The red faces reprise skit(on HEY HEY Reunion)of a 1980's send up of Michael Jackson first caused "dismay by a visiting US star then 'world wide' racist controversy".

This was widely covered in news teasers by other commercial TV stations.

From what I under understand the international comment was no more than a 15 second news item in UK.

It was expanded to a couple of talking heads and less than 30 seconds on US Fox.

Given the the show was a ratings grabber for 4 hours prime time over two weeks.

Is this "controversy" :
- a storm in a tea cup,
- sulking other commercial TV networks,
- misplaced satire (just plain tacky),
- an example of background racism in Aust,
- an example of abuse of the media's self serving cheer leading
(creating, by sensationalising), rather than simply reporting real news?

I would like to know how else anyone could do a parody of the Jacksons? Or are the Jacksons and other black identities exempt from parody? Should they have left out the paint and just held up signs saying "the jacksons"? Wouldnt have been very funny or much of a parody would it?

If that connick fool hadnt been there or hadnt said anything it would have passed without a murmur. The same way all the sexism, bigotry and childishness that is hey hey gets ignored and forgotten as the lightweight tripe it is.

I have never before seen such a mass hysteria incident over something so petty.

The whole thing is a media beat up.
And the bloke who started it a fool.
No racism here just highlighting Jackson for some is a figure of fun.
Put me in that number his color change is weird I know a bloke who has that illness he is a wonderful bloke but his skin is patchy not uniform.
Poor old adopted Aussie star has been bought into this but he too by his manner and actions has often been his own reason to be laughed at.
Would we be offended if it was a black man in white face?
I think not humor is not always well based but it was harmless here.

Unfortunately incidents like this always provide fertile ground for feigned indignation.

The American himself who made up all the fuss had previously painted himself as a black preacher in a very mocking way. Total hypocrisy. You can't make comedy of a man who at very best slept with young boys but its fine to make fun of black preacher. Very similar to the Bush/Howard haters who complain and scream racism every time Obama is mocked.

Examinator:

I too watched "Hey,Hey" and I personally was astonished to see the self-serving beat-up by Connick and I felt very sorry and embarassed for Darryl having to apologize to "the world" for a simple comedy sketch that Connick turned into a farce of perceived racial prejudice, to simply make mileage for his obviously, and now understandable, waning public image!

Harry Connick Jnr should wake up to himself and clean around his own back-door before he starts making big issues out of nothing, simply to gain cheap media attention!.....( I don`t know whether anyone else has noticed but he even sings with a sneer on his face!).

It was insensitive. Their intention wasn't bad, but the show should've known better. Painting your face black for the purpose of impersonating 'blacks' is seen world wide as racist at worst, or dodgy at best.

America is a hypocrite. Just because a fraction over half voted in a black president that doesn't make them the pinacle of all that's rightieous. But really, that's not the point. They should've been more sensitive to something that's OBVIOUSLY upsetting for a percentage of the population.

I think those that blame Connick really should reconsider as they are being unfair and a mite jingoistically defensive and lacking perspective.

He comes from the Sthn. US where such issues are ultra sensitive. He clearly didn't see it as a Jackson send up but but more as a derogatory and racially insensitive. Which satire tends to be.
Runner, the issue was the 'boot black faces' and the associated connotations to racist ridicule. He probably saw that if he didn't react he might be criticised back home. I certainly don't believe it was self seeking as such. It was insensitive over sight to put Connick in that position.( much like Newtons 'boy' comment to Ali.) both intended in different contexts to the US sensitivities.

IMO the skit was puerile and unfunny (tacky) but didn't warrant criticism beyond that.

I found the media response very telling.

I agree examinator. Harry Connick comes from a country steeped in racism and it will only be when skits like this are not seen as racist that Americans will have achieved true equality.

I am sure Harry's reaction was very genuine given the culture he comes from, however, it should be seen in an Australian cultural context.

The irony is the doctors who performed this skit come from a variety of multicultural backgrounds - Lebanese, Greek and Indian comes to mind from what I can remember. Some lee-way should be given to the intent.

The reaction overseas is largely overdone to sell newspapers particularly in Britain.

Anyone who understands the Australian sense of humour will understand that we send up everyone - the Irish, women, men, Americans, Brits, Lebanese (Fat pizza) all equally well including Aussie culture itself. Greek Australians sent themselves up for years with the Effy characters and the like.

Australian culture was sent up in The Castle and the Ted Bullpit with his oft used phrase "not the Kingswood".

The only thing I would say is that given the fervour of political correctness it was probably, to quote Humphrey Appleby, a courageous move.

ABC's Q&A handled this issue very well this week.

Pelican

"Harry Connick comes from a country steeped in racism and it will only be when skits like this are not seen as racist that Americans will have achieved true equality."

Yes indeed!

Xammy, I think that Mr Connick should go bury his head!!

What amazes me is that it was apparently ok for an American actor called Robert Downey Junior to act as an African American in the movie "Tropic Thunder" last year.

He painted his face black and made fun of an obviously Southern African American accent for this movie, as well as trying to also say he was from Australia!

Where was the outcry here? Double standards if you ask me.

Q and A did handle this issue well.
To me, the entire episode is a storm in
a teacup. It was a skit that wasn't meant
to demean anyone. Admittedly it wasn't
particularly funny - and if Mr Connick Jr
wouldn't have protested - it wouldn't have
received even a by-line in the media.
Now it's gone global - with publicity for
Mr Connick Jr - that even money couldn't
have bought.

No one in the US objected to the film made
by the black comedians (brothers), sorry
I can't remember their names, - who dressed
up in full make-up - and impersonated
white females in an over-the top way.
That was supposed to be funny.
As someone said - double-standards exist
everywhere...

If anyone here is interested, they may access the following link, and, perhaps, gain some understanding into the reasons for Harry Connick Jnr's protest.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/foster/sfeature/sf_minstrelsy.html

Harry could not be seen to do anything else. As for comments claiming he was self-seeking, gaining publicity:

1. His successful career means he does not need additional publicity - it isn't alway 'good'.
2. To have remained silent would've meant he was assumed as giving approval to a tasteless act.

As Australians, many of us chafe under the image that 'Crocodile Dundee' and 'Bazza MacKenzie' bestowed upon us. Clearly Australians are just as ignorant about American culture in some areas. Also, I know from having lived in the USA, it is (and remains) very ignorant of the rest of the world (former President Bush Jnr did not even have a passport until becoming president), however that does not excuse the 'rest of the world' remaining ignorant of the USA.

Had H.C. Jnr not been present on Hey Hey, little would be said about the humourless skit.

But that is not what happened.

Was the blackface skit on the execrable 'Hey Hey' racist? Absolutely.

Is it a big deal? No.

Everybody knows that the unsophisticated Australian demographic that constitutes the program's audience is intrinsically racist - indeed, they're the same mob who voted for Pauline Hanson.

Situation normal - this is Australia.

That same 'racist' Australia continues to accept record numbers of migrants.

Isn't it time to accept the obvious, which is that there will always be jokes about differences and those jokes are not always about hatred and probably often about acceptance. What political correctness does is make an offence where none was intended, making chasms appear where a bit of light-heated ribbing might have easily dispenses with the obvious noting and sometimes celebration of difference.

This is Australia, we have our own history and culture which are thankfully very much different to the US. It is wrong to 'bad-mouth' everyone as 'Hansons', that is the sort of superior and malicious labelling that stereotypes and leads to hatred and divisions.

The censorship and tyranny of political correctness makes it far more dangerous to our liberty and way of life than any undergraduate humour about the late Whacko Jacko and his celebrity family.

Darryl Summers was really ill-advised reacting to the political correctness he was confronted with - it is the reaction that is taken to legitimise the (usually false) complaint. It is the sort of media beat-up to be expected of crummy current affairs shows and tabloid newspapers. Hey, Hey aims at the same audience, it is all the same old, same old dumbed down pap and none of it is newsworthy.

There you go, what an opportunity, how about some 'sensitive' whinger stooping to take PC offence at my use of 'dumbed' as in 'dumbed down'?

This sort of political correctness is so yesterday.

Dear Fractelle,

Thanks for the "Blackface," link. I read it with interest.
However, the skit on Hey Hey was not a "Blackface" skit.
It was simply a re-enactment of the skit they did 20
years ago. It was a tribute to the Jackson Five. Nothing
more, nothing less. It was not meant to demean in any way.
Harry Connick Jr over-reacted. He assumed it was a "Blackface,"
skit. It wasn't. Even Whoopie Goldberg on "The View," had more
nouse, and recognised the skit as a tribute to the Jackson Five.
"No Big Deal!" was her comment.

And, as for Americans being upset by "Blackface," routines.
Robert Downey's recent "Blackface" got an Academy Award nomination.

CJ writes

'Everybody knows that the unsophisticated Australian demographic that constitutes the program's audience is intrinsically racist - indeed, they're the same mob who voted for Pauline Hanson.'

You would think with the Greens track record of dishonesty they would keep their mouth shut. Nothing like the self righteous ones who truly believe their own press.

Foxy

Robert Downey's role in a recent film, was not a "blackface" performance, this is why I posted the link so that people would understand the difference between acting and the 'entertainment' that had its origins in the slave owning south of the USA, during the 1800's.

The skit on Hey Hey had no resemblance to the Jackson Five but did look exactly like a B&W minstrel act.

Harry Connick Jnr had every right to protest, given his background of a Southern Lawyer father and childhood in New Orleans. Therefore, to expect Harry Connick Jnr to understand Aussie sensibilities is ignorant.

I fully understand that the Hey Hey act was a reprise of an act I found in bad taste when it was first presented. I also know that Australia does not have a history of slave ownership and the parodying of blacks through 'blackface' entertainment. However, I can discern the difference between the 'blackface entertainment' of the deep South and Robert Downey Jnr's role and, in fact, the 'whiteface' of the actors, Shawn and Marlon Wayans in the 2004 movie "White Chicks".

This is why I presented a link to the history of 'Black & White Minstrel entertainment, so that others would understand where Connick Jnr was coming from.

The only good to come from the mockery of blacks was the introduction of glorious 'black' music to the greater white population. As a result we have Jazz, Blues and Rock 'n Roll today.

Also at the very end of my last post I noted that if Connick Jnr had not been present, no one would even be discussing this now.

Fractelle:"to expect Harry Connick Jnr to understand Aussie sensibilities is ignorant."

Why then must we, as Aussies, try to understand his? There is an old saying that goes "when in Rome, do as the Romans do", which is a very good piece of advice for Young 'Arry. As Aussies, we don't and shouldn't find the skit terribly offensive, even if it was in bad taste and pretty talentless. I find Connick's self-serving over-reaction distasteful and the man himself turgid and talentless, should I be receiving an apology from him?

As you said: "if Connick Jnr had not been present, no one would even be discussing this now."

And that would have been a good thing. The whole thing is nothing but a piece of grandstanding by a man who's always been an imitator, never an innovator

Dear Fractelle,

I appreciate your further explanations - however
we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

To me the skit on Hey Hey was not a take-off
of a "Black & White,"
minstrel show, or "Blackface," -
but a poor attempt at imitating the
Jackson Five - even to the point of having a
"Michael Jackson" with a "white face."
Whereas - Robert Downey's so called
"acting," I found fitted
into the offensive caricature of the Black man -
that many Americans unfortunately - find acceptable.

I lived and worked in the US for close to ten years,
my children were born in Los Angeles. I'm fully aware
of the race problems in that country - and it's history.
And it's for this reason that I still firmly believe
that Harry Connick Jr - over-reacted
in this particular case.

Foxy

It is unfortunate that you cannot understand the difference between acting a character and the performance of Black and White Minstrel (so-called) entertainment. Did you really read my link?

Harry Connick Jnr had every right to voice his honest opinion on the minstrel parody on Hey Hey. I gave clear reasons why.

You don't think Harry Connick Jnr should have spoken out against the act - as you say that's your opinion. However, I find B & W minstrel performance as degrading to black Americans and therefore offensive - that's my opinion.

Fractelle
I agree with what you said he has subsequently said he found the act 'offensive' not the show.
Me I find the show banal lacking any humour that doesn't play at the lowest common denominator.

Passing through I watched a few minutes of idol and saw that drone judge have a shot at Harry over Hey Hey....to me the judge was simply gutter trawling.

Foxy
The racial tension in the deep south (where Connick is from ) is from are different EMOTIONAL dimension ('poor white trash') to LA. Connick will get more stick from whites than blacks there because of the deep resentment. How many years ago was the boy dragged behind a truck, or the school that charged a black with attempted murder for fighting over sitting under a tree yet the whites escaped without charge, but was publicly supported by the town? IMO In that context Connick was upright and principled.He called it as he saw it.

Consider daylight saving a boring issue but in QLD the emotional angst out of the SE corner is extraordinary. Or may be racial attitudinal differences between NT and say Melb.

Red faces is made to be amateur hour. So they didn't spend too much money or time on costumes, especially knowing the tone and expectations of the quality of performance. Hence they used boot polish and afro wigs, rather than proper make-up and costumes, making it all look more like a throwback to the minstrels.

The difference between racism and entertainment comes down to the quality of costume and make-up.

People are becoming too precious. Magda Szubanski ended up apologising to cyclists, as she made Kyle apologise to Jews. Where does it end? It ends with the death of comedy.

I yearn for the next celebrity to come out after such a 'controversy' and say... yep, I meant it, what of it, stop being a sook, lighten up. Actually I double it. I am totally unrepentant. IN fact.. kiss my ass, and stop being such a precious, weedy, whining little minger. Something Daryl should have said to Harry I think.

Nobody has a right not to be offended. People need to lighten up, find the remote control, change the channel, and get over themselves.

Yes whether or not the segment is considered racist should not depend on comparing the quality of makeup used by entertainers to make their skin dark. They were doing a skit on Hey Hey It's Saturday not looking for an academy award in a major motion picture and made up accordingly.

Fractelle,

"The skit on Hey Hey had no resemblance to the Jackson Five but did look exactly like a B&W minstrel act."

My understanding is that most people who watched it recognised it as an imitation of the Jackson 5. But if you couldn't spot the resemblance I have now watched it on u-tube and can assist. They called themselves Jackson Jive and it was introduced as a song and dance tribute to Michael Jackson and the hair looks very 70s(albeit due to the cheap disco wigs). The 5 in the background had darkened their skin. The lead singer is dressed up in iconically Michael Jackson outfit. He even obviously applied white colour on his face. Apparently they did the same routine 20 years ago and won 'Red Faces'.

Examinator,

If so then how do you explain the Robert Downey character that Foxy referred to?

Folks,

It's not an argument about the cheapness or costuming nor it justified because it's on "make a fool of yourself TV."

To me it was an over reaction by the Aus media (sensationalism and selfish perhaps even sour grapes.)
But it seems now some overtly sensitive jingoistic individuals are blaming Harry Connick Jr .....Get over it he is entitled to call it as he saw it, so what. Get off his case.

Contrary to common opinion the world isn't binary it is more analogue, a series of shades of colour from existence to non existence and multi dimensional to boot.

The case of black face at the academy awards was a different person different context see my explanation to Foxy. Some jokes work some are just insulting to some people.

Examinator:"he is entitled to call it as he saw it"

Of course he is, but we're entitled to take his call and tell him politely to shove it up his jacksie.

We are nder no obligation to squirm obsequiously whilst offering cringeing apologetics, as Summers did, simply because a washed-up piano-bar crooner gets upaet.

Dear Fractelle,

Yes I did read your link - thanks for asking,
but as I explained in
an earlier post - I didn't see its relevance
to the Hey Hey skit - which was not a "Blackface,"
in my opinion - but a satire of the Jackson Five.
Your premise of Harry Connick Jr's "Southern
Connections," being an entitlement to object
so strongly to the Hey Hey skit I don't buy.
Not because of any lack of understanding, but
because I don't see the skit as a parody of any
Black & White Minstrel show. Simply a satire of
the Jackson Five.

Connick by the way - moved to New York at the age of
18. He attended New York's Hunter College
and later the Manhattan School of
Music. He regards himself basically as a New Yorker, and
lives with his family in Connecticut.

Dear Examinator,

I agree with you - we all need to lighten up.

Some jokes do work - some don't.
The Hey Hey skit obviously didn't.
It wasn't funny. However, it wasn't meant to
be insulting - it wasn't a parody of the Black
and White Minstrel Shows, (or of Al Johnson,
or anyone else of that ilk).
Of that I am convinced.

Sorry Foxy but I'm going to have to stick up my hand for Mr Connick on this one as well.

Let me state from the start, though a little uncomfortable about the skit I'm not sure I could say I viewed it as overtly racist. That being said I'm glad we have moved on a little in this country over the last 25 years.

Back then I vividly remember standing with some mates at the footy and one of them was giving the Krakour(sp) brothers an ear full. He was quite witty and the jibes, going from wine flagons to hygiene, were getting many a laugh from the crowd. I was extremely uncomfortable but never said a peep. To this day my actions, or rather lack of them, still rankle. I do not remain silent nowadays.

My understanding is that half of Mr Connick band is Afro-American and more than likely friends of his. There is two ways this could have 'gone down'.

The first is after the skit he doesn't react, then goes to his band members and says "Look guys, sorry about that, might have been a little uncomfortable for you as it was for me, but really I'm sure they didn't mean any harm by it, it is a different country remember."

Or he could have done what he did.

It could be that with him being pretty close to my age, and having spent most of his life working for himself as I have done, I totally relate to his stance and applaud it.

Please note I do not compare the Hey Hey It's Saturday skit to my mates efforts. I am making a point about people's willingness to speak out. I do think those who baselessly claim ulterior motives to Mr Connick are being unfair, he certainly gets kudos from me.

If you want to blame anyone make it the media who have blown this way out of proportion.

cont'd...

Excuse my typo - I meant to say -
Al Jolson ... (Mammy -how I love ja, how I love ja...)
Big difference in music between this, and what
they were singing on the Hey Hey skit as the Jackson
Five!

Dear csteele,

My objection is that this skit is being
criticised as being a "racist," i.e.
a "Blackface," skit. A parody of the
Black and White Minstrels.
In my opinion,
it was a poor satire of the Jackson
Five. That failed miserably.

I don't believe that the skit deserves the
condemnation that it got. As Whoppie Goldberg
and other black comedians in the US have pointed
out -"It's no big deal - it was only a send up
of the Jackson Five." If Harry Connick Jr saw it
differently - that's his call. I'm sure that
not all the members of his band would perceive
things in exactly the same way.

For those who think that this 'blackface' crap is a uniquely American phenomenon that isn't significant in Australian culture, I lived in Townsville during the 80s and 90s and encountered a homegrown racist 'blackface' comedian who apparently still performs and records as "King Billy Cokebottle". I recall hearing his recordings in the odd Townsville pub, where they received a generally positive reception.

This is what he looks like in 'blackface', along with a sample of his humour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKzF9l1UMXQ

It seems that he's also created the odd minor controversy, although I don't recall it getting nearly as much exposure as the 'Hey Hey' crap - despite it being considerably nastier.

http://tiny.cc/3nMFR

'Blackface' is an intrinsically racist form of entertainment, depending as it does on skin colour. It may not be overtly intended as such, but that simply points to the ingrained racism of those who perform it, and indeed those who are entertained by it.

If it wasn't racist, then on what basis was the jibe at Kamahl included? What other possible connection is there between the Jacksons and Kamahl, except (vaguely) the colour of their skin?

Good point, Clownfish. Crikey covered it the other day:

http://tiny.cc/BLT6g

Apparently Kamahl wasn't all that impressed.

If a comedian portrays a disabled person it is degrading and insensitive unless the comedian happens to be disabled himself.
.
If a comedian makes a joke about Arabs it is racism unless he is an Arab himself.
.
If a comedian refers to a Jew he is religious racist unless he is a Jew himself.
.
If a comedian is making a joke about black people he is racist but when a black man jokes about a white man then that is not racist.
.
Personally I detest racism, real racism and not what happen to be mere comedy! Then again the Federal constitution s.51(xxvi) actually permits racism on a grand scale so what are we really going on about?
.
Just imagine someone going down a stationary supply store and argue it is racism they do not sell black paper while they do sell white paper and other such nonsense.
,
Would it just not be better if we spend less time about the race issue and more time to ignore it all?
.
More then 40 years ago was dating this young woman and then one day she made known that it never could go further because I was white. Well I wasn’t blind and knew she was of a coloured skin more then just a sun burn would do but it didn’t make any difference to me. Well, to her it did. If I had in reverse commented on the colour of her skin I more then likely would have been regarded as a racist.
.
Seems that society is too obsessed about racism and forget to live real life.
.

Dear Foxy,

I feel we both have pretty much the same perspective on the skit itself, and it is probably quite an Australian one.

I don't think we can deny another person a different perspective based on their culture, upbringing, or their history. As you say "If Harry Connick Jr saw it differently - that's his call".

Indeed I also agree that "not all the members of his band would perceive things in exactly the same way" since possibly some of them may have 'stormed out' if put in the same situation, but we can't know. Mr Connick did not do that. I thought he put his position firmly but was not disrespectful to Mr Somers and he saw the show out.

Posting on another thread I drew parallels with the Bert Newton and Muhummad Ali incident ten years earlier than when Jackson Jive skit first aired.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=9562&page=0

Back then it seemed quite okay to say "Oops, our mistake", why is it so different now? Why are we so defensive? Furthermore why in that defensiveness are we lashing out at Mr Connick?

However I have since been wondering where Bert might have picked up the expression "I like the boy". Could it have been adopted from the States, especially with the accent he used? Might we think of 'blacking up' as a similar meme?

I'm not saying that changes the intent of the participants, which was in my opinion quite benign, just something we might reflect on.

<< "If Harry Connick Jr saw it differently - that's his call" >>

I have to follow on Csteele's comments:

Why the fuss?

Connick Jnr had every right to present his opinion of the skit. And more power to him, I have no idea how he could've faced his band members had he remained silent.

Yes, Foxy, there was Al Jolson and he did aid in the contribution of Afro/American music to the world. Like most human conundrums it is not black and white - no pun intended. However, to claim that the Hey Hey skit was purely a parody of the Jackson Five strikes me as deliberately myopic - it clearly is based on the B & W minstrel blackface that has its foundation in ridicule of blacks at a time when the Ku Klux Klan held sway in the southern states of America.

I get the impression that posters are now merely defending their opinions on Connick than actually looking at the appalling origins of "blackface" and acknowledging that this form of mockery is no longer acceptable.

Was there an over reaction on Hey Hey?

Yes indeed a complete overreaction to Harry Connick Jnr's right to express his feelings about a skit he was invited to judge on Hey Hey's Red Faces.

Grow up Australia.

ok..the past few days its like i'm living in the twilight zone ;-)

but i'll give it another try:

the act was racist there is no question of this, summers and red and the HHIS producers are entertainment professionals, while some audiences might legitimately claim ignorance of the symbolism of blacking up, for the entertainment professional there is simply no excuse. it must have, at some level, been "allowed".

racism was then modelled to children, right across this wide brown land, on a prime time high rating icon of Aussie light entertainment. racism was sanctioned. just a bit of fun eh? lighten up it wasn't racist......

these small, yes small, moments of racism are what allow the potential of serious racist outcomes to emerge. they are like seeds, sometimes dormant, waiting for the rain and sun of someone like, say Hanson to feed them. If we choose not to challenge them at every single turn, then we allow the possibility of horror. History is unequivocal in this. let's look and learn from history.

The act, does not change just because someone of the panel was from the US, or one of the performers was indian, racism knows no bounds, it is not just the domain of white folks. For me the issue here is not HCjnr at all, or what the performers intended, or the jackson 5, or what anyone in the world thinks of us..the issue is about us, australians...do we choose to behave like decent human beings in front of our kids or shall we just ignore our own history, the history of the world, and just...go on behaving like complete ignorant morons and then, god help us, celebrate how moronic and ignorant we are by calling it a storm in a tea cup?

this isn't PC gone mad, it's not wowserism, it's decent human behaviour, its treating others (whoever they are) with dignity and respect. on prime time tv, in front of our kids.

racism: in the media or round the dinner table, we have to call it out, every time. anything else is cowardice.

I think it is a very sad day for Australia, nay a sad day for the whole world when we lose our sense of humour and cannot laugh at simple issues such as the skit in "Hey, Hey".

There will always be the colours Black, White, Brown and all the shades in between, but when we make the fatal mistake of applying it to a person`s skin shade, we have created a "racial issue".

This issue is never going to go away as there will always be "different" coloured people on this planet, so why don`t we all get on with life and simply recognize that there is good and bad in all races, and we all have the same right to live here, unhindered and unostracised!

I remember "Steady Eddie" once having an advert on television, asking people to "come along and buy ticket to my show, ...or I will come around and dribble on you!" or words to that effect! He was a classic example of uncontained humour and showed a person who could laugh at his own inadequacies.

The world today is becoming paranoid about "political correctness" but sanity must prevail or we will all end up chewing each other to death over the garden fence!

Dear csteele,

I appreciate your presenting your views
in such a fair and well reasoned way.

Dear Fractelle,

I haven't accused you of being "short-sighted,"
or lacking in tolerance - and it's a bit
disappointing that you think I'm being
"deliberately myopic," simply because I disagree
with your take on the Hey Hey skit.
To me, it was definitely not a parody of the
Black and White Minstrels.

However, I really don't care to continue this
discussion any further. You're entitled to your
opinion, and I to mine. Let's leave it at that.

Clownfish,

"If it wasn't racist, then on what basis was the jibe at Kamahl included? What other possible connection is there between the Jacksons and Kamahl, except (vaguely) the colour of their skin?"

Umm he is the well known singer who Hey Hey parodied extensively in their day. Is that a trick question?

Can't people see past Kamahl's skin colour and the makeup? What is the obsession with race that blinds people to the apparently obvious? Colour is only skin deep. Why can't we look past it? Some international celebrities will have dark skin and people will imitate them also. Why does it take Whoopi Goldberg to tell Australians the obvious?

I could go lateral like you and say that one of the performers was Indian like Kamahl so that must have been the basis for bringing in Kamahl but that would be equally unhelpful and would also avoid the obvious.

Fractelle,

"I get the impression that posters are now merely defending their opinions on Connick than actually looking at the appalling origins of "blackface" and acknowledging that this form of mockery is no longer acceptable."

But if in our opinion it was a send up of the Jackson's not a mockery of people because of their skin colour what relevance would it have? I am happy to acknowledge that blackface entertainment as described in your links is totally unacceptable and should always have been. However I maintain the opinion that this was a specific imitation of the Jacksons.

Same ol same ol,

Fractelle thinking anyone who doesn't agree with her 'doesn't understand' her (too thick) or is being 'deliberately myopic' and we all should 'grow up'.

Watch out, if anyone replies in kind, they will obliviously be 'bullying' her.

Maybe even because she dares to have an opinion while being female!

I think she really just wants people to 'acknowledge' her 'contributions'. ie: This amazing thing called google she's discovered.
Read my links dammit and tell me I'm clever please!

mjpb?

errrr..so blackface is unacceptable as long as it's far away and long time passing in another country.....but its not unacceptable if we black up and imitate the jacksons on prime time tv in front of children in 2009 in australia because we are just sooooooooooo different from everyone else it's just a laugh and doesn't matter?

yeah, good aussie logic that. thanx.

E. Sykes,

Again I don't consider it blackface because they used cheap makeup for a tacky entertainment show. It didn't demean people because of their skin colour. It was imitating the Jacksons. Whoopi Goldberg is American and she shares the aussie logic that you struggle with so much.

Foxy gave an example in America which appeared racist but was apparently not objected to by Americans. They apparently do worse even if certain Americans react more to Hey Hey Its Saturday.

Ha!

Now I have my own link.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/dont-laugh-taste-police-take-aim-at-cruel-jokes-20091012-gtxv.html

Applause please!

Looks like the UK are one step ahead. I think we need to make a committee to stop shows like Fawlty Towers being allowed to be shown here too!

'The famous Fawlty Towers episode in which Basil insults the Germans fails every one of the new guidelines. It is racist, intimidating, humiliating, mocks Spaniards, Germans, and the mentally ill, and commits other offences too numerous to mention. It is also dementedly funny, even after repeated viewings over 30 years.'

Although maybe it would be worth it to get Daryl Somers off the TV.

mjpb

forgive me but errrrr?

what you are saying actually makes no sense whatsover....

either they had blackface on or they didn't.

looks to me like they did.

how much they paid for the make up? tacky entertainment?...whoopi? errrr?

whatever reason they had for putting it on, they put it on and were allowed to go to air.

jeez....the twists and turns of the racist culture apologist...next you'll be telling me there weren't any stolen children and native title is a complete waste of time eh..? cause we didn't intend to wipe most indigenous australians out, we meant well at the time, and the americans did it anyway to the indians so whats the problem?

Foxy

For what its worth, you remain one of the OLO posters I respect. While I do disagree vehemently with you that Connick Jnr overreacted and wish you could understand why, I will always give your opinions due consideration, knowing that they come from a sincere and genuine interest in this crazy world of ours.

All the best, my friend.

E.Sykes

"forgive me but errrrr?

"what you are saying actually makes no sense whatsover...."

Then I am in congenial company.

"either they had blackface on or they didn't."

In my opinion they didn't. If they had somehow imitated the Jacksons without makeup (which would have been confusing) or used more sophisticated makeup (which would have been out of place) the blackface rationalisation wouldn't be available. What demeaning stereotypes of African Americans did it display? That they sing Jackson songs in groups of 5 in the 70s?

"looks to me like they did."

And it looks to me like they didn't.

