The coolest monkey in the jungle
The article “Turning H&M´s racist image around on white kids won´t fix anything” is written by Stacey Patton. It was published in January 12 2018, in The Washington Post. The article primary focus is to inform the reader about racism.
1. The add “The coolest monkey in the jungle” sparked mostly resentful responses. Even so the add doesn’t have a lot of audience it still has been seen as “cute” by a few white and black people. The boy’s mother told people to get over it. As distinct from the positive others have responded by photoshopping hoodies onto white children with offending messages like “ugliest honkie in the jungle”, “saltiest cracker in the box” and “future school shooter”. The add provokes black people to be racist against the opposite colour. This will potential make the situation even worse which could lead to a disaster.
Admakers know that the add will offend black people because they´ll resonate with white audiences who will understand the “joke”. H&M still offered half-hearted apologies and claimed that they didn’t knew the add could be interpreted as racist. 2. …show more content…
Throughout the article, Stacey Patton is language impressive. She supports her claim with hard words which is difficult to read (e.g. outraged, revised, controversy, mocking, rendered). Stacey Patton ensures the audience attention by using hard words which make the readers put more awareness in the article. This strategy is called logos. Logos is an appeal to common sense which usually convinces the audience to see the sanity in Stacey Patton´s arguments. Stacey Patton claims that the racism debate isn’t a new thing. She writes, “The conversation isn’t new. Black people have always insulted racist white people among ourselves in our own communal circles” (p.3 l. 7-11). Stacey Patton adds historical knowledge that gives additional proof to the audience that she knows a lot. Stacey Patton points out that people focus their anger on wrong things. But earlier she mentioned in the article that racist ads aren’t something new. She writes, “There is historical precedent for these attacks. In recent years, H&M, Dove, Pepsi, Nivea, Gap, Bennetton, Sony American Apparel, Burger King, Intel and others have produces racist ads” (p.3 l.14-16). Many companies has used racist ads which concluded with them in apologising. All of them claimed that she they didn’t actually know they were being racist. By common sense the black people answers so they can protect themselves. Stacey Patton uses the appeal ethos. She is searching for trustworthiness and showing herself as an expert. Stacey Patton mentions black children were featured in pedophilic pornography. She writes, “We had no choice during the post-Reconstruction and Jim Crow eras, when racist images of black children were featured in pedophilic pornography: as monkeys or grinning watermelon eating pickaninnies” (p.3 l.28-30). The black people couldn’t just stand still while their children were being offended. The word “pickaninnies” was used in the civil war as a racist caricature by Americans. The ads have been a part the century we live in. Stacey Patton writes, “But all of those ads are rooted in the centuries-old racist distortions of black humanity” (p.3 l.19-20). The structural problem with racism are rooted in people ordinary days. Stacey Patton uses the appeal pathos when she wants an
The article “Turning H&M´s racist image around on white kids won´t fix anything” is written by Stacey Patton. It was published in January 12 2018, in The Washington Post. The article primary focus is to inform the reader about racism.
1. The add “The coolest monkey in the jungle” sparked mostly resentful responses. Even so the add doesn’t have a lot of audience it still has been seen as “cute” by a few white and black people. The boy’s mother told people to get over it. As distinct from the positive others have responded by photoshopping hoodies onto white children with offending messages like “ugliest honkie in the jungle”, “saltiest cracker in the box” and “future school shooter”. The add provokes black people to be racist against the opposite colour. This will potential make the situation even worse which could lead to a disaster.
Admakers know that the add will offend black people because they´ll resonate with white audiences who will understand the “joke”. H&M still offered half-hearted apologies and claimed that they didn’t knew the add could be interpreted as racist. 2. …show more content…
Throughout the article, Stacey Patton is language impressive. She supports her claim with hard words which is difficult to read (e.g. outraged, revised, controversy, mocking, rendered). Stacey Patton ensures the audience attention by using hard words which make the readers put more awareness in the article. This strategy is called logos. Logos is an appeal to common sense which usually convinces the audience to see the sanity in Stacey Patton´s arguments. Stacey Patton claims that the racism debate isn’t a new thing. She writes, “The conversation isn’t new. Black people have always insulted racist white people among ourselves in our own communal circles” (p.3 l. 7-11). Stacey Patton adds historical knowledge that gives additional proof to the audience that she knows a lot. Stacey Patton points out that people focus their anger on wrong things. But earlier she mentioned in the article that racist ads aren’t something new. She writes, “There is historical precedent for these attacks. In recent years, H&M, Dove, Pepsi, Nivea, Gap, Bennetton, Sony American Apparel, Burger King, Intel and others have produces racist ads” (p.3 l.14-16). Many companies has used racist ads which concluded with them in apologising. All of them claimed that she they didn’t actually know they were being racist. By common sense the black people answers so they can protect themselves. Stacey Patton uses the appeal ethos. She is searching for trustworthiness and showing herself as an expert. Stacey Patton mentions black children were featured in pedophilic pornography. She writes, “We had no choice during the post-Reconstruction and Jim Crow eras, when racist images of black children were featured in pedophilic pornography: as monkeys or grinning watermelon eating pickaninnies” (p.3 l.28-30). The black people couldn’t just stand still while their children were being offended. The word “pickaninnies” was used in the civil war as a racist caricature by Americans. The ads have been a part the century we live in. Stacey Patton writes, “But all of those ads are rooted in the centuries-old racist distortions of black humanity” (p.3 l.19-20). The structural problem with racism are rooted in people ordinary days. Stacey Patton uses the appeal pathos when she wants an