Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, October 27, 2016

Rob Manfred Hints At Meeting With Indians Ownership To Discuss Racist Logo

Manfred hinted to Golic that he has plans to speak with team ownership about the use of the logo during the offseason:

  Well, I understand that particular logo is offensive to some people, and I understand why. On the other side of the coin, you have a lot of fans that have history and are invested in the symbols of the Indians. I think that after the World Series, at an appropriate point in time, Mr. [Larry] Dolan and I have agreed we’ll have a conversation about what should happen with that particular logo going forward.

I reached out to MLB for clarification on whether Manfred has concrete plans to meet with Dolan or other Indians people about the logo.

Dolan said earlier this year that Wahoo would become its alternate logo to the classic block-C logo. During the ALCS, an indigenous activist in Canada filed a request for an injunction to disallow the use of the team name and Chief Wahoo logo while the Indians were playing the Blue Jays in Toronto. The request for the injunction was denied.

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 06:33 AM | 79 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: chief wahoo, indians, logo, racism, rob manfred

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. RMc Has Bizarre Ideas to Fix Baseball Posted: October 27, 2016 at 07:41 AM (#5335736)
Tell, ya what, Commish. Try to get playoff games to end before midnight first, and then we'll deal with logos, mmkay? (The only reason last night's game ended before twelve was because it started at 7:08pm. If it had started at the usual 8:30 or so, it would've gone well midnight because it was four hours and four minutes long! A 5-1 game lasting four freakin' hours?! Gimme a break!)
   2. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 10:45 AM (#5335832)
That lingering shot of this fan during last night's broadcast really made me cringe.
   3. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:27 AM (#5335882)
It's still mind-boggling to me that a major league team is using a racist cartoon caricature from the 1950's as a logo in 2016. Could you imagine an expansion team in 2016 proposing a team named after a race or ethnic group and using a racist caricature as a logo???
   4. Stormy JE Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:30 AM (#5335885)
I think folks who argue the "Indians" name is racially insensitive, let alone racist, are way overreacting but remain beyond amazed that the Wahoo logo are featured on both the cap *and* jersey sleeve.
   5. Jose is an Absurd Force of Nature Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:33 AM (#5335887)
That lingering shot of this fan during last night's broadcast really made me cringe.


I don't remember where I saw it but someone had a photo of someone dressed similarly (maybe the same guy) before the game and asked if he would have been allowed in if he was dressed in blackface.
   6. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:35 AM (#5335891)
Could you imagine an expansion team in 2016 proposing a team named after a race or ethnic group and using a racist caricature as a logo???

Chief Wahoo is bad, but I can easily imagine a New Orleans expansion team called the "Cajuns".
   7. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:42 AM (#5335895)
From RoyalsRetro:

That lingering shot of this fan during last night's broadcast really made me cringe.


I thought the same thing. It's still amazes me that white people would wear "red face" makeup and headdress to a sporting event in 2016. They appropriated an item of clothing denoting great respect and political and spiritual significance into a prop worn by white drunken fans in face paint.
   8. Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:42 AM (#5335896)
I can easily imagine a New Orleans expansion team called the "Cajuns".

We just got a new team name in New Orleans a few years back, in the NBA, they picked Pelicans.

In 1974, a contest was held to name the NBA expansion team in New Orleans. Of the more than 6,500 names suggested, eight semi-finalists were selected: Jazz, Dukes, Crescents, Pilots, Cajuns, Blues, Deltas, and Knights. As NBA fans know, Jazz was crowned the winner and remains the team’s name.

The NBA attorney who represents brand names for the league has filed trademarks for five possible new names for the team: Mosquitoes, Bull Sharks, Swamp Dogs, Rougarou and Pelicans.


Not sure your imagination really means it could happen these days.
   9. Juilin Sandar to Conkling Speedwell (Arjun) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:46 AM (#5335902)
That lingering shot of this fan during last night's broadcast really made me cringe.

Yup, was about to post the same thing.
   10. Accent Shallow is probably a hologram Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:47 AM (#5335904)
Swamp Dogs and Bull Sharks?

Is this the NBA or single A ball?
   11. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:53 AM (#5335911)
Not sure your imagination really means it could happen these days.

Do you think any Cajuns would find it offensive? Do the Irish in Boston find "Celtics" offensive?
   12. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:56 AM (#5335913)
Chief Wahoo is bad, but I can easily imagine a New Orleans expansion team called the "Cajuns".


A more appropriate analogy is if a team from Portland named its team the Cajuns, which is exceedingly hard to imagine happening today.

   13. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:57 AM (#5335914)
Chief Wahoo is bad, but I can easily imagine a New Orleans expansion team called the "Cajuns".

It's not quite Fighting Irish, but University of Southwest Louisiana's mascot is the Ragin' Cajun. Not sure if he push-poles a pirogue up and down the sidelines after they score a touchdown though.
   14. Cabbage Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:05 PM (#5335923)
Do the Irish in Boston find "Celtics" offensive?


No, but they might not like it if logo was a caricature of a white guy protesting school bussing desegregation.
   15. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:05 PM (#5335924)
From Snapper:

Chief Wahoo is bad, but I can easily imagine a New Orleans expansion team called the "Cajuns".


Well the term "Cajun" isn't a racial classification. I was talking about an expansion team calling themselves "The Africans" or "The Mexicans" or "The Asians" and then using racist cartoon caricature as a logo.

The term "Cajun" is more of an ethnic/regional term. Even regional team nick names are rare. I think the last one was the "Houston Texans". Before that, it was probably "The New York Islanders".
   16. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:06 PM (#5335925)
A more appropriate analogy is if a team from Portland named its team the Cajuns, which is exceedingly hard to imagine happening today.

Because it would be non-sensical, not because it would be racist.

If the Yankees had stayed the Highlanders, would that be offensive to Scots? Is Yankees offensive to New Englanders?

I agree that racist caricatures (although I don't see how Chief Wahoo is any worse than the Notre Dame or Celtics logo) and names that are slurs (e.g. "Redskins") should go. But, I just don't see it for neutral usages.

Of course actual American Indians that have been polled are less sensitive that I am.
   17. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:11 PM (#5335929)
Well the term "Cajun" isn't a racial classification. I was talking about an expansion team calling themselves "The Africans" or "The Mexicans" or "The Asians" and then using racist cartoon caricature as a logo.

The Cajuns are a specific ethnic and linguistic group displaced from Acadia by British ethnic-cleansing. They are every bit as much a "race" as "Indians" are ("race" being something of an artificial construct anyway), and suffered very similar mis-treatment.
   18. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:13 PM (#5335931)
I agree that racist caricatures (although I don't see how Chief Wahoo is any worse than the Notre Dame or Celtics logo) and names that are slurs (e.g. "Redskins") should go. But, I just don't see it for neutral usages.


The Fighting Irish and the Rajun Cajuns and others kike it represent "us." They are nicknames for teams that have a connection to the people they're representing. Irish Catholic families dream of sending their kids to ND. Cajuns are plentiful in Louisiana. And self-caricatures, even comical ones, are inherently less inappropriate than caricatures of others. This isn't hard.

Most Native American nicknames, such as the one in Cleveland, have no such connection.
   19. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:25 PM (#5335940)
18: That's an... unfortunate typo.
   20. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM (#5335948)
From Snapper:

The Cajuns are a specific ethnic and linguistic group displaced from Acadia by British ethnic-cleansing. They are every bit as much a "race" as "Indians" are ("race" being something of an artificial construct anyway), and suffered very similar mis-treatment.


"Cajun" is not a separate race of people, It's an ethnic, linguistic & regional group of people that share historical & cultural traditions. There's a separate category for "Native American" on a Census report, there's not a separate category for "Cajun". A person who referred to himself as a "Cajun" would most likely checkoff "white" because of their French ancestry. In cases of familial mixed race ancestry, they would check off multiple boxes like "White" and "African", etc.

   21. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM (#5335949)

18: That's an... unfortunate typo.


