The #CancelColbert Kerfuffle: Why Suey Park Got It Wrong

By Guest Writer | Monday, March 31, 2014 | 15 Comments

Thanks for visiting 8Asians, a blog about Asian American issues. If you find this interesting, subscribe to the RSS feed, visit our Facebook Page or add us on Twitter!

8Asians screenshot Colbert 600x339 The #CancelColbert Kerfuffle: Why Suey Park Got It Wrong

By Greg Watanabe

Regarding the #cancelColbert kerfuffle.

So, there’s two things:

The first being the sketch itself, which is about the Washington Redskins’ owner creating the “Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation” to mitigate the pr damage from having such a fucked up name. In the segment Colbert uses the following joke:

“Folks, this move by Dan Snyder inspires me, because my show has frequently come under attack for having a so-called offensive mascot, my beloved character Ching Chong Ding Dong….Offensive or not — NOT — Ching Chong is part of the unique heritage of the Colbert Nation that cannot change. But I’m willing to show the Asian community that I care by introducing the Ching Chong Ding Dong Foundation for Sensitive to Orientals or Whatever….I owe all this sensitivity to Redskins owner Dan Snyder. So Asians, send your thank-you letters to him, not me.”

So, this is awesome satire to me. It’s a clear send up of Dan Snyder and his “Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation”.

The second thing is Comedy Central (apparently separate from Colbert and his writing staff) tweeting out part of that segment via the Colbert Report Twitter account:

“I am willing to show #Asian community I care by introducing the Ching-Chong Ding-Dong Foundation for Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever.”

I understand how it could be interpreted to be fucked up and racist if you didn’t know the context of the rest of the joke.

I think it’s good that Comedy Central took it down.

So, they took it down because Suey Park of #NotYourAsianSidekick fame weighed in and created #CancelColbert, which basically accuses Colbert of anti-asian racism and calls for twitter followers to “trend” the hashtag and call for cancellation.

It gets crazy from here. But before going forward, I’ll say this: The accusations of the racism of this bit, and therefore of Colbert, are totally off the mark. The tweet was inexpert and ill-advised and it was good that it was taken down, but seeing that it was clearly derived from the complete segment, it was not racist.

I’d leave it at that, but accusing a celebrity of racism means controversy and backlash. If Suey Park was right, I’d totally be with her, especially in the onslaught of racist and misogynist backlash on Twitter (which, honestly, is constantly awash in racism and misogyny).

But, she’s not right, not in this case. And I feel like there’s a conversation to be had on why I think that and an explanation of why she and others think it is true.

But here’s what’s frustrating to me: it seems like the negative backlash is given as a reason why she’s right. For sure, racism and misogyny abound, and all the fucked up shit directed at Suey Park is a flagrant example of that, but that isn’t proof that her original accusation is well-founded or true.

The same can be said for some of the arguments brought up in defense of Colbert and the joke (again, from the wisdom of the internets): the fact that those arguments are false is not proof that you’re right.

Yes, over simplified arguments of, “it’s just a joke, get over it, and you don’t get it” are lame and often used to defend actual fucked up, racist shit. But that isn’t proof that you’re right.

Then I read this on a Time editorial on the web, by Suey Park:

Andy Smith on Twitter argued: “Folks seem to think that you can effectively address anti-Native American racism by satirically engaging in anti-Asian or anti-Black racism.” Such an approach presumes anti-Native American racism isn’t distinct and that it doesn’t need to be addressed on its own terms.

There are a couple of different things I find problematic with this. One, I think that one can make a point about anti-Native American racism using an example of anti-Asian racism. It’s not the entirety of the argument, not the fundamental crux of the argument of why anti-Native American racism is fucked up, but a point can be made.

And two, I don’t think that making a satirical analogy presumes that anti-Native American racism isn’t distinct or needs to be addressed on it’s own terms. If I only discussed anti-Native American racism in terms of anti-Asian racism and only gauged anti-Native American racism based on the importance and relevance of anti-Asian racism, then I could see that point being made. But that is a far cry from Colbert and his joke.

I’m frustrated by the call for righteous indignation and mobilization in a misguided cause. It’s especially maddening to me when there seems to be a whiff of, “if you’re not for us, you’re against us.”

I’m also frustrated that such a misguided and incorrect assessment of a joke involving API’s has been given so much attention. The majority of folks I’ve talked with or whose commentary I’ve read have not been in alignment with with her accusation of racism and it pains me that this particular opinion is sucking up so much air.

As I look at the joke and try and understand the argument that it’s racist…and I just can’t see it. The joke is clear as a bell.

Colbert has a beloved character called “Ching Chong Ding Dong” which is totally offensive, just like the totally fucked up, ridiculously racist name the Washington “Redskins”. Colbert says his mascot, “Offensive or not — NOT — Ching Chong is part of the unique heritage of the Colbert Nation that cannot change,” which is a direct reference to the argument from Snyder for not being willing to change the name because of the “unique heritage” of the organization and his refusal to acknowledge that the name of his team is a denigrating, racist slur.

Then he says, “But I’m willing to show the Asian community that I care by introducing the Ching Chong Ding Dong Foundation for Sensitive to Orientals or Whatever…” which directly references what Snyder is doing with the creation of his ridiculously named foundation, “The Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation”. This is why Colbert’s (joke) organization is called “the Ching Chong Ding Dong Foundation for the Senstive to Orientals or Whatever…” because it’s ridiculous to have the racist term Redskins or Oriental or Ching Chong Ding Dong in the name of a foundation that’s supposed to benefit Indigenous peoples or Asian Pacific Islander Native Hawaiian South Asians.

And then he says, “I owe all this sensitivity to Redskins owner Dan Snyder. So Asians, send your thank-you letters to him, not me,” which is another dig at Snyder, mocking the idea that Indigenous people should be grateful to him and his foundation, and that Asians are being treated this way because Colbert is directly emulating the behavior and logic of Dan Snyder and the Washington Redskins organization.

And there were other jokes as well, this is just the joke in dispute.

If Colbert does something racist, then I think it’s worth trying to appeal to him and engage in a dialogue or conversation, and I would be supportive of that effort. I just think the accusation in this case is false and needlessly inflammatory.

I hope people unfamiliar with the issue or this person’s campaign consider an alternate, more well reasoned perspective that hews closer to that of most APIA’s I respect and am familiar with.

As Mike Nailat alluded to in a Facebook status: if Michelle Malkin is in your corner, it’s time to reassess your position.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: I’m an actor based in L.A., born and raised in So Cal, schooled and seasoned in No Cal. One of the 18 Mighty Mountain Warriors, an Asian American theatrical sketch comedy troupe.

Categories:

ComedyCurrent EventsEntertainmentObservations

NOTE: 8Asians.com is a community, and we thank you for being a part of it. While we welcome and appreciate differences in opinion, if you're rude or you're promoting spam, we have a right to edit or delete your comment. Read our comment policy for more information.

If you see a comment that violates the 8Asians.com comment policy, you may flag the comment by mousing over the comment and clicking "FLAG."

Facebook Comments (Beta)

15 Comments to “The #CancelColbert Kerfuffle: Why Suey Park Got It Wrong”

Kim Pham wrote:

That joke was pretty racist though, but not enough for canceling the show. Also it was pretty lame and I didn’t like the execution. You did a great job breaking up the joke into parts that I could understand more easily (I seriously am bad at sarcasm).

People reacted strongly to it because it hit a nerve, which it was meant to do! Like the joke’s “foundation” is supposed to erase years of bullying and discrimination in your childhood with derogative names based on your ethnicity. OH WAIT, like the Redskins trying to make a foundation based on white guilt while keeping the racist team name, like that would erase years of ethnical cleansing & forced cultural assimilation ever since Europeans arrived!!!! :DDDDD Yeah, basically this Redskins thing is pretty fucked up. It doesn’t mean that combating a racist thing with mediocre PC bullshit while not doing a real action about the main issue. Like you can’t just rebrand your whole team?! Like sports teams don’t do that when they update their team logo after many years. For example, Marquette University (my school fyi) has gone thru various names throughout the years: Warriors, Blue and Gold, Gold, Hilltoppers until finally settling on Golden Eagles.

I was reading Time magazine and Key & Peele wrote an editorial where they’re like making the joke about anyone makes sure they’re not marginalized and forgotten in popular culture compared to tiptoeing around the topic and being politically correct 100% of the time. Make the joke and make sure your audience is laughing with you about the topic, not AT the topic. http://time.com/22993/key-and-peele-make-fun-of-everything/

Posted on 31-Mar-14 at 7:29 pm | Permalink
NoFactsZone wrote:

I totally agree with the idea that by considering the quote within the context of the show’s segment and the character that Stephen Colbert plays, the charge of anti-Asian racism seems spurious. But what is most frustrating to me is that our Asian American experiences always seem to be in “suspended belief” when it comes to how others think we ought to feel. This becomes all the more maddening when only one pitch of our voices grabs attention to show our “over-sensitivity”, and in case of Suey Park, how “irrational” and “out of line” we are. It just seems like everyone is engaging in some form of racism calculus. As for community solidarity, I think mutual respect is also key, even if we do not agree on methods.

Posted on 31-Mar-14 at 8:23 pm | Permalink
Weird Al Yankovic wrote:

I agree with Greg. Pretty much what I said on my comments in the other article. Think about a much more PC version of “All in the Family”. People with common sense will know that the show is portraying Archie as a backwards thinking idiot.

Did anyone catch Colbert’s response to this controversy? He explained how his humor works, that he’s done this same type of humor to highlight issues with other groups, asked people to stop bashing Suey Park, and explained that the twitter that posted the out-of-context comment wasn’t even his (it was Comedy Central’s). I thought the funniest part was when he brought his Asian intern “Ja-Meis” (whose real name is James but since his character is racist he can’t grasp that an Asian-American would have an American name) in. He’d been promoted to the head of the “Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever” organization but because of the controversy Stephen had to shut it down and “Ja Meis” was brought back down to an intern.

I also thought it was funny when he pointed out that Michelle Malkin was one of people on-board with CancelColbert…the same person who wrote a book on why the WW2 Asian internment camps were justified.

I am a bit concerned about what kind of reaction this is getting. This seemed to turn into a “You’re too sensitive” or “Don’t take my freedom of speech away” event. Even the cheers from Colbert’s audience had a ” ‘Murica FUCK YEAH!” tone to it, as if CancelColbert was a personal attack on America’s freedom of speech. I can understand where Park and the other activists were coming from, particularly with the tweets. What’s gonna happen next time? Are more people going to point out this event and dismiss our future protests as us being too sensitive again?

Posted on 01-Apr-14 at 1:02 pm | Permalink
Daechoong Mama wrote:

Great article. I appreciate the well thought-out-ness =) For me I thought the same thing but watching the bit he did and seeing the many offensive comments. I can’t help but be affected by it all. Here is my take:

http://www.daechoongmama.com/daechoongmamacom/2014/3/30/an-asian-americans-thoughts-on-cancelcolbert-and-suey-parks-hashtag-war

Posted on 01-Apr-14 at 7:38 pm | Permalink
Livingston Frost wrote:

Good points, thanks. Issues that are inflaming the backlash against Suey Park:

1. She and her supporters continue to invoke “white entitlement” and “white man privilege” as a blanket term to refer to anyone who doesn’t agree with her. Many white people are not all white; many white people are poor, disabled or otherwise marginalized. Most importantly – all white people do not think, act or believe as some sort of faceless demographic any more than all Asian-American or Black-Americans do. To paint all her detractors with this broad brush reeks of the same stereotyping that she accuses others of.

2. “Humor” is highly subjective, but most comics throughout history have thrived on blue comedy and pointed jokes at the expense of others. Most comedians take a scorched-earth approach to humor – attacking all races and sexes equally – which usually gets them off the hook against accusations of hate, racism or sexism. At face value many comics do in fact cross lines, and comedy clubs are one of the last places to speak cringe-worthy topics aloud. Often comedians use our discomfort to make larger social points. But Park sees no humor in ANY of this. By her definitions of racism and hate, she would cancel the careers of 90% of all comedians.

3. By choosing to attack Colbert (of all people) she seems to have unwittingly attacked a show that shares most of her values. His audience in most cases would be aligned with her beliefs. Of all the worthwhile valid attacks she chose to use friendly fire, and the backlash is by people who would rather see their battles fought effectively by Colbert than in the off-putting manner of Park.

In short, there is a very very wide line between legal and ethical hate actions and those that merely “offend.” Anybody who watches Colbert knows the difference, where Park seems to see no distinctions anywhere. And as someone else once said – “just because you feel offended does not mean that you are necessarily right.”

There are many political/social issues today in which personal morality divides us but to stifle free speech and (yes) humor with a silly teen-aged hashtag attack not only undermines the dialogue, but insures the blowback that she is now experiencing.

Posted on 02-Apr-14 at 1:10 am | Permalink
James Cagney wrote:

Good points, Frosty

Posted on 02-Apr-14 at 3:59 pm | Permalink
Colin128 wrote:

All of you are missing the point of the complaints. The discourse here is that Asian-Americans are so frequently the target of this kind of passive-aggressive satire. If Colbert had put on blackface and spoke in ebonics, he would have been fired, and the idiots at Deadspin definitely would not have written an article titled, “N***ers don’t get Redskins joke.” The problem with Colbert here is that he cowardly chose to mock a powerless group like Asians instead a powerful group likes blacks, Jews, or gays, because he thought he could do with impunity. The irony is that Asian-Americans are the minority group most similar to Native Americans in terms of political power and are also similarly subject to public mockery.

Posted on 02-Apr-14 at 6:12 pm | Permalink
PoorRighteousTeacher wrote:

Do you watch Colbert Report?

Posted on 02-Apr-14 at 7:15 pm | Permalink
Good Things Thursday! | fairyprincessdiaries wrote:

[…] the issues of the last two weeks, behind Jeff Yang, Phil Yu, Kristina Wong, Calpernia Addams , and Greg Watanabe and the positions they have […]

Posted on 03-Apr-14 at 12:13 pm | Permalink
Fracist wrote:

We’re always defending white people. I know she’s wrong but hey we still have to stick together anyway. We don’t have enough PUBLIC voices/activists out there attacking racism against Asian Americans. If we continue to bash her too like what the whites are already doing, we are back to square one.

Posted on 04-Apr-14 at 6:41 am | Permalink
Why The Stephen Colbert Thing Isn’t a Big Issue | Asian-American Man wrote:

[…] Earlier this week I heard about the whole dust-up regarding Stephen Colbert’s alleged racist tweets about the Asian community. Yes, the tweet by the Colbert camp that triggered this whole thing did look really bad–when taken out of context. After seeing everything in its original context, I discovered that yes, this was really meant as a satire, and that the whole controversy and #CancelColbert protest was a big broo-ha-ha over nothing. I was going to write a piece about it but then I found one on 8asians.com by a Mr. Greg Watanabe that already explains things better than I could. Check it out here: http://www.8asians.com/2014/03/31/the-cancelcolbert-kerfluffle-why-suey-park-got-it-wrong/ […]

Posted on 05-Apr-14 at 6:30 pm | Permalink
Colbert Responds to #CancelCobert, as does a Surprising Other Person | Comedy | 8Asians.com | An Asian American collaborative blog wrote:

[…] we presented opinions both pro and con on #CancelColbert. The Nerdist has shared Stephen Colbert response, and the first part of his […]

Posted on 09-Apr-14 at 9:37 pm | Permalink
Tim Holland wrote:

If you, as an individual, “know she’s wrong” why would you feel any obligation to defend her position? You can defend her right to an opinion without agreeing with her or jumping on the “us vs them” bandwagon.

There’s a difference between being offended by something “as an Asian American” and being offended by something because you’re an individual who is an Asian American. If someone honestly thinks Ms Park is not picking her battles wisely, how is that “defending white people”, especially when it’s that someone’s personal opinion.

That being said, Ms Park has brought up some interesting things about “not-white” (Caucasian minority classes that identify themselves as not enjoying all the privileges of being white, theoretically exempting them from “white guilt”) vs POC. The African American community weren’t concerned about Zimmerman being “Hispanic”, they correctly identified him as being just another shade of “white”. I can agree with her on what she identifies as a problem without agreeing with her on a solution.

Posted on 24-May-14 at 9:06 am | Permalink
Fracist wrote:

Come on it’s not that serious. I defend her because even though she was wrong, her being attacked should not have happened. Many of Colbert’s followers were EXTREMELY racist using words like Chop Suey. Many kept saying over and over that they thought Asians were different (whatever that means). As well as throwing death threats at her. So I would rather back her than his supporters. It was basically Suey vs his supporters. I am curious how effective Colbert’s satire on race is because most of his views/followers seem extremely racist. Anyway, I still don’t like the fact Colbert used those exact words satire or not. He should have used a different word.

And whether you understand what I am saying or not, if we have to get our voice out there starting with Suey that is fine by me.

Posted on 25-May-14 at 1:32 pm | Permalink
Tim Holland wrote:

Honestly, I don’t think she’s that wrong. I think she’s intentionally abrasive, and that tends to overshadow her message. But, she makes a point that the media will give a pass to offensive material directed at Asians that you would never hear about American Hispanics, Arab-Americans and other ethnic white minorities.

I get the impression that Suey is trying to stir up things. Her #YesAllWhiteWomen is a brilliant response to the white exclusive 2nd wave feminism that’s reared it’s ugly head the past decade or so.

If Suey does it right, she could become the new Michael Moore. You can hate her and still agree that she’s not wrong.

Posted on 29-May-14 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

8 Asians