No, a bunch of executives did. A bunch of executives do not represent a company, the shareholders do. Unless you have evidence that a majority of the shareholders endorsed the commercial then you can assume any more than what I stated.

You also have no evidence they used a racial stereotype intentionally. I had never heard of this stereotype until I came across it on VideoSift.

I'm not aware of your example but what you're describing is racist. If it was designed to entertain white people at the expense of mocking black people as a racial group then it was racist.
>> ^longde:
I think this is a valiant effort to rationalize something that is cut and dry. KFC did endorse this commercial (obviously, since it's their ad); and the aussie ad team did intentionally use a racist stereotype to sell chicken.
And I disagree that intent is at the core of what makes something racist. The sambo stories are offensive to blacks, but when they were produced, the intent was to entertain whites, not to offend blacks. They didn't care what black thought.
>> ^RedSky:
I think the notion of racism needs to be brought back to the core.
It's not racist unless it's purposely meant to be offensive to a particular racial background. It's clear that no company, least of all a fast food chicken company, would walk off a cliff willingly like this and put on an intentionally racist ad.
At worst it was produced by a bunch of employees that want to play up on a racial stereotype but was in no way endorsed or acknowledged by KFC. At best, and to me most likely, the ad was produced by an Australian marketing team unaware of the stereotype. Cenk to me seems correct, they're not rowdy, they looked like they were generally having a good time at the game. As for the whole 'awkward situation' phrasing relating to being surrounded by a bunch of black people, well yes it's a fact that even now people from different racial backgrounds tend to have more trouble getting along. There's no harm is stating that evolution has made us innately mistrustful of those that look different to us, there's nothing offensive about admitting that.
Point is, regardless of which it is, it's overblown and diverts attention away from actual examples of racial hate.



It comes down to how you define it, and yes I agree that ignorance with no hateful or prejudiced intent can be harmful but I wouldn't think of it as racism. The point where you draw the line is definitely fine though. Being wilful ignorance as a form of denying your prejudiced views is not the same as simply being unintentionally offensive. Being culturally acceptable is also of course not a defence either. Jokes about Aborigines are common place around here unfortunately, although I can definitely say I've heard less of them since I left high school.

It also doesn't help that it's virtually impossible to separate the two. We will never really know if the people who made this ad were purely ignorant or racist. Looking from the point of view of a minority I can see that perhaps past experience would gravitate you towards assuming the latter but I think it's an important distinction to make.

>> ^Throbbin:
RedSky - racism doesn't have to be intentional to qualify as racism. Ignorant/inadvertent racism is just as harmful, maybe even more harmful than intentional (hateful) racism. At least with hateful racism it's easy to isolate, identify, and mock/ridicule the racists. When it's ignorant/unintended racism it's tacitly accepted by society, and thus harder to isolate and rectify.
I don't buy the 'Australia doesn't have the same stereotypes of black people that Americans do' line. Aussies consume just as much American media as Canadians do, and all of the stereotypes about black people I encountered came from American media. In general, I have heard that Australia is an exceptionally racist place - I heard this firsthand from Aborigines (and Maori from NZ). I have even even heard it from 'white Aussies' themselves. One Aussie was trying to congratulate me (us? as in Inuit) for having our shit together much more than the good for nothing Aborigines down under. I shit you not.

RedSky - racism doesn't have to be intentional to qualify as racism. Ignorant/inadvertent racism is just as harmful, maybe even more harmful than intentional (hateful) racism. At least with hateful racism it's easy to isolate, identify, and mock/ridicule the racists. When it's ignorant/unintended racism it's tacitly accepted by society, and thus harder to isolate and rectify.

I don't buy the 'Australia doesn't have the same stereotypes of black people that Americans do' line. Aussies consume just as much American media as Canadians do, and all of the stereotypes about black people I encountered came from American media. In general, I have heard that Australia is an exceptionally racist place - I heard this firsthand from Aborigines (and Maori from NZ). I have even even heard it from 'white Aussies' themselves. One Aussie was trying to congratulate me (us? as in Inuit) for having our shit together much more than the good for nothing Aborigines down under. I shit you not.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^potchi79:
So you start a pulse jet with a leaf blower?

Mostly yes, the idea behind most jets is to compress incoming air with fuel. No spark is needed as the compression causes heat. The problem is you need the air already moving to start. The same is true of turbofan engines of most jet airplanes. In my day they used electric motors to start the fan blade spinning. Once they are up to speed, they feed enough air fast enough into the combustion chambers to keep it going. A leave blower is a lot easier to add to a project then an electric motor. If you look up DIY jet engines in youtube, you will see it as the staple for home brew jet starters.
Jets are much more "simple" then combustion engines as they are mainly self sustaining when up to speed. They are very complex in other ways though, like how to not melt down under extreme heat and such. A flame out at low speed typically spells doom for a jet...engine restarts when careening downward is not as experience you want in life.
One thing I have never understood about a pulse jet is how to ramp your speed up. With a turbofan, you just up the fan speed or fan blade pitch...with a pulse just I have no idea. Add more fuel maybe? If that were the case, then the max speed would be dictated by the explosion maximum. If your explosion is to great, you risk vibration annihilation or destruction of your combustion chamber...or you spit the hot air out the back end before the pulse can bring it back for re-ignition? Or perhaps it has to do with pulse modulation and changing how long you wait till your open the valve. The longer you wait, the more thrust you get before the next cycle? Dunno, pulse jets were always more of a curiosity than an area of study.
Edit: Jets are very similar to diesel engine as there is no spark needed...all the heat is gained through compression. Hope that isn't TMI at this point


than

Though your knowledge of jets is impressive. Let's really try to stomp this sign of the internet generation out, shall we?! Who's with me!?

>> ^potchi79:
So you start a pulse jet with a leaf blower?


Mostly yes, the idea behind most jets is to compress incoming air with fuel. No spark is needed as the compression causes heat. The problem is you need the air already moving to start. The same is true of turbofan engines of most jet airplanes. In my day they used electric motors to start the fan blade spinning. Once they are up to speed, they feed enough air fast enough into the combustion chambers to keep it going. A leave blower is a lot easier to add to a project then an electric motor. If you look up DIY jet engines in youtube, you will see it as the staple for home brew jet starters.

Jets are much more "simple" than combustion engines as they are mainly self sustaining when up to speed. They are very complex in other ways though, like how to not melt down under extreme heat and such. A flame out at low speed typically spells doom for a jet...engine restarts when careening downward is not as experience you want in life.

One thing I have never understood about a pulse jet is how to ramp your speed up. With a turbofan, you just up the fan speed or fan blade pitch...with a pulse jet I have no idea. Add more fuel maybe? If that were the case, then the max speed would be dictated by the explosion maximum. If your explosion is to great, you risk vibration annihilation or destruction of your combustion chamber...or you spit the hot air out the back end before the pulse can bring it back for re-ignition? Or perhaps it has to do with pulse modulation and changing how long you wait till your open the valve. The longer you wait, the more thrust you get before the next cycle? Dunno, pulse jets were always more of a curiosity than an area of study.

Edit: Jets are very similar to diesel engine as there is no spark needed...all the heat is gained through compression. Hope that isn't TMI at this point

>> ^lucky760:
Here's my entry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO4bZ7O1cqc
It's not funny so it doesn't go in comedy.
He's not doing anything unusual, just shopping at a Walgreen's pharmacy so it's not wtf.
It doesn't make you happy.
It's not dark.
There are no kids or cats and dogs or anything cute.
It's not geeky and no engineering is happening.
There's no music.
He's not in Asia or Britain or Canada or Down Under and there's no animation.
It's not packed with action.
It's not about the brain.
No comics, commercials, cooking, nor cult.
He tells the truth so it can't go in lies...
So yeah. Without a fatguys or beards channel, I think this could be a wiener.

it's viral

Here's my entry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO4bZ7O1cqc

It's not funny so it doesn't go in comedy.
He's not doing anything unusual, just shopping at a Walgreen's pharmacy so it's not wtf.
It doesn't make you happy.
It's not dark.
There are no kids or cats and dogs or anything cute.
It's not geeky and no engineering is happening.
There's no music.
He's not in Asia or Britain or Canada or Down Under and there's no animation.
It's not packed with action.
It's not about the brain.
No comics, commercials, cooking, nor cult.
He tells the truth so it can't go in lies...

So yeah. Without a *fatguys or *beards channel, I think this could be a wiener.

*sigh*

Nice of you to invent things which I never said. I never said that the Australian system was perfect by any means, there are plenty of things which can make it better. But the crux of it is that when it comes to having treatments to keep you alive or well, you should NEVER be having to stop before seeking treatment and thinking 'gee, can we afford this'.

That just SHOULD NOT cross your mind.

But seeing as you have this insane logic where you think it's ok that you had to pay $5K out of pocket lump sum right there to get your treatment then you have a mindset completely different to mine. I find it infinitely better to be paying taxes ongoing that I don't notice, taxes that are taken out consistently and put to good use, rather than having something happen and having to cough up THOUSANDS of dollars that I don't have.

Seriously, do you think that everyone puts aside the amount that we pay in taxes for a rainy day? Sure it's a good idea to always put aside money, but... you know... things come up, and well, look we have that money we put aside, let's use it to do X or Y. In our system, and that of other countries that have public health. We ongoing pay our taxes, and as such when things come up, well, we CAN'T have spent our 'health savings' as it's handled for us. And yes, some people will get more value out of the system than others. But if you begrudge someone getting more money spent of them for health care then truly you are a heartless, money grabbing bastard.

But I keep seeing Americans having fund rallies and setting up websites to ask for donations to pay for treatment for cancer or other such life threatening ailments. And yet you think this is a good way to be, that people constantly have to find a way to raise thousands of dollars to get treatment to keep themselves alive?

You have rationalized the insanity that you only paid $5000 for your treatment. Well, good on you for being able to FIND $5000. Most people would have a hard time coming up with that sort of money out of the blue.

Simply because something is necessary or important does not mean it should become a federal government entitlement - and CERTAINLY it doesn't mean it can or even should be 'free'.

HUH!? The very definition of 'Necessary' is that it's needed, that it's a service that is mandatory. And you're sitting there, typing away that it's bad economics for a government to provide that?

Your thinking, which would seem to be the thinking of the right wing, is a thinking I will NEVER come around to, because it is, at it's core, unjust and created by those who already HAVE money, who already CAN afford to self pay for things. It gives NO allowances for those who can't afford $5K medical treatments or $40K a year school fees. If there is a way you can have a government fund and pay such that these basic NECESSITIES are provided for all who need them, and do so in such a way that you are not stopping those who work hard from becoming successful, (Which, hey, we have plenty of rich people here you know, there's nothing stopping hard work making you shiteloads of cash in Australia) how can you be against that, I really don't get it.


>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
THAT is what is wrong with the US system, and THAT is what will ALWAYS put it below other countries like Australia, the UK etc. where we get access to still world class services and yet do not end up in financial difficulty
Your post is full of what can only be described as disingenous exaggerations. "Here Down Under, every citizen gets free health care, doesn't pay a dime, there are no waiting lines, and our care is world class. You poor, poor Americans... No one can afford care, you wait months for all your services, and your doctors & facilities are the equivalent of a witch doctor pulling up a cot in a shanty..."
BS. Not that I put much stock in the WHO list, but if the Aussie system is SO grand then why are they #32 on the list and the US is #37 despite being private? Clearly not all is beer and skittles in Oz's health care system. Anyway, I'm not impressed by anecdotal evidence. Know why? Because I've got my own story about how GREAT the US health care system is. I won't bore you with the details, but I consider getting a half-million in medical care for a total of $5K out of my pocket (tax free) to be a pretty good deal. "Oh yeah - but I got that much and it was FREE..!" Uh - bull. Taxes, copays, and such added all together and adjusted for currency exchange and you guys are paying as much (or more) in relative terms for your so-called 'free' system.
Regardless, the sentiment of your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of basic economics. Simply because something is necessary or important does not mean it should become a federal government entitlement - and CERTAINLY it doesn't mean it can or even should be 'free'.

THAT is what is wrong with the US system, and THAT is what will ALWAYS put it below other countries like Australia, the UK etc. where we get access to still world class services and yet do not end up in financial difficulty

Your post is full of what can only be described as disingenous exaggerations. "Here Down Under, every citizen gets free health care, doesn't pay a dime, there are no waiting lines, and our care is world class. You poor, poor Americans... No one can afford care, you wait months for all your services, and your doctors & facilities are the equivalent of a witch doctor pulling up a cot in a shanty..."

BS. Not that I put much stock in the WHO list, but if the Aussie system is SO grand then why are they #32 on the list and the US is #37 despite being private? Clearly not all is beer and skittles in Oz's health care system. Anyway, I'm not impressed by anecdotal evidence. Know why? Because I've got my own story about how GREAT the US health care system is. I won't bore you with the details, but I consider getting a half-million in medical care for a total of $5K out of my pocket (tax free) to be a pretty good deal. "Oh yeah - but I got that much and it was FREE..!" Uh - bull. Taxes, copays, and such added all together and adjusted for currency exchange and you guys are paying as much (or more) in relative terms for your so-called 'free' system.

Regardless, the sentiment of your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of basic economics. Simply because something is necessary or important does not mean it should become a federal government entitlement - and CERTAINLY it doesn't mean it can or even should be 'free'.

God he makes that look so easy. When I was first learning, I spent hours and hours in my pool. When I finally got into the river, I hit a massive rock and rolled over against the rock, after which point I was sucked down under the massive thing. I panicked and forgot how to pull the skirt, so I was under there a good minute. Finally, i snapped out of it enough to to a t-rescue. What a traumatizing experience.

But I have successfully pulled this one off a few times, but still haven't really gotten it down.

>> ^swampgirl:
^just Dag.. or has Lucky moved down under too?


Ah, I thought it was both. Wow, they work together in two different countries. Amazing!

^just Dag.. or has Lucky moved down under too?

Well, if you Aussies would only learn to speak English, I can't help but think all of these problems would have been solved years ago.

Stubborn lot, down under.

Still you have your...loveable island ways...and rumor has it that the native girls are nothing to shirk at...wink wink....

It would be a great place to live if only you could make a decent beer!

I woke up to March 31st -now realizing Down Under is one day ahead of Us! (Hint)

It passed my mind that since Dag is "down under" that Cheese Festivals was being sprung on us early. The idea that a grater was lost on people is telling of the age we live in, next thing you know kids will stop listening to music on their portable turntables!

Sweet! Thanks for that!

Will be travelling with wife & kid, and our plan so far is to rent a little camper do cruise around with, so it looks like we might just need a parking spot outside your house

In reply to this comment by dag:
Awesome. If you need a place to crash up here in Brisbane - we should be able to accomodate as well.

In reply to this comment by maatc:
Thanks dag! And you sir,are the roof of sift!

Right now it looks like i´ll actually be around your area in the beginning of October (5th or so +/- a few days), so make sure to reserve a table at the Burleigh Brewery

(I can´t help but giggle at "pillar" every time you mention it, since "piller" is a kids slang word for penis in germany)

In reply to this comment by dag:
You sir, are a pillar of Sift. I hope you can get back down under soon for a Sift Up - don't make me come meet you in a German beer hall ... OK, make me.