"how much they paid for the make up? tacky entertainment?...whoopi? errrr?"

See above. As regards Whoopi, Foxy said:
As Whoppie Goldberg
and other black comedians in the US have pointed
out -"It's no big deal - it was only a send up
of the Jackson Five."

It isn't just some bizarre aussie logic as you construe it. That is also how some African Americans view it.

"jeez....the twists and turns of the racist culture apologist...next you'll be telling me there weren't any stolen children and native title is a complete waste of time eh..? cause we didn't intend to wipe most indigenous australians out, we meant well at the time, and the americans did it anyway to the indians so whats the problem?"

And because I don't share your view and consider it just a cheap imitation of the Jacksons I'll have to also admit to burning crosses on my lawn. Puhlease!

'And because I don't share your view and consider it just a cheap imitation of the Jacksons I'll have to also admit to burning crosses on my lawn. Puhlease!'

Haha!

As I said before.. Yikes!

BTW: His daddy fought in the war to stop the likes of you!

sooo...

HCjnr should shut up and we should take no notice of what people say about us overseas especialy "the yanks"...unless they agree with uslike Whoopi ..then they're ok....

and bugger the ANZACs eh? what did they ever do for us? why did they even bother to fight racism? and people in black face are not people in black face, isn't that obvious?.. and why have we even got an ANZAC day? I mean...it's all over the top PC wowserism....

ok yeah, great logic. LOL

I am interested on what others deem as racist as opposed to Aussie humour.

Should we be imposing some regulation on racist material on our screens?

I have stated I didn't consider the Hey Hey skit as overtly racist but as I think the issue through, and consider what others have been putting, I find myself hardening my attitude a little. Especially in light of the Kahmal cartoon.

Here is something I do consider racist, it was on primetime television and watched by many of our youth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnnAWxvLPQc&feature=related

Would I like a firmer stand taken on this sort of humour? Probably.

Is there anyone here going to defend Mr Newman's behaviour as not racist but just good old Aussie humour?

I think it says something about a particular networks tolerance levels for this sort of stuff.

Dear Fractelle,

With those three wonderful words - "Respect,"
"My Friend," you gave me an extra-ordinary gift.
All of a sudden I feel lifted up.

Thank You!

I can hear that Beaches theme song going on in my head Foxy. Did you ever know that you're my Heeeero...

Dear Houellie,

As Piper said, "You're awesome!"

Aboriginals are using white face painting is that perhaps racism or is it only if white people use dark face painting?
.
Let’s be real, you can call it racism or whatever but in the end it was merely a show for entertainment.
Here we have legislators trying to deal with Faulty Towers kind of shows, even so no offence was previous held to exist instead of having legislators deal with criminal conduct and other more important issues.
Decades ago, when I was in management, I had a rule no worker was to use nicknames, swear words, etc. To do so would be dismissal instantly. So one worker tried me out and was sacked on the sport. And, for what it may be worth, his Union accepted this. Long before sexual harassment, etc, was in place I used to practice this among the workforce and successfully that if they wanted a job they show respect to other workers.
This I view is the kind of conduct to pursue but to try to make out racism because some fun is poked surely is going overboard.
We are getting to be a society where bashings is flourishing because we are to over sensitive on the wrong things and by this ignore to address the real issues.
In my view the skit was not specifically indicating racism but merely was to whatever any person perceived from it.
For example, when my wife and I watch a show she has often a different interpretation of it then I have because our backgrounds are so starkly different that certain terms and slangs I am used to hear and understand have no meaning to her.
Technical terms are meaning less to her and so that is so to say the prove in the pudding that it is all to perception.
Those who had a perception of racism should blame themselves for perceiving it as such and not the skit!

I think some racism exists in Australia of course. However never to the extent to which this country is portrayed. The sad outcome is that many people who are not white are too afraid to come here. Also I heard some people will not hire people who appear racially different from the other employees for fear of being labelled racist over any incident. So not racism against the person but from fear of being called one. Australians are very sensitive to it and bullies do use it whenever and where ever to get attention.

I think we need to ignore calls of racism unless there is proof positive malice or discrimination has occured.Our focus on this subject should be for real issues that do not seem interesting enough for media. It is becoming counter productive. Without basis it will only create hatred.

France appears to have refused to be drawn into race debate over the French Vogue incident. Maybe we should do likewise. The Political Correct is no different than some form of fundamentalist religion and ignores all true liberal values.