Danny Baker sacked

diamount said:
I'll probably say he didn't have any malicious intent, because back in the day he could take the mick out of 'darkies' without repurcusion
Click to expand...

Nicely done defamation there - you make something up, attach it to him and then slightly protect him from your own attack on him. Far more effective that way. You are politically skilled. The fact is that he didn't "take the mick out of 'darkies'", but you neatly slipped it in as if it was proven.

You can keep saying the comparison isn't racist until you're blue in the face. No other comparison has as much prejudicial and denigration associated with it.
Click to expand...

if I was blue in the face, would you still assume I was guilty?
 
FoxEye said:
Tbh I don't think you need to be obsessed with race to realise that posting a chimp to represent a person of African descent is frowned upon these days.
Click to expand...

You do need to be obsessed with "race" to be constantly thinking about race in all contexts at all times. He posted a chimp to represent a media circus. He wasn't obsessed enough with "race" to predict what people who are would do in response.

I experienced the same mismatch of ways of thinking with a customer yesterday. They were fixated on Prince Archie being "black". To them, it was the most important thing. Not just the most important thing about him, but the most important event of the day, if not the year, if not ever. To me, it's irrelevant. I don't even believe in "race". It's a made up thing that's just wrong piled on wrong. It's factually wrong, ethically wrong and obviously wrong and it's silly. I use the word "silly" deliberately - a childish word for a childish belief. I can't think that way and wouldn't want to if I could, so there's no way I could filter everything I said through that way of thinking to predict how it might be interpreted by people who do think that way. Or, more often, don't think.
 
Angilion said:
Nicely done defamation there - you make something up, attach it to him and then slightly protect him from your own attack on him. Far more effective that way. You are politically skilled. The fact is that he didn't "take the mick out of 'darkies'", but you neatly slipped it in as if it was proven.



if I was blue in the face, would you still assume I was guilty?
Click to expand...

Simply stating that I'd give him more slack than if someone 30 years younger made a similar tweet. Racism was so normalised when he was growing up, it's hard to break out of that conditioning. Either way knowingly or not, it was still a racist tweet.
 
diamount, are you saying you think the comments were racist because he made a joke about this baby but not the previous one? You have to be doing some fairly advanced mental gymnastics to get to that conclusion.
 
Freakbro said:
Yep, very true. Though as I said I initially gave him the benefit of the doubt, it's the shifting narrative that has given me doubts. The truth doesn't generally change, so when he comes out with different explanations/excuses it makes me doubt their veracity
Click to expand...

Yeah. The shifting excuses do ring bells with me too, although I haven't followed whether they came directly from him or not.
 
Lopéz said:
diamount, are you saying you think the comments were racist because he made a joke about this baby but not the previous one? You have to be doing some fairly advanced mental gymnastics to get to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

You will have to clarify why you think that? It puts the 'not racism' comments to bed right away.
 
diamount said:
You will have to clarify why you think that? It puts the 'not racism' comments to bed right away.
Click to expand...
Because lots of people comment on lots of things, there are countless events taking place all over the world every second. Commenting on one event but not a similar one, months or years later, does not necessarily prove anything. Neither does commenting on them both.
 
aren't the BBC and their desire to virtue signal (post cliff/saville/kidscompany/carriegracie) part of the problem too, inflaming these issues,
I noticed how their initial articles on whether the queen should retire following Japanese example got curtailed, after an item on r4 today.

bbc also mention in most reporting how Meghan is mixed race, why ? (no one can avoided this), so if Danny's message was a parody of his employees political line,
would that be so bad.
 
Lopéz said:
Because lots of people comment on lots of things, there are countless events taking place all over the world every second. Commenting on one event but not a similar one, months or years later, does not necessarily prove anything. Neither does commenting on them both.
Click to expand...

I wonder why he didn't comment in those instancers? A new white member of the royal family? How boring, but one whom is 1/4 black? Best comparison to make? A chimpanzee, I'm sure that'll go down well.
 
Danny Baker is allegedly a fan of Twitter where he allegedly has about ½ million followers.
Wikipedia doesn't mention either Danny Baker's IQ or anything much about his education other than that he left school at age 14.
Danny Baker was the first person to be voted off I'm a Celebrity... Get Me Out Of Here in 2016.
BBC said:
Danny Baker showed a "serious error of judgement"
Click to expand...
Danny Baker said:
An image of a couple holding hands with a chimpanzee dressed in clothes with the caption: "Royal Baby leaves hospital" is a funny image. (Though not of course in that context.) Enormous mistake, for sure.
Click to expand...
Danny Baker is aged 61.

None of the foregoing is a matter of opinion.
 
diamount said:
I wonder why he didn't comment in those instancers? A new white member of the royal family? How boring, but one whom is 1/4 black? Best comparison to make? A chimpanzee, I'm sure that'll go down well.
Click to expand...

We're essentially discussing intent if that helps. Do you reasonably think a public figure who works for the BBC would be deliberately racist on Twitter?
 
For whatever reason he posted it, he should have known what the politically correct reaction would have been, i.e. that its racist.

If he doesn't have that level of awareness then he was a PR disaster waiting to happen.
 
BowdonUK said:
For whatever reason he posted it, he should have known what the politically correct reaction would have been, i.e. that its racist.

If he doesn't have that level of awareness then he was a PR disaster waiting to happen.
Click to expand...
Maybe it was a call for people to be sensible and he just wants to prove that most of the world has gone mad
 
The thing is that you now have to second guess other people's interpretations as well as your own.

Given his background, I can't believe that he didn't know how this would go.

Saying that, it annoys me that you're not allowed to be a ******** without losing your job these days. If your actions are ill judged everyone else has an opportunity to criticise and debate you these days. I don't like the creep towards thought police.
 
Moothead2 said:
It's pretty easy to forget Meghan is mixed race if you don't care about the royals honestly. It definitely comes across as accidental but you're a racist in the eyes of Twitter now.
Click to expand...

Danny baker has not defended himself by saying he didnt know the child was mixed race.

Probably because, he's not a complete dick and didn't want to further the argument about if he's racist or not. I suggest you do the same.

Try to understand why what he posted is racially insensitive, rather than suggest it isnt.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom