Categories
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « May | ||||||
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | ||||||
Recent Posts
Tags
America
Amnesty International
art
baby p
BBC
Church
David Cameron
death penalty
defence by provocation
domestic abuse
Egypt
EU
finance
Gaza
Gordon Brown
government
Guardian
Harriet Harman
In prison my whole life
internet
Iran
Islington
Islington Now
Israel
Jennifer Hochschild
Jeremy Dear
Johann Hari
Journalism
justice
law
media
money
multiracial
Mumia Abu Jamal
new media
Obama
Palestine
Politics
porn
racism
Religion
riots
unemployment
US
Web 2.0
Comment is free but outrage is easy
Published February 23, 2009 Journalism , World affairs 2 CommentsTags: blogging, Comment is Free, ethics, Guardian, India, L'Oreal, lightening cream, racism
The problem with blogging – and it is a trap I fall into myself – is that it encourages extremes of opinion.
For all the blurb about social networks and the global community, posting in the blogosphere can sometimes feel like shouting into a void and listening for an echo, which in the end only makes you shout louder.
Even so-called professionals can be guilty of this sin. Yesterday, on the Guardian’s Comment is Free section, I read a post by one of their NY-based freelancers, Shahnaz Habib, on the lack of ethics in multinationals.
She writes:
Although she admits that “all beauty advertising caters to culturally relative neuroses of what is beautiful”, Habib still believes selling whitening cream is tantamount to promoting racism.
This, she tells us, proves the moral corruption of multinationals that claim to “think globally and act locally” but in fact are merely exploiting the vulnerable people of a developing country for profits.
And so it might seem at first glance. When I first saw lightening creams lining the shelves of supermarkets in India last summer, my first reaction was exactly the same – outrage. But then I started to think about it.
If lightening cream caters exclusively to Asian markets and is deplored by the west, how can it be said that it is imposed upon them? Multinationals may have the GDP of small countries and wield more power than many of them, but they cannot change social and cultural norms.
You can argue that, in India specifically, they are perpetuating the legacy of racism left by the British. But the caste system, India’s very own home-grown brand of prejudice, existed long before the British East India Company had even set sail.
Surely trying to impose western standards of political correctness on the Indian market shows a far more colonial attitude than catering to their “culturally relative neuroses of what is beautiful”. Is selling fake tan or promoting sunbeds perceived as racist in the UK?
This, I believe, is the danger of blogging: it encourages posts that spring directly from gut reaction. Habib is clearly not stupid or arrogant or morally imperious. She was seduced by the medium into writing something that, though researched and articulated with care, ended up as a self-defeating tirade.
But at least it’s a consolation to know that when comment is free, comments there will be – 88 and counting underneath Habib’s article.