further apology demanding—for example, Maclean’s latest cover has clearly photoshopped Stephen Harper to look like a narcoleptic Ken doll doing a gig at the Copa Cabana. Surely parliament can gather to condemn this latest affront to the nation. It’s not possible that Harper actually looks like that, is it?
• Request for Apology for the media article “Too Asian?” [Toronto.ca]
What is up with journalists who seem to have no idea what actual censorship is? Comparing a symbolic motion to denounce a racist article to “the state deciding it has business in the newsrooms of the nation” makes the average person roll their eyes. Get out into the real world, folks.
This to be clear, the Maclean’s article did more than just portray Asians as studious buzzkills.
The article urged Canadians to debate whether to impose limits on Asian enrollment at universities. It said Asian self-segregation was a serious problem, and said the UBC and U of T presidents were “in denial” because they couldn’t see any problem.
In fact, the people who could see a problem were two anonymous Havergal students whose friends themselves self-segregated into “all-blonde houses.” But the article wasn’t called “Too Blonde?”
Maclean’s takes too much pride in tweaking PC sensitivities in order to start “difficult but necessary conversations,” forgetting that sometimes people get offended not because of hypersensitivity, but because one is threatening real damage. And sticking a question mark on the end of a racist statement is what irresponsible cowards do. Whether they intended it or not, this article was full-on racist crap.
If City Council can vote to praise Joey Votto, I don’t see why it can’t stick up for one of Toronto’s largest communities and fight racism in one of Canada’s most diverse cities.
If you read the Open Letter on Facebook’s Too Asian Talk Back: http://www.facebook.com/TooAsianTALKBACK#!/note.php?note_id=179107952099462 you’ll see that people aren’t trying to kill freedom of speech. They are trying to raise the issue of media responsibility.
By publishing racist, biased, poorly written, poorly researched articles that are offensive to the public open up the media to attack. Sure, the press has the freedom to write what it wants, but the public has the right to protest if they find that material offensive.
Maclean’s has yet to show that they understand WHY people are offended. People are not simply offended about the title “Too Asian”? people are offended by the perpetuation of Asian stereotypes, people are offended by the perpetuation of the idea of Asian’s as foreigners (even though Asians have been in Canada for over 150 years and many of them were born in Canada), people are offended that Maclean’s continues to defend this irresponsible piece of journalism.
What if the article was called “Too Jewish” or “Too Black”? Would we be so nonchalant about it then? Why is it ok to be racist against Asians?
You can say whatever you want. You have the freedom to say whatever you want; but if people don’t like what you have to say, you sure as hell better be prepared to deal with their reactions.
Tired of folks hiding behind freedom to speech to say whatever the hell they want and expect to be protect by the government. If you say racist bullshit, I’ll call you out on your racist bullshit.
One of the reasons I cancelled my subscription to Macleans a few months ago. They TRY to raise the bar with provocative editorial crap and took on President Obama in a racist demeaning tone. Notice I said President Obama and they stopped refering to him as the president – quite disrespectful.
The magazine also made me question their supporting rationale of putting Sarah Palin on the cover. By the time this article came out, my cancellation was done but i read the article,shake my head and threw the copy my friends gave me in the trash-right where it belong!!
This has nothing to do with censoring the media. There’s nothing wrong with condemning an article that insinuates that there could be too many Asians in university, an meritocractic-based organization. What if a publication published an article about too many (insert other group) in (another industry)? Not to mention there was no differention between Asian-Canadians who were born and raised here versus those who came overseas. The cultures and beliefs can be very different. The Maclean’s article was hogwash.