在经历了2020年之后,令人感到一丝慰藉的是,越来越多的美国民众意识到,种族、文化和经济的不平等在美国一直存在,而且终于迎来了大爆发。
随着这种公众意识的不断增长,很多公司开始自我反省,包括曾经在其产品或广告中使用过问题名称和形象的一些公司和品牌。例如Quaker Oats,该公司最近决定更换其Aunt Jemima品牌及其漫画标志,做出类似决定的还有克利夫兰印第安人队(Cleveland Indians),该队在去年12月就曾经宣布对其标志进行更换。
有鉴于人们在这方面的意识不断加强,对一些人来说,这种种族审判,例如吉普(Jeep)对切诺基民族(Cherokee Nation)希望该公司停止使用其部落名称的回复,尤为令人失望。公司称,其汽车品牌名称经过了多年的精心挑选和培养,以致敬和彰显美国原住民的高尚、英勇和自豪的品质,但公司的声明看起来似乎异常空洞,毫无诚意,何况吉普在这方面也是公然地只说不做。
我们有必要了解品牌名称和相关形象的使用如何以及为什么会带来伤害,例如Jemima Aunt、克利夫兰印第安人和吉普切诺基(Jeep Cherokee)。不管人们是否对此有清醒的认识,但媒体形象在自我认同的塑造中发挥着重要作用。与此同时,这些形象还会塑造大众对我们的认知,尤其是有色人种。
主流文化的成员已经得到了媒体的广泛、正面宣传,那么采用这类形象通常有利于品牌自身。然而,对非主流文化的成员来说,例如很少出现、或者主要都是以凶残的原型或商品化形象(例如吉普切诺基)出现在媒体中的美国原住民,这种做法不仅会给他们的自我认知带来负面影响,同时还会影响其他人对这些人的看法和对待方式。这种循环非常有可能让人们形成负面或不健康的自我印象,我在自己撰写的《瓦坎达的重要意义何在:电影〈黑豹〉反映的心理、身份和沟通》(Why Wakanda Matters: What Black Panther Reveals About Psychology, Identity, and Communication)一书中探讨过上述流程。
我们的文化甚至很少意识到,这类原型词汇和图片会通过某种复杂的方式,伤害边缘文化和边缘群体,并损害主流文化。媒体宣传的匮乏,再加上简单化或不准确的形象宣传,将导致文化的内部冲突和误导,或“冲突时刻”,继而给涉及的各方都带来不幸。
事实在于,受媒体影响的认知确实会决定人们如何与其他群体互动,这里既包括个人层面,也包括集体层面。在集体层面,这种现象催生出的社会环境最终不仅会伤害被边缘化和受压迫的群体,而且会波及所有人。制度化的种族主义是真实存在的,而且十分普遍。
一些人可能会认为,尽管对Aunt Jemima的抵制是可以理解的,但吉普并未在其产品或广告中明确地宣扬种族主义形象。“切诺基”只不过是一个名字,如果产品本身没有问题的话,那么使用这个名字又有何妨?这是否只是“取消文化”的刻意责难呢?
首先,这个观点并未考虑切诺基这个名字真正的所有者,也就是独立的切诺基民族,它并未同意吉普使用其名称。事实上,他们明确地表达了不要使用其名称的意见,而吉普却拒绝接受这一要求。这一点便凸显了吉普并不在意切诺基民族有关其自身名称的意见。这种对黑人、原住民和有色人种(BIPOC)以及其他边缘化团体自我决断的漠视,是白人至上主义的作祟方式之一,只不过比较委婉罢了。
此外,由于美国原住民没有得到人性化、准确的宣传,因此仅将其文化和传承用作销售某种产品是一种不人道的剥削。试想一下,从未被提及或宣传的自己突然出现了某种商品之上。理解这一点并与之共情至关重要,然而,无法做到或者不愿意去做正是白人至上主义和不公平性滋生的沃土。
就像之前提到的那样,经过2020年的洗礼,更多美国白人表达了加入反对种族主义阵营的意愿,但真正的结盟要求的不仅仅是在推特(Twitter)发声并挂出标语“#黑人的命也是命”(#BlackLivesMatter)。它还需要心甘情愿的牺牲精神,其中最容易做到的一种牺牲就是放弃使用某种产品。那些寻求加入联盟的人应该拿起电话,或者登陆社交媒体,然后让吉普知道自己不会购买其产品,除非公司展现出付诸实际行动的意愿。
当吉普表示自己将继续使用切诺基名称时,人们能够对其施压,至少通过实际行动来表达对部落的敬意,而不是仅仅停留在口头声援。例如,吉普可以邀请切诺基民族协商建立长期合作伙伴关系,并询问自己能够为部落提供哪些帮助,继而以一种更负责任的方式来使用其名称。按照部落的反馈意见,吉普随后可以采取多种措施:例如制定教育计划、教授美国人有关切诺基的历史和传承、为青年切诺基学生设立奖学金,或者提供资源帮助社区应对持续的新冠疫情,尤其是原始部落和边缘化社区遭到疫情的冲击普遍更为严重。此举不仅符合道德,而且也将创建一种良好的公关形象,有利于吉普自身的业务。但在现实中,吉普的这种回复不仅体现了资本家的剥削,同时也代表了一种不良的商业行为。
社会变革的首要步骤之一就是让个人和机构意识到,在他们看来可能被称之为“小事”的事情,对于那些受到这类小事影响的人来说有着完全不同的感受。有鉴于机构的转变十分缓慢,因此我们就得靠个人来推动和鞭策这些机构进行改变。就吉普这件事情来说,这意味着人们得告诉吉普,忽视切诺基民族的要求就相当于让其保持沉默,但人们不会对此类事情熟视无睹。(财富中文网)
希娜·霍华德是莱德大学(Rider University)传播学教授,也是《瓦坎达的重要意义何在》一书的作者。
译者:冯丰
审校:夏林
在经历了2020年之后,令人感到一丝慰藉的是,越来越多的美国民众意识到,种族、文化和经济的不平等在美国一直存在,而且终于迎来了大爆发。
随着这种公众意识的不断增长,很多公司开始自我反省,包括曾经在其产品或广告中使用过问题名称和形象的一些公司和品牌。例如Quaker Oats,该公司最近决定更换其Aunt Jemima品牌及其漫画标志,做出类似决定的还有克利夫兰印第安人队(Cleveland Indians),该队在去年12月就曾经宣布对其标志进行更换。
有鉴于人们在这方面的意识不断加强,对一些人来说,这种种族审判,例如吉普(Jeep)对切诺基民族(Cherokee Nation)希望该公司停止使用其部落名称的回复,尤为令人失望。公司称,其汽车品牌名称经过了多年的精心挑选和培养,以致敬和彰显美国原住民的高尚、英勇和自豪的品质,但公司的声明看起来似乎异常空洞,毫无诚意,何况吉普在这方面也是公然地只说不做。
我们有必要了解品牌名称和相关形象的使用如何以及为什么会带来伤害,例如Jemima Aunt、克利夫兰印第安人和吉普切诺基(Jeep Cherokee)。不管人们是否对此有清醒的认识,但媒体形象在自我认同的塑造中发挥着重要作用。与此同时,这些形象还会塑造大众对我们的认知,尤其是有色人种。
主流文化的成员已经得到了媒体的广泛、正面宣传,那么采用这类形象通常有利于品牌自身。然而,对非主流文化的成员来说,例如很少出现、或者主要都是以凶残的原型或商品化形象(例如吉普切诺基)出现在媒体中的美国原住民,这种做法不仅会给他们的自我认知带来负面影响,同时还会影响其他人对这些人的看法和对待方式。这种循环非常有可能让人们形成负面或不健康的自我印象,我在自己撰写的《瓦坎达的重要意义何在:电影〈黑豹〉反映的心理、身份和沟通》(Why Wakanda Matters: What Black Panther Reveals About Psychology, Identity, and Communication)一书中探讨过上述流程。
我们的文化甚至很少意识到,这类原型词汇和图片会通过某种复杂的方式,伤害边缘文化和边缘群体,并损害主流文化。媒体宣传的匮乏,再加上简单化或不准确的形象宣传,将导致文化的内部冲突和误导,或“冲突时刻”,继而给涉及的各方都带来不幸。
事实在于,受媒体影响的认知确实会决定人们如何与其他群体互动,这里既包括个人层面,也包括集体层面。在集体层面,这种现象催生出的社会环境最终不仅会伤害被边缘化和受压迫的群体,而且会波及所有人。制度化的种族主义是真实存在的,而且十分普遍。
一些人可能会认为,尽管对Aunt Jemima的抵制是可以理解的,但吉普并未在其产品或广告中明确地宣扬种族主义形象。“切诺基”只不过是一个名字,如果产品本身没有问题的话,那么使用这个名字又有何妨?这是否只是“取消文化”的刻意责难呢?
首先,这个观点并未考虑切诺基这个名字真正的所有者,也就是独立的切诺基民族,它并未同意吉普使用其名称。事实上,他们明确地表达了不要使用其名称的意见,而吉普却拒绝接受这一要求。这一点便凸显了吉普并不在意切诺基民族有关其自身名称的意见。这种对黑人、原住民和有色人种(BIPOC)以及其他边缘化团体自我决断的漠视,是白人至上主义的作祟方式之一,只不过比较委婉罢了。
此外,由于美国原住民没有得到人性化、准确的宣传,因此仅将其文化和传承用作销售某种产品是一种不人道的剥削。试想一下,从未被提及或宣传的自己突然出现了某种商品之上。理解这一点并与之共情至关重要,然而,无法做到或者不愿意去做正是白人至上主义和不公平性滋生的沃土。
就像之前提到的那样,经过2020年的洗礼,更多美国白人表达了加入反对种族主义阵营的意愿,但真正的结盟要求的不仅仅是在推特(Twitter)发声并挂出标语“#黑人的命也是命”(#BlackLivesMatter)。它还需要心甘情愿的牺牲精神,其中最容易做到的一种牺牲就是放弃使用某种产品。那些寻求加入联盟的人应该拿起电话,或者登陆社交媒体,然后让吉普知道自己不会购买其产品,除非公司展现出付诸实际行动的意愿。
当吉普表示自己将继续使用切诺基名称时,人们能够对其施压,至少通过实际行动来表达对部落的敬意,而不是仅仅停留在口头声援。例如,吉普可以邀请切诺基民族协商建立长期合作伙伴关系,并询问自己能够为部落提供哪些帮助,继而以一种更负责任的方式来使用其名称。按照部落的反馈意见,吉普随后可以采取多种措施:例如制定教育计划、教授美国人有关切诺基的历史和传承、为青年切诺基学生设立奖学金,或者提供资源帮助社区应对持续的新冠疫情,尤其是原始部落和边缘化社区遭到疫情的冲击普遍更为严重。此举不仅符合道德,而且也将创建一种良好的公关形象,有利于吉普自身的业务。但在现实中,吉普的这种回复不仅体现了资本家的剥削,同时也代表了一种不良的商业行为。
社会变革的首要步骤之一就是让个人和机构意识到,在他们看来可能被称之为“小事”的事情,对于那些受到这类小事影响的人来说有着完全不同的感受。有鉴于机构的转变十分缓慢,因此我们就得靠个人来推动和鞭策这些机构进行改变。就吉普这件事情来说,这意味着人们得告诉吉普,忽视切诺基民族的要求就相当于让其保持沉默,但人们不会对此类事情熟视无睹。(财富中文网)
希娜·霍华德是莱德大学(Rider University)传播学教授,也是《瓦坎达的重要意义何在》一书的作者。
译者:冯丰
审校:夏林
One of the silver linings of 2020 was that a growing number of Americans had their eyes opened to the racial, cultural, and economic injustices that had always been present in this country but had finally reached a boiling point.
With this growing public recognition came a new willingness on the part of many to examine their own complicity, including some companies and brands that had previously used problematic names and imagery in their products or advertising. Examples include Quaker Oats, which recently decided to change the name of its Aunt Jemima brand and get rid of its caricature logo, or the Cleveland Indians, which last December announced they would do the same.
Within this context of heightened awareness and, for some, a racial reckoning, Jeep’s response to the Cherokee Nation’s wish that the company stop using the tribe’s name is particularly disappointing. The company’s assertion that its vehicle names “have been carefully chosen and nurtured over the years to honor and celebrate Native American people for their nobility, prowess, and pride” comes across as tone deaf and disingenuous, given its blatant lack of actions accompanying such words.
It’s important to understand how and why the use of names and associated imagery of brands such as Aunt Jemima, the Cleveland Indians, and Jeep Cherokee is harmful. Whether people are consciously aware of it or not, media images play a powerful role in the formation of self-identity. At the same time, these images also shape how others perceive us—particularly people of color.
For the dominant culture, who are already widely and positively represented in the media, this often works in their favor. However, for members of nondominant cultures, like Native Americans, who are sparsely represented, or predominantly represented through crude stereotypes or commodification (in this instance, the Jeep Cherokee), this not only has a negative impact on how they see themselves, but it also shapes how others perceive and treat them. This cycle exacerbates one’s likelihood of developing a negative or unhealthy self-image, a process I discuss in my book, Why Wakanda Matters: What Black Panther Reveals About Psychology, Identity, and Communication.
What is even less understood in our culture are the complex ways in which stereotypical words and imagery hurt not just marginalized cultures and communities, but the dominant culture as well. The scarcity of media representation, combined with simplistic or inaccurate representations, can lead to intercultural conflict and miscommunication, or “crash moments,” that create distress for all parties involved.
The fact of the matter is that media-influenced perception does determine how we interact with people of other groups at both the individual and collective levels. At the collective level this can lead to societal conditions that ultimately hurt everyone, not just those who are marginalized and oppressed. Institutional racism is real and pervasive.
Some may argue that while the backlash against Aunt Jemima is understandable, Jeep isn’t flaunting explicitly racist imagery in its product or advertising. “Cherokee” is just a name, and if the product itself is a good one, then where’s the harm in it? Isn’t this just cancel culture run amok?
First of all, this view doesn’t consider that the only true owners of the Cherokee name, the sovereign Cherokee Nation, have not given their consent to Jeep to use their name. In fact, they clearly expressed their desire that their name not be used, and Jeep has declined to honor this request. This signals that the opinions of the Cherokee Nation regarding their own name don’t matter. This lack of weight given to how BIPOC and other marginalized groups frame their own experience is one of the more subtle ways the insidious nature of white supremacy works.
Next, in the absence of humane and accurate representations of Native Americans, using their culture and heritage only to sell a product is dehumanizing and exploitative. Imagine if you never saw yourself reflected or represented anywhere except on a commercial product. Understanding and empathizing with this is crucial, because the inability or unwillingness to do so is the very engine that drives white supremacy and inequality.
As mentioned earlier, 2020 led to more white Americans expressing the desire to be allies against racism, but true allyship requires more than just tweeting hashtags and displaying #BlackLivesMatter signs. It requires a willingness to sacrifice, and one of the easiest forms of sacrifice is forgoing the use of a product. Those seeking to be allies should therefore pick up their phones or hop on social media and let Jeep know that they will not buy its products unless the company shows a willingness to go beyond empty gestures.
While Jeep has already indicated it will continue using the Cherokee name, people can pressure it to at least offer more than just lip service about honoring the tribe. Jeep could invite the Cherokee Nation to the table for an ongoing partnership, for instance, and ask what it could do to give back to the community and use its name in a more responsible way. Depending on the tribe’s feedback, Jeep could then take any number of possible actions: creating educational programs to teach Americans about Cherokee history and heritage, setting up scholarships for young Cherokee students, or offering resources to help the community fight the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, particularly given the pandemic’s disproportionate impact on native tribes and on marginalized communities in general. This would not only be the right thing to do from an ethical standpoint, it would also be good PR in a way that would serve Jeep’s own business interests. As it stands, the company’s response isn’t just capitalist exploitation; it’s also bad business.
One of the first major steps toward social change is for individuals and organizations alike to recognize that what might seem like small things to them are not experienced that way by the people who are affected by those “small things.” And since organizations are slower to change, it’s up to individuals to push and prod them toward that change. In this case, that means telling Jeep that ignoring the Cherokee Nation’s request amounts to silencing them, and that such silencing will not be passively accepted.
Sheena C. Howard is a professor of communication at Rider University and author-editor of Why Wakanda Matters.