Who says it's a typo. I'm a Rajun' Anti-Semite.
   22. Lassus Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:45 PM (#5335952)
I agree that racist caricatures (although I don't see how Chief Wahoo is any worse than the Notre Dame or Celtics logo)

We didn't slaughter quite as many Irish. And what SoSH said.
   23. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:48 PM (#5335955)

A more appropriate analogy is if a team from Portland named its team the Cajuns, which is exceedingly hard to imagine happening today.

Because it would be non-sensical, not because it would be racist.


What if they named them the Cajuns to honor an important person in Portland sports history? Isn't that why Cleveland is the "Indians"?
   24. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 12:50 PM (#5335958)
"Cajun" is not a separate race of people, It's an ethnic, linguistic & regional group of people that share historical & cultural traditions. There's a separate category for "Native American" on a Census report, there's not a separate category for "Cajun". A person who referred to himself as a "Cajun" would most likely checkoff "white" because of their French ancestry. In cases of familial mixed race ancestry, they would check off multiple boxes like "White" and "African", etc.

Census classifications are made up, and have no scientific basis. American Indians are genetically closely related to Siberian Asians.

"White" is not a meaningful categorization. It includes Indo-European groups from Europe, Semitic groups from the Middle East, Turkic groups from the Near East and Central Asia, Indo-European groups from Central and Southwest Asia.

It's pretty silly to say American Indians are distinct from Alaskan Natives, but Norwegians, Basques, Moroccan Berbers, and Iranians are all the same.
   25. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:03 PM (#5335968)
From Snapper.

Do the Irish in Boston find "Celtics" offensive?


Well "Celtic" isn't a race so it's not completely analogous. A Celt was a person that shared a common ethnic, cultural and linguistic similarity throughout Europe during the middle ages. In the U.S. the term "Celtic" solely means "Irish" but that would be a mistake. The modern definition of Celtic people describes people from Ireland, Scotland, Brittany, Wales, Cornwall and The Isle of Man.

Also the term "Celtic" is not a controversial term whereas the term "Indian" is much more problematic because of the historical baggage.

The name "Celtic" was used as a regional/cultural connotation because of the large amounts of Irish people in Boston.
   26. Delorians Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:05 PM (#5335969)
It seems to me the obvious solution is to slowly, over a period of maybe 10 years, reduce the presence of the logo. I think they've already started emphasizing the classic 'C' a little bit more. Maybe in a couple of years remove it from the sleeve. Then a couple years replace it on the cap with the classic 'C'. Still sell it on merchandise but gradually phase out the amount of merchandise until it's barely there at all, but with no one big moment where there's an announcement "we're getting rid of this for good" that can be protested and dominate the new cycle, until by the time it's appropriate to announce 'we are no longer using the logo on anything', it's effectively already gone and not that big of a story. Of course this would require those opposing the logo to agree behind the scenes with the plan, not to announce the plan, or push for protests to accelerate the plan.
   27. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:08 PM (#5335971)
I can't believe you guys are falling for snapper's bit. Admittedly, he did a good job of changing the subject, but it takes 2 to tango and you guys took the bait.

Let's review:

The article was about Manfred talking to the Indians about changing the logo. Post number 3 said
It's still mind-boggling to me that a major league team is using a racist cartoon caricature from the 1950's as a logo in 2016. Could you imagine an expansion team in 2016 proposing a team named after a race or ethnic group and using a racist caricature as a logo???
(emphasis mine).

snapper then jumps in, and while agreeing with the premise, manages to change the subject to the team name, and how there's nothing wrong with Indians than isn't also wrong with cajuns, Celtic, and Fighting Irish. Let's keep in mind that no one was talking about the name "Indians" until snapper himself brought it up as a straw man, and you guys fell for it.

An honest reading of post #3 is that it's all about the racist caricature. snapper agrees about the logo, but somehow felt the need to argue against something no one argued.

Well done.
   28. Lassus Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:08 PM (#5335972)
I'm kind of disappointed snapper didn't respond to #18.
   29. JJ1986 Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:10 PM (#5335977)
I'm stunned by how prominent the logo still is. I don't watch the Indians that much and thought they had been trying to move away from it since they started wearing those caps with the boring "C" on them.
   30. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:11 PM (#5335978)
If the Yankees had stayed the Highlanders, would that