Monday, October 26, 2020



'I have made mistakes': Vogue editor Anna Wintour apologizes as black staffers call for her to resign and reveal she used a racist word and dismissed concerns when Kendall Jenner and Karlie Kloss were accused of cultural appropriation

Vogue editor in chief Anna Wintour has apologized after black staffers called for her to resign and revealed she used a racist word and dismissed their concerns about cultural appropriation.

In a lengthy New York Times article published on Saturday, 18 black journalists who have worked with Wintour said Vogue favored employees who are thin, white and from elite backgrounds.

Eleven of them called for her resignation following offensive incidents involving Wintour's use of the word 'pickaninny', and cultural appropriation controversies involving Kendall Jenner's false gold teeth and Karlie Kloss's Vogue photo shoot as a Japanese geisha.

However, Naomi Campbell, one of the first black supermodels, who appeared on the cover of Wintour's first September issue in 1989, vehemently defended the editor.

And three other people of color told the Times that Condé Nast had made positive changes and that Wintour had promoted them to top roles.

Wintour recently split with her partner of 20 years, telecoms tycoon and entrepreneur Shelby Bryan, and is rumored to have grown close to actor Bill Nighy.

Wintour, who has been Vogue' editor in chief since 1988 and Condé Nast's artistic director since 2013, making her the editorial leader of all its titles, responded to the latest allegations in a statement to the Times: 'I strongly believe that the most important thing any of us can do in our work is to provide opportunities for those who may not have had access to them.'

'Undoubtedly, I have made mistakes along the way, and if any mistakes were made at Vogue under my watch, they are mine to own and remedy and I am committed to doing the work,' she added.

The Times article details a number of examples of alleged racism under Wintour's leadership.

In 2017, Wintour used an offensive racial term in an email as she raised questions about whether a photo shoot of black models wearing bonnets would itself be perceived as offensive.

'Don't mean to use an inappropriate word, but pica ninny came to mind,' Wintour wrote.

In a statement to the Times, Wintour said: 'I was trying both to express my concern for how our readers could have interpreted a photo and raise the issue for discussion, and I used a term that was offensive. And for that, I truly apologize.'

When Wintour asked a black assistant to weigh in on the photo shoot, the assistant said the image was not offensive, but expressed displeasure at being asked to render a verdict as a junior staff member, according to the Times.

In another 2017 incident, Kendall Jenner appeared at a London fashion week party wearing fake gold teeth, which a white Vogue writer described as 'a playful wink to the city's free-spirited aesthetic — or perhaps a proverbial kiss to her rumored boyfriend, A$AP Rocky.'

The Times reports that a black Vogue staffer expressed outrage, saying that the gold teeth were cultural appropriation.

A top lieutenant brought the issue to Wintour's attention, writing: 'If Kendall wants to do something stupid fine but our writers (especially white ones) don't need to weigh in and glorify it or ascribe reasons to it that read culturally insensitive.'

Wintour appeared dismissive of the cultural appropriation crisis, responding: 'Well I honestly don't think that's a big deal.'

Also in 2017, white model Karlie Kloss drew cultural appropriation accusations when she appeared in Vogue in a geisha outfit, with her face in pale makeup and her hair dyed black.

The photo shoot in Japan drew immediate accusations of 'yellowface'.

After internal cries of alarm over the feature, Wintour reportedly replied that it could not be cut because of its 'enormous expense.'

Kloss later apologized, tweeting: 'These images appropriate a culture that is not my own and I am truly sorry for participating in a shoot that was not culturally sensitive.'

That tweet reportedly angered Wintour, who received a personal message from Kloss saying 'I imagine the feeling is mutual, that it was hurtful to see the criticism from our Japan trip.

'I had written a short piece on social media as I wanted to make known that it was never my intention to offend or upset anyone from this spread.'

Wintour dryly replied: 'Thanks Karlie another time please give us a heads up if you are writing about a Vogue issue.'

Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner threaten to sue over billboards linking them to COVID-19 deaths

US President Donald Trump's daughter and son-in-law are threatening to sue a group of anti-Trump Republicans for posting billboard ads in New York City's Times Square linking them to the country's almost 225,000 coronavirus deaths.

The Lincoln Project says the billboards are there to stay
A lawyer representing Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, made the threat on Friday in a letter to the Lincoln Project, calling the ads "false, malicious and defamatory".

Marc Kasowitz, who is acting on behalf of the couple who are White House aides, also wrote the ads were "outrageous and shameful libel".

"If these billboard ads are not immediately removed, we will sue you for what will doubtless be enormous compensatory and punitive damages," Mr Kasowitz said in his letter.

One of the ads features a smiling Ms Trump gesturing towards text showing the number of coronavirus deaths in New York and nationwide.

