The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

New Ch 4 Muslim documentary.

Is the outrage justified?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/oct/19/my-week-as-a-muslim-documentary-sparks-racism-row

TL;DR
Channel 4 disguised a white British woman as a South Asian Muslim who lived with a Muslim family for a week in order to experience "Islamophobia" first hand.

A range of Muslim groups and individuals have branded the programme "racist", "deeply offensive", "absolutely shocking", and "reinforcing prejudice".

Scroll to see replies

I've blocked 4News from my screen after quite a few years. Their social agenda is suffocating.
Original post by QE2
Is the outrage justified?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/oct/19/my-week-as-a-muslim-documentary-sparks-racism-row

TL;DR
Channel 4 disguised a white British woman as a South Asian Muslim who lived with a Muslim family for a week in order to experience "Islamophobia" first hand.

A range of Muslim groups and individuals have branded the programme "racist", "deeply offensive", "absolutely shocking", and "reinforcing prejudice".


Typical Channel 4 rubbish
Reply 3
Avatar for kenedy6
kenedy6
3
I think Muslim communities should be investigated more thoroughly. There is clearly something wrong with this religion.
Moved to TV shows.
Original post by FriendlyPenguin
Channel 4 is becoming more and more a mouth-piece for the far-right, which I find rather worrying.


Whatever channel you're watching, it is not the same we are talking about. Would the far-right commission a piece on the 'exposure of Islamophobia'? They wouldn't be able to commission an ad on 4, let alone this.

This is all f****d up s**t by the usual media channels. These people are mental, not even the alleged victims they purport to represent like them. Let's hope it's all more for the money than anything else but it's still sick to try and earn out of these things.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by kenedy6
I think Muslim communities should be investigated more thoroughly. There is clearly something wrong with this religion.


You sound like what National Socialists said about Jewish people in the 30s.
Reply 7
Avatar for QE2
QE2
OP
20
Original post by JMR2017
Moved to TV shows.
Why? It's not a thread about a TV show. It's a thread about the reaction to a TV show amongst different social groups, and the implications thereof. If you feel you must hide it somewhare, move it to "society", but it needs to remain within "Debate and Current Affars", because it is a debate thread about current affairs!

Seriously. Why is TSR leaving decisions like this in the hands of people clearly not qualified to make them?
Original post by QE2
Why? It's not a thread about a TV show. It's a thread about the reaction to a TV show amongst different social groups, and the implications thereof. If you feel you must hide it somewhare, move it to "society", but it needs to remain within "Debate and Current Affars", because it is a debate thread about current affairs!

Seriously. Why is TSR leaving decisions like this in the hands of people clearly not qualified to make them?

But it is a thread about a TV show, regardless of what it is discussing.
Reply 9
Avatar for QE2
QE2
OP
20
Original post by JMR2017
But it is a thread about a TV show, regardless of what it is discussing.
So why are so many threads discussing religion in "Faith and Spirituality"?
And what about all the threads about politics in N&CA? Why aren't they in "Politics"?
And all the threads about religion in "Pholosophy"?
Etc, etc.

You're going to have your hands full keeping everything in its right place!
Original post by QE2
Is the outrage justified?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/oct/19/my-week-as-a-muslim-documentary-sparks-racism-row

TL;DR
Channel 4 disguised a white British woman as a South Asian Muslim who lived with a Muslim family for a week in order to experience "Islamophobia" first hand.

A range of Muslim groups and individuals have branded the programme "racist", "deeply offensive", "absolutely shocking", and "reinforcing prejudice".


To some extent, I mean really? Putting on brown skin and a Pakistan nose as if it's a costume, WELL I wish I could take it off sometimes then smh.
I would say it's racist I mean it's almost comedic the way she's just taken in by this family lmao, however I'm not sure if its Islamophobic.
Honestly I was not expecting that when I read the article WTF
Original post by QE2
So why are so many threads discussing religion in "Faith and Spirituality"?
And what about all the threads about politics in N&CA? Why aren't they in "Politics"?
And all the threads about religion in "Pholosophy"?
Etc, etc.

You're going to have your hands full keeping everything in its right place!

Just seen a thread about how to become resistant to antibiotics, and whether we should pay rent to parents in the N&CA section:rofl:
just a load of leftie nonsense
Original post by karl pilkington
just a load of leftie nonsense


You dont see a problem with Brown-face? What about Black-face?


This pretty much marks the output of C4 for the last decade or so. What was once a promising alternative tv station has become the equivalent ofthe Daily Mail, at least in its 'factual' programming.

They deliberately go out and look for subjects like this because it gets them publicity and views and as a result, more add money.

Much like benefits, Islamophobia is a topic where you can get pretty much everyone outraged, be that those who see the obvious racist connotations of the make up as well as the crowd who will no doubt maintain its all 'PC gone mad'.
Reply 14
Avatar for QE2
QE2
OP
20
Original post by FriendlyPenguin
I remember they had another offensive "documentary" not long ago.

Funnily enough, if someone sees absolutely nothing wrong with using blackface/brownface, and the mere suggestion that it is offensive is alien to them, then yes, I will mark them down as far-right.
Do you see any difference between traditional "blackface", overtly used to unflatteringly represent people of a different racial group for entertainment purposes - and using an ethno-variant disguise for the purposes of undercover journalism?
Or are they both the same thing, to be equally condemned and vilified?
Reply 15
Avatar for QE2
QE2
OP
20
Original post by Nuba123
To some extent, I mean really? Putting on brown skin and a Pakistan nose as if it's a costume, WELL I wish I could take it off sometimes then smh.
I would say it's racist I mean it's almost comedic the way she's just taken in by this family lmao, however I'm not sure if its Islamophobic.
Honestly I was not expecting that when I read the article WTF
I think the point behind using a white person was that it is entirely possible that a non-Muslim South Asian would also have experienced discrimination and abuse, and the point of the programme is to push the "Islamophobia" agenda rather than merely highlight the obvious racism and xenophobia present in some parts of society against "brown foreigners".
Reply 16
Avatar for QE2
QE2
OP
20
Original post by FriendlyPenguin
Yes I see a difference, I just don't think we should draw a line between them.

Undercover journalists should not be excused for any and all offensive behaviour in the name of their "journalism", which is at best little more than an attempt to stir up racial hatreds.
Is highlighting the discrimination and abuse that some groups experience "stiring up racial hatred"?
Surely the more exposure this has to the wider audience, the greater the appreciation of the problem and the willingness to tackle it.

So, is a white person posing as South Asian a bad thing if; A) it was done with the intention of highlighting the issue, and B) it alters even a few people's perception of the issue?

There have been several examples of people undergoing these transformations for TV, to better understand the issues of people of different race, gender and disability but I don't remember any of them causing such outrage before.
I don't understand....why are muslims outraged due to "blackfacing"? Is it because its stereotypical for a Muslim to be black or brown? Well what the **** did they want this girl to go undercover as, ****ing blue?
This is how 'news' can pop out of nothing, a TV program on 4 and Guardian report into it... nothing. That's the summary, nothing to show for.

Where's the Islamophobia all this pantomime was supposed to uncover? Nowhere, now the news is just... this.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by FriendlyPenguin

Undercover journalists should not be excused for any and all offensive behaviour in the name of their "journalism", which is at best little more than an attempt to stir up racial hatreds.


So you object to dressing up as someone of a different race per se. By the same token, then, you wouldn't approve if a policeman disguised himself as an Asian in order to investigate a crime undercover, or if an MI6 spy adopted such a disguise, and would condemn a special services soldier in Iraq who infiltrated ISIS by dressing and making up as an Arab. The same constraint would prevent Willem Dafoe from playing Jesus in The Last Temptation of Christ, Russel Crowe from playing Noah, Alec Guiness from playing Prince Faisal in Lawrence of Arabia, and Natalie Wood from playing Maria in West Side Story.

You must have a field day when your friends change the colour of their skins to be darker and appear tanned, and would probably go mad if you met one who had also had a nose job and did so.

I, on the other hand, think that it is reasonable to adopt a disguise, or change dress, accent or any identifying characteristic in order to appear to be someone else if one has a reasonable motivation for doing so, and that race is completely irrelevant. There is nothing remotely racist in doing so.

Investigative journalism is an obvious reason to do so, as are the ones I mentioned in my first paragraph, and acting is another.
(edited 6 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you