Do you accept the Onion's apology?
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By Alissa_Sal
  • 1 Post By Jessica80
  • 1 Post By Spacers
  • 1 Post By Spacers

Thread: Do you accept the Onion's apology?

  1. #1
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default Do you accept the Onion's apology?

    The satirical weekly has spoofed mass shootings and pedophiles. So why say sorry for calling a 9-year-old actress the c-word? David Freedlander on the Onion?s about-face.

    Callers to The Onion?s office in Chicago are greeted with the usual automated rundown?Press 1 for an automated phone directory, 5 for accounts payable, 7 for technical problems, etc.?except that at the end of the message, the calm, deadpan voice on the answering service says, ?For content concerns, please refer to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. For content correction, please note that we do not make mistakes.?

    A pedestrian walks by an Onion news rack May 5, 2009 in San Francisco, California. (Justin Sullivan/Getty)
    Callers are then given an email address to contact ?if you feel like ranting.?

    But today the Onion acknowledged that, contra company policy, they did make a mistake, a big one, when the satirical news weekly called Quvenzhan? Wallis, the 9-year-old star of the movie Beasts of the Southern Wild a ?****? in a tweet.

    The tweet brought a storm of outrage and was quickly deleted. Today, the much loved newspaper published an apology on its Facebook page.

    ?I offer my personal apology to Quvenzhan? Wallis and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for the tweet that was circulated last night during the Oscars. It was crude and offensive?not to mention inconsistent with The Onion?s commitment to parody and satire, however biting,? wrote Onion CEO Steve Hannah. ?No person should be subjected to such a senseless, humorless comment masquerading as satire.?

    But the incident brought a torrent of opprobrium online and overshadowed much of the day after Oscar coverage which otherwise would be devoted to Seth McFarlane?s middling hosting performance and the surprising showing of the Ben Affleck film Argo.

    Hannah went on to say that the site was taking immediate steps to ?discipline those individuals responsible? although he declined to say who or how. An email message to Hannah was not returned, nor was one to Onion editor Will Tracy. A phone operator at the newspaper?s Chicago offices said ?Unfortunately we can?t?there is no real direct line to them right now,? when asked to be put through to either Tracy or Hannah.

    But left unsaid in the controversy was what the exact line was that The Onion believed they had crossed. It was not the C-word itself, since the site has used it dozens of times over the years, from a story titled ?Foster Mom A ****? to ?New Congressional Bill Actually Just A List Of Reasons Why Joe Lieberman Is A Stupid ****ing ****? to ?Replacement Socialite **** Sought For Simple Life Cast.? Was it that the insult was directed at child, including one who was among the feel-good stories of otherwise dismal season?

    If so, then The Onion will have to start scrubbing its website further, beginning with the op-ed by Penn State serial child molester entitled, ?They Can Never Take Away My Memories,? and a satiric service-y piece titled, ?How To Protect Your Children On Halloween, A.K.A. The Pedophiles' Christmas.?

    This is not the first time the satirical news site has gotten into trouble over its Twitter account. In 2011 the site posted an article spoofing the increasing number of up-to-the-deadline crises Congress and the White House had been engaged in with the headline, ?Congress Takes Group Of Schoolchildren Hostage,? featuring a doctored photo of House Speaker John Boehner holding a pistol to a little girl's head. The site promoted the article by live-tweeting the hostage showdown, including posts like ?Two chaperones are also being held, one of whom is said to be pregnant #CongressHostage,? and ?Obama: ?I know this Congress well. Trust me, they will kill these kids.? #CongressHostage.?

    The article forced the Capitol Police to respond that the tweets were meant as merely as joke.

    The latest c-word controversy comes as The Onion has been particularly sharp in its political and cultural coverage. It has even been able to make the spate of recent mass shootings funny without going over the line, as when the site published an article about people from around the country pouring into the streets in celebration to mark a full week without such an outbreak of violence. After there was a much publicized shooting at the Empire State Building, The Onion updated its story: ?Federal officials have reportedly just informed celebrating Americans that a mass shooting did in fact just happen in front of the Empire State Building, and that citizens should stop chanting and cheering now. ?Oh,? Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said, looking at what appeared to be a news alert on her cell phone. ?You know what, forget it. There was another one about 20 blocks from here. So, party?s over. Sorry.? Napolitano then urged the visibly saddened Americans to be careful, get back home as soon as possible, lock all their doors, and never leave their homes unless it is absolutely essential.?

    Also left unclear is where The Onion will go from here. As of today, the apology is taking up a coveted slot high on its webpage, apparently the first time The Onion has ever done such a thing. The letter is next to another post about Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow stunning the Oscar night?s red carpet by wearing ?the blood-soaked rags Osama bin Laden was killed in,? and another about a somber moment at last night?s ceremony when the coffins of dead film industry stalwarts were wheeled into to the Oscar ceremony during the ?In Memoriam? portion of the show.

    A representative for Wallis declined to comment.



    I was shocked to see the vitriol in response to a link to this article on Facebook. Is the Onion's apology sufficient? Would you continue to read their material? Do you think that the whole thing (the original tweet) is no big deal as they deal in satire and it wasn't meant meanly?

    What say you?

  2. #2
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default

    I think it was in (really) poor taste to call a child the worst word I know. Having said that, for me anyway, the apology and taking it down is enough. They're a satirical site/paper/whatever that routinely joke about stuff that many would normally call "off limits" and I admit that I enjoy their content when I think to read it. I think they probably took it too far for my tastes this time, but I'm also willing to let it go after an apology.
    smsturner likes this.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  3. #3
    Prolific Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,219

    Default

    I like their site too and I think the apology is enough.

    I think the difference with this vs. their other articles was that it picked on a specific child and not just "children" in general as most of the other articles referenced were about and calling her a terrible name. It was just the combo of the two that was not cool in my book.

    But, I'll still read it and I'm glad they addressed it as they did.
    smsturner likes this.

  4. #4
    Posting Addict KimPossible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    20,195

    Default

    I don't know of any company that has ever been lucky enough to not have employees make bad mistakes or do something unacceptable. You can try very hard to build up your company with the best people, but the chances of you getting it perfect? Slim to none.

    In a business like the Onion...a bad mistake will mean bad publicity, that is just the nature of the industry.

    I think a public apology and a promise to discipline the individuals responsible makes perfect sense. The higher ups may not have the ability to micro manage every decision that is made, but they can certainly take action when they know somethings gone wrong. Thats what they did, and I'm satisfied with it.

  5. #5
    Posting Addict Spacers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    My avatar is the tai chi -- a symbol of the eternal cycle of life
    Posts
    16,525

    Default

    I'm satisfied with the apology but I actually wasn't upset by it at all. Part of why it was so funny was *because* it was directed at a child. It was directed at a child who shouldn't be on Twitter to see it in the first place, and who can be sheltered from it by her handlers and/or parents. And she might even get the joke if it's explained to her by someone who knows her personally and can filter the story with the right spin for her age & maturity level. She was *the* perfect foil IMHO, because someone a bit older might be on Twitter and see it unfiltered and with no emotional support right then & there, and that IMHO would be horrible.
    smsturner likes this.
    The number of U.S. states in which a person can marry the person they love regardless of gender: 30 and counting!

  6. #6
    Posting Addict smsturner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Hamilton, NY
    Posts
    5,863

    Default

    It was good to apologize, that should be plenty.
    The onion is supposed to be ridiculous. I love the site
    Susan, dh Tom, dd Megan, ds Marcus, ds #2 coming Feb, 2014

    Lilypie Maternity tickers

    I never knew until that moment how badly it could hurt to lose something you never really had. - Missed Miscarriage at 10 weeks - 3/26

  7. #7
    Posting Addict Spacers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    My avatar is the tai chi -- a symbol of the eternal cycle of life
    Posts
    16,525

    Default

    I have nothing else to add to this thread but I just noticed Susan's new signature! Congrats!!! I'm so super excited for you!!!!
    AlyssaEimers likes this.
    The number of U.S. states in which a person can marry the person they love regardless of gender: 30 and counting!

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions