TorteDeForm

Kia Franklin

Bad Racial Imagery, Bad Ties to Tort “Reform”

Six black men in athletic attire kneeling in track position (also in a position that looks like bowing) in front of a shirt-and-tie clad white man. Mmm....sound like a modern day D.W. Griffith film or an illustration for a book on "Eugenics For Dummies"? Well, it's not.

It's a recent Intel ad
that was *thankfully* pulled from distribution shortly after being released, complete with apologies and other PR attempts at making up for the offense. This YouTube video records people's reactions to the ad:

(The video keeps getting removed and reposted, so if the link isn't working, just search for Intel Ad)

Interestingly, this blog points out the following information on Intel's support of tort reform measures that would make class action lawsuits, suits against acts like the racial faux pas they just committed, more difficult to file:

Intel, the computer chip maker recently pulled an advertisement that, to most people, appears obviously racist... Intel apologized twice for the ad, calling it “culturally insensitive and insulting.” The timing of the ad scandal is interesting. The Santa Monica based Foundation for Tax Payer and Consumer Rights has pointed out that Intel happens to be at the forefront of sponsoring a ballot measure in California next June that would eliminate class action law suits over civil rights issues. Intel is part of a business group calling itself the Civil Justice Association of California, which would like to see California’s class action laws be more like the federal Class Action Fairness Act which was signed into law by President Bush in 2005.

Civil Justice Association of California, huh? Um, okay, sure.

Well, it is good that Intel apologized for the ad and pulled it out of distribution--sometimes this is enough to right a wrong. And to give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps it is imaginable that they didn't know what they were doing was not a good idea. This causes me to wonder whether they have at least one person of color in their advertising section, but that's another separate, yet obviously related, issue.

But now, the next step is for the company to pull out of support for tort "reform" efforts that would reduce individuals' ability to hold less-apologetic companies accountable. This is something that civil rights groups have begun urging the company to do.

Kia Franklin: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 10:54 AM, Aug 17, 2007 in
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (6)


Comments

If they hadn't pulled the ad, you think they should have been sued? By whom?

And, leaving aside questions about the First Amendment, for what damages?

Posted by: Elliot | August 17, 2007 3:20 PM

Wow, that is completely shocking. I'm seeing the runners metaphor, I guess, for maximizing performance, but I am really at a loss.

Posted by: Elizabeth Hartline Green | August 17, 2007 3:59 PM

I digress but what prompts these black models to pose in such a disgaceful manner . What could be the incentive for doing that ?

Posted by: Anirban | August 19, 2007 4:56 AM

I don't know, but I would guess it would be the same incentive that the white model had, or that the photographer and the rest of the folks who worked to put together the ad had: it's a paying gig. I suppose if the price is right you can probably find someone to do almost anything... doesn't make it right, though.

Posted by: Kia | August 20, 2007 11:09 AM

Intel was guitly of poor judgment and questionable taste (perhaps) but nothing more than that. If poor taste is actionable, then we should just concede that we are heading to a Stalinist paradise and give up worrying about quaint notions such as damages, freedom of speech and justice

Posted by: Anonymous | August 20, 2007 10:11 PM

The post with the "Stalinst paradise" comment was mine and my name is not anonymous- I gladly stand by my comments

Posted by: Paul W Dennis | August 21, 2007 11:55 PM