Danny Baker

Barnezy

Isn’t everyone racist to an extent? We’re also all classist, ageist, sexist etc. It’s the world we’ve all been bought up in, making judgements of other people based on what we see externaly. The line in A Time to Kill sums it up perfectly "The fact is you are just like all the rest of them. When you look at me, you don't see a man, you see a black man.". 

Now I don’t think anyone can self proclaim themselves as not racist. Yes he might not be proactively racist, but he does have unconscious bias. What does exist is being conscious of your bias so you can challenge it and be aware how your words or actions might be percevied by others. If your a considerate person you will be able to manage this.

Clearly posting a picture of a monkey is offensive and everyone knows this. Baker must have decided to do this anyway, which goes to show the type of character he is. Basically an egotistical arrogant twat. 

Philly_Q

Bridgehouse said:

p90fool said:

I honestly don't think he's racist, but if I'd said something publicly which was meant as a performing monkey jibe and then realised I'd said it about someone who was mixed race I would've been horrified and deeply, deeply embarrassed and could not have apologised enough. 

Not Baker though, he's too smug, too important and too self-centred. So saying that him being a smirking, loathsome prick shouldn't be relevant to whether is fired or not, well I'm sorry, it IS relevant when it prevents a meaningful apology. 

Totally agree. My thoughts are only based on what I’ve read of his response - far too smug 

I agree, but having discussed this all day yesterday I watched a bit of the interview he did standing at his front door.  He looked a lot more uncomfortable than I expected, even a bit shaken. 

If it was a conscious decision to make the joke, disregarding the racial overtones and thinking he could rebuff the criticism, it certainly didn't pan out as he expected.

Bridgehouse

Barnezy said:

Isn’t everyone racist to an extent?

The thing is, whether we like it or not, we all have our own individual thoughts and opinions on everything. As a set of opinions, they will be unique. We are not only entitled to those thoughts and opinions but they are our business, and ours alone. 

It’s how we choose to share and articulate those thoughts that count. And the process we go through in analysing our own thoughts and opinions often dictates how we come across and how others perceive us. 

I could hold an opinion that nobody else agrees with. I’m quite within my rights to think that way. How I act on those thoughts is what counts. And those actions could be words, expressions, choices and decisions that impact others. 

We all have our own processes for how we translate our thoughts into the things we actually do. How much we care about ourselves and our own self-centredness versus how much we care about others and those around us or those we influence will have a bearing on how that internal process works and how much gets filtered out. 

It’s never one thing or another entirely though, there’s always degrees and nuances in everyone. 

In this case, it’s irrelevant whether Baker is racist or not in the way he thinks - What’s important is that his own internal process for vocalising what he wants to hasn’t stopped him from tweeting a picture which many will find deeply offensive. 

His own self centred attitude has prioritised his ability to get a clever quip over to make himself look smart or smug or whatever at the expense of considering the impact his tweet may have on many people. 

Given his passion for football and the racist issues therein, it’s something he will have seen and witnessed many many times - he will be well aware of how ingrained it has been in the past and how much effort has gone in to stamping it out - if that’s not had an effect on his internal processing of his own thoughts then he’s more self centred than I thought. And if it has had an effect but his process chooses to ignore the potential ramifications and prioritises his own self promotion then in my view that’s even more odious.

Bridgehouse

Philly_Q said:

Bridgehouse said:

p90fool said:

I honestly don't think he's racist, but if I'd said something publicly which was meant as a performing monkey jibe and then realised I'd said it about someone who was mixed race I would've been horrified and deeply, deeply embarrassed and could not have apologised enough. 

Not Baker though, he's too smug, too important and too self-centred. So saying that him being a smirking, loathsome prick shouldn't be relevant to whether is fired or not, well I'm sorry, it IS relevant when it prevents a meaningful apology. 

Totally agree. My thoughts are only based on what I’ve read of his response - far too smug 

I agree, but having discussed this all day yesterday I watched a bit of the interview he did standing at his front door.  He looked a lot more uncomfortable than I expected, even a bit shaken. 

If it was a conscious decision to make the joke, disregarding the racial overtones and thinking he could rebuff the criticism, it certainly didn't pan out as he expected.

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

cj73

Bridgehouse said:

Philly_Q said:

Bridgehouse said:

p90fool said:

I honestly don't think he's racist, but if I'd said something publicly which was meant as a performing monkey jibe and then realised I'd said it about someone who was mixed race I would've been horrified and deeply, deeply embarrassed and could not have apologised enough. 

Not Baker though, he's too smug, too important and too self-centred. So saying that him being a smirking, loathsome prick shouldn't be relevant to whether is fired or not, well I'm sorry, it IS relevant when it prevents a meaningful apology. 

Totally agree. My thoughts are only based on what I’ve read of his response - far too smug 

I agree, but having discussed this all day yesterday I watched a bit of the interview he did standing at his front door.  He looked a lot more uncomfortable than I expected, even a bit shaken. 

If it was a conscious decision to make the joke, disregarding the racial overtones and thinking he could rebuff the criticism, it certainly didn't pan out as he expected.

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

Two days ago I couldn't honestly tell you the last time Danny B crossed my radar........

Philly_Q

Bridgehouse said:

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

That I don't know.  He may genuinely regret causing offence, now that he's thought about it.  I don't think he'd reached that point yesterday, though.

As for his career, he may not be bothered too much about the BBC show, I doubt it's his main source of income.  But who knows how this will develop?  Some seem to "get away with it", headline news for a couple of days then it's pretty much forgotten.  Others are like Kevin Spacey - career stone dead overnight.

crunchman

Philly_Q said:

Bridgehouse said:

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

That I don't know.  He may genuinely regret causing offence, now that he's thought about it.  I don't think he'd reached that point yesterday, though.

As for his career, he may not be bothered too much about the BBC show, I doubt it's his main source of income.  But who knows how this will develop?  Some seem to "get away with it", headline news for a couple of days then it's pretty much forgotten.  Others are like Kevin Spacey - career stone dead overnight.

A comment on Twitter that can be construed as racist is not quite on the same level as what Kevin Spacey is alleged to have done.

Philly_Q

crunchman said:

Philly_Q said:

Bridgehouse said:

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

That I don't know.  He may genuinely regret causing offence, now that he's thought about it.  I don't think he'd reached that point yesterday, though.

As for his career, he may not be bothered too much about the BBC show, I doubt it's his main source of income.  But who knows how this will develop?  Some seem to "get away with it", headline news for a couple of days then it's pretty much forgotten.  Others are like Kevin Spacey - career stone dead overnight.

A comment on Twitter that can be construed as racist is not quite on the same level as what Kevin Spacey is alleged to have done.

I was thinking that as I posted, but I left the comment as it was, because in a funny sort of way every "crime" is given equal weight on social media, for the few hours or days that particular Twitterstorm lasts.  Cultural appropriation or dead-naming seem to be pretty much equivalent to alleged GBH or sexual assault in the hysteria they create.  And short of actual criminal charges, they can be equally damaging to celebrity careers.

(Spacey was too extreme an example, but his career was already fucked before the criminal charges started kicking in.)

boogieman

Philly_Q said:

Bridgehouse said:

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

That I don't know.  He may genuinely regret causing offence, now that he's thought about it.  I don't think he'd reached that point yesterday, though.

As for his career, he may not be bothered too much about the BBC show, I doubt it's his main source of income.  But who knows how this will develop?  Some seem to "get away with it", headline news for a couple of days then it's pretty much forgotten.  Others are like Kevin Spacey - career stone dead overnight.

I doubt the Beeb pay him very much. The damage will be that he’ll be largely unemployable now, certainly as a radio jock or guest on QI or HIGNY etc. 

PhilW1

Bridgehouse said:

Emp_Fab said:

@Heartfeltdawn I didn’t say most people here, I said “there are far too many people”.  It’s not delusional to come to hold that opinion when the evidence is here; multiple comments about how the poster dislikes him, focussing on ad-hominems and criticism of his radio show.  That’s not delusional - that’s fact!

As for those saying there is no way he didn’t know what he was doing, what is your answer to the question “Why did he do it then?”.

Total lack of judgement, and going on past history a desire to prioritise his own mouthpiece rather than actually considering the implications of the things he says.

Why do I think this? The nature of his response to it all - which is just yet more self serving self prioritising rhetoric

You've answered it far better than I could.
To me he's a bit of a smug git and has proven he's not as funny as he thinks he is and we're the cunts for not getting him.

roberty

A good perspective here: https://metro.co.uk/2019/05/09/racism-like-danny-bakers-tweet-is-usually-explained-away-im-glad-the-bbc-fired-him-9465905/

tony99

boogieman said:

Philly_Q said:

Bridgehouse said:

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

That I don't know.  He may genuinely regret causing offence, now that he's thought about it.  I don't think he'd reached that point yesterday, though.

As for his career, he may not be bothered too much about the BBC show, I doubt it's his main source of income.  But who knows how this will develop?  Some seem to "get away with it", headline news for a couple of days then it's pretty much forgotten.  Others are like Kevin Spacey - career stone dead overnight.

I doubt the Beeb pay him very much. The damage will be that he’ll be largely unemployable now, certainly as a radio jock or guest on QI or HIGNY etc. 

He could become an actual baker

that'd be using his loaf

could earn a good crust doing that, there's plenty of dough in it

Bridgehouse

PhilW1 said:

Bridgehouse said:

Emp_Fab said:

@Heartfeltdawn I didn’t say most people here, I said “there are far too many people”.  It’s not delusional to come to hold that opinion when the evidence is here; multiple comments about how the poster dislikes him, focussing on ad-hominems and criticism of his radio show.  That’s not delusional - that’s fact!

As for those saying there is no way he didn’t know what he was doing, what is your answer to the question “Why did he do it then?”.

Total lack of judgement, and going on past history a desire to prioritise his own mouthpiece rather than actually considering the implications of the things he says.

Why do I think this? The nature of his response to it all - which is just yet more self serving self prioritising rhetoric

You've answered it far better than I could.
To me he's a bit of a smug git and has proven he's not as funny as he thinks he is and we're the cunts for not getting him.

I re-read his explanation that he posted today following his crass dumbing down of it all yesterday. 

Thing is, even if he really genuinely means it now, and even if he really is sorry/mortified/ashamed etc. the response he gave yesterday has already done the damage. @ICBM called it - the response yesterday showed total lack of respect and judgement and highlighted the smug self centred indifference to how others feel. 

If he’d have posted today’s apology yesterday then we’d be having a different conversation. But he didn’t - and it all feels a bit too late tbh.

roberty

tony99 said:

boogieman said:

Philly_Q said:

Bridgehouse said:

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

That I don't know.  He may genuinely regret causing offence, now that he's thought about it.  I don't think he'd reached that point yesterday, though.

As for his career, he may not be bothered too much about the BBC show, I doubt it's his main source of income.  But who knows how this will develop?  Some seem to "get away with it", headline news for a couple of days then it's pretty much forgotten.  Others are like Kevin Spacey - career stone dead overnight.

I doubt the Beeb pay him very much. The damage will be that he’ll be largely unemployable now, certainly as a radio jock or guest on QI or HIGNY etc. 

He could become an actual baker

that'd be using his loaf

could earn a good crust doing that, there's plenty of dough in it

FFS

boogieman

tony99 said:

boogieman said:

Philly_Q said:

Bridgehouse said:

What’s shaken him more? The offence he’s caused or how much it’s damaged his reputation and career?

That I don't know.  He may genuinely regret causing offence, now that he's thought about it.  I don't think he'd reached that point yesterday, though.

As for his career, he may not be bothered too much about the BBC show, I doubt it's his main source of income.  But who knows how this will develop?  Some seem to "get away with it", headline news for a couple of days then it's pretty much forgotten.  Others are like Kevin Spacey - career stone dead overnight.

I doubt the Beeb pay him very much. The damage will be that he’ll be largely unemployable now, certainly as a radio jock or guest on QI or HIGNY etc. 

He could become an actual baker

that'd be using his loaf

could earn a good crust doing that, there's plenty of dough in it

Coat. NOW!! 

  

Bridgehouse

roberty said:

A good perspective here: https://metro.co.uk/2019/05/09/racism-like-danny-bakers-tweet-is-usually-explained-away-im-glad-the-bbc-fired-him-9465905/

Agreed. 

For me, there’s a big difference between expressing outrage and offence and actually rationally explaining why you think something is wrong. 

This is well written, well argued and does a good job of putting a point of view across with some decent evidence rather than just screaming offence. 

Similarly, as a white male, the tweet didn’t offend me. Nor was I outraged or upset by it. Doesn’t mean I can’t have an opinion on it - and it doesn’t mean I can’t have empathy with the views that others express.

Heartfeltdawn

Barnezy said:

Isn’t everyone racist to an extent? We’re also all classist, ageist, sexist etc. It’s the world we’ve all been bought up in, making judgements of other people based on what we see externaly. The line in A Time to Kill sums it up perfectly "The fact is you are just like all the rest of them. When you look at me, you don't see a man, you see a black man.". 

Now I don’t think anyone can self proclaim themselves as not racist. Yes he might not be proactively racist, but he does have unconscious bias. What does exist is being conscious of your bias so you can challenge it and be aware how your words or actions might be percevied by others. If your a considerate person you will be able to manage this.

Clearly posting a picture of a monkey is offensive and everyone knows this. Baker must have decided to do this anyway, which goes to show the type of character he is. Basically an egotistical arrogant twat. 

'Racist' is as defined here:

"a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another."

You believe that nobody can self proclaim themselves as not racist. Unconscious bias can lead a person toward making racism statements and then it is either down to the individual  to become conscious of the contentious nature of the statements either by their own discovery or through the intervention of others. 

If people are unable to self-determine that they are not a racist, how would that apply to self-determinism and gender? If a claim to be non-racist has to be judged by people external to the individual, then does a self-proclamation about also have to be judged accordingly? 

*yes this has fuck all to do with Danny Baker

Strat_a_tat_tat

tony99 said:

amarok1971 said:

i rather believe he threw himself under a bus, the pillock

Not literally though.

May I refer my honourable friend to the Oxford English Dictionary.

Bridgehouse

Heartfeltdawn said:

Barnezy said:

Isn’t everyone racist to an extent? We’re also all classist, ageist, sexist etc. It’s the world we’ve all been bought up in, making judgements of other people based on what we see externaly. The line in A Time to Kill sums it up perfectly "The fact is you are just like all the rest of them. When you look at me, you don't see a man, you see a black man.". 

Now I don’t think anyone can self proclaim themselves as not racist. Yes he might not be proactively racist, but he does have unconscious bias. What does exist is being conscious of your bias so you can challenge it and be aware how your words or actions might be percevied by others. If your a considerate person you will be able to manage this.

Clearly posting a picture of a monkey is offensive and everyone knows this. Baker must have decided to do this anyway, which goes to show the type of character he is. Basically an egotistical arrogant twat. 

'Racist' is as defined here:

"a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another."

You believe that nobody can self proclaim themselves as not racist. Unconscious bias can lead a person toward making racism statements and then it is either down to the individual  to become conscious of the contentious nature of the statements either by their own discovery or through the intervention of others. 

If people are unable to self-determine that they are not a racist, how would that apply to self-determinism and gender? If a claim to be non-racist has to be judged by people external to the individual, then does a self-proclamation about also have to be judged accordingly? 

*yes this has fuck all to do with Danny Baker

Interesting definition. 

By it’s very nature it makes self determination and 3rd party determination both necessary and impossible. 

“Who shows” - means it can only be judged by others

”who feels” - means it can only be judged by the self 

Bit of a catch 22 that one - someone is shown by others to have exhibited racist statements or actions, perhaps through a blunder or lack of judgement (familiar, no?) cannot be determined by others in how they feel about the issue. 

Similarly, someone who feels discrimination but never shows it can only self determine, but authentication can only come with showing such feeling

proggy

I think it's disgusting of Danny Baker to compare a member of our Royal family to a performing monkey.

That little monkey has a job.