Yes, Paula Deen.
... or more specifically, her apologists.
Let's use some logic, people!
We all know what Paula Deen said was wrong... right?... we're in agreement on that much? Okay, good. I'm all for free speech - and if Paula Deen was the head of the KKK, I personally wouldn't care - but the people focusing on the repercussions she's facing are focusing on the wrong thing. The issue here is not speech, or the N-word - it's celebrity.
If Paula Deen had never gotten famous, it wouldn't matter what she said. But she is famous (so let's not have too much pity on her - after all, she's a millionaire many times over), and as such needs to come to terms with the ugly side of fame. The more famous you are, the less privacy you have. You can debate the fairness of that all you want, but them's the breaks, my friend.
When famous people foul up, they face the court of public opinion. Paula didn't break any laws - it's not like she's facing legal consequence - so anything happening to her right now is essentially the will of the people. Again, maybe it's unfair, but that's the way it is. Look at Tom Cruise - after his "couch-jumping" incident, his box office performance took a noticeable hit (look at everything after 2005)... or Ben Affleck - he faced backlash simply because he was dating Jennifer Lopez, and it's only within the last few years that he's finally gotten away from those ill effects.
So, let's turn away from Paula and take a look at the apologists...
The argument here is that the "punishment doesn't fit the crime," essentially. So far as we know, this was an isolated incident decades ago, so why should that affect anything right now? Well, don't mean to be rude, but when it happened is irrelevant. It happened, people found out about it, and they raised a stink. Like I said, all she's facing right now is public backlash - if the people feel it's appropriate, she'll completely lose her celebrity, and we'll never hear from her again... if the people feel she's had enough, they'll slowly let her back in. That simple.
Does this make sense? Yes, we've all said things we shouldn't have said; we've all done things we regret. That's not the point. She's famous. These things happen to famous people. The smartest thing Paula could do right now is simply take some time off and let the fires die down.
PS... Also, this is a little something leveled specifically at those attacking Wal-Mart/Target... To recap: the argument here is that if Wal-Mart/Target are going to drop their sponsorship of Paula Deen over this incident, then they should stop selling rap CDs which may contain use of the N-word, or other degrading lyrics... This is really stupid, and it makes no sense.
Logic!
What's the difference between corporate sponsorship of a celebrity and selling a product? The sponsorship! When you sell a product, that's all you do - you sell it. When you sponsor a product, you're endorsing it. That's why they dropped her: they didn't want to endorse a racist... This is why Wal-Mart/Target are not in the business of endorsing controversial artists, though they will sell their products as appropriate. See the difference? It applies even to non-controversial items: how can Wal-Mart/Target sell Coke and Pepsi? Because they don't endorse either one - they simply offer it, and the consumer makes the choice.
This is the marketplace of ideas in a microcosm.
The other thing that bugs me about this argument? It takes power away from the consumer, which completely goes against our capitalist system. Products are out there, you buy them or ignore them - it's your decision. So if Wal-Mart/Target actually were targeting Deen for some reason and were involved in a concerted effort to bring her down, use your power as the consumer! These places wouldn't exist with you! You are the consumer, you decide what sells and what doesn't! So if it bothers you that much, put your money where your mouth is - boycott! Show them who's boss, and they'll learn their lesson.
No comments:
Post a Comment