The other is a photo of Mr Kushner next to a quote attributed to him last month by Vanity Fair magazine, citing an unidentified source: "(New Yorkers) are going to suffer and that's their problem."

"While we truly enjoy living rent-free in their heads, their empty threats will not be taken any more seriously than we take Jared and Ivanka," the group said.

The group, which includes former campaign consultants to president George W Bush and senator John McCain, is the most prominent Republican-led organisation opposing Mr Trump's re-election on November 3.

It has produced barrages of ads calling for his defeat, attacked pro-Trump Republican politicians and endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

The billboards have appeared during a week where the US President said his country was "rounding the corner" on COVID-19 despite new figures contradicting his view of the pandemic.

The US recorded 84,218 new COVID-19 cases on Friday eclipsing its one-day record high of 77,299 new cases on July 16.

A Stake Through the Heart of the Market System

Letter to a critic:

I urge skepticism of calls for government to compel corporations to attend to the welfare of so-called “stakeholders” at the expense of the welfare of shareholders. The quotation at my blog from Deirdre McCloskey and Alberto Mingardi nicely summarizes many reasons for such skepticism. I stand by that quotation and encourage you to consider it more carefully. But I here add one more reason – one built on the truth of your wise recognition that “corporate decisions impact communities and families outside of ownership.”

Given this truth, should government, then, compel individuals and households to attend to the welfare of “stakeholders” at the expense of the welfare of the individual and members of the household? After all, if you choose to shop at Safeway rather than at Kroger, your decision contributes to possible job losses at Kroger. In light of this fact, would it be wise to enable government to compel you to shop at Kroger despite that store’s higher prices or greater inconvenience?

Or if your parents are considering moving to another town, should government be able to override their decision – forcing them to remain where they are – because the sale of their current home will depress property values in their town and, thus, negatively affect their neighbors?

My point is that every economic decision has impacts far beyond the individual decision-maker. This reality isn’t confined to corporations; it’s true of each and every economic decision that you personally make, that each household makes, that each small business makes. And it’s fundamental to an economy built on specialization and trade. To ensure that as many as possible of these impacts are positive rather than negative, market economies rely upon private property and contract rights as well upon economic competition and market prices. (To better understand how these institutions promote positive impacts and lessen negative ones, I recommend a well-taught course in principles of economics.)

And so – “Stakeholder capitalism” is not, contrary to Elizabeth Warren’s claim, a means of saving or improving the market economy. It’s a frontal assault on it. By allowing government to suppress private property and contract rights, we’d move, not in the direction of what you call “a more humane capitalism” but, instead, in the direction of a more arbitrary and, hence, authoritarian means of dictating the use of resources, including labor. The end result would not be what you expect and hope.

National anthem non-protest decision by Australia's Rugby football team

Wallabies coach Dave Rennie has confirmed the national men’s rugby side will not take a knee in support of the Black Lives Matter movement before their Bledisloe Cup match against the All Blacks next weekend.

Sporting teams and organisations around the world have opted to show support for the BLM movement since the death of George Floyd by taking a knee.

On Thursday, Wallabies fullback Dane Haylett-Petty revealed the Australian squad were considering a silent protest during the national anthem before their Test match against New Zealand in Sydney on Sunday, October 31.

The Wallabies would become the first Australian national side to take a knee during a national anthem if they went ahead with the silent protest.

“I think it’s great,” Haylett-Petty said. “I think sport has an amazing opportunity to have a say and join conversations and a lot of sports have done that and it would be a great thing for us to do.”

It led ex-Wallabies captain Nick Farr-Jones to speak out against the idea.

“To take the risk of basically splitting the support the Wallabies are starting to earn through their gutsy performances in Wellington and Auckland – just don't do it guys, it's too risky,” he told 2GB radio. “You run the risk that a few (viewers) would just turn off. They don't want to see politics in national sport. That's a real risk. I think it could be divisive. I don't think here in Australia that we have a major issue in relation to discrimination of coloured people."

Which led to a response from former player Gary Ella. “That's just stupid talk. That obviously shows that Nick doesn't have a full appreciation of the history of Aboriginal people in this country,” Ella said. “If you're talking about reconciliation, we're talking about sharing and acknowledging the history that we’ve come past and are working towards a better future. Those type of comments are totally ignoring the history."

On Friday, Rennie told reporters the Australian squad came to a “unanimous decision” not to perform the silent protest.

“We met with the leaders and then the leaders met with the rest of the team and it’s a unanimous decision,’ Rennie said. “The key thing is, this is about honouring our indigenous people and we want the focus to be on that.

“Everyone’s got their own opinions around the other situation, but we want the focus to be on reflecting on our history and our past.

“All I’ve said is that our focus is around the First Nations People and the indigenous jersey. We’re not looking to make a political statement.”

***************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com TONGUE-TIED)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://john-ray.blogspot.com (FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

No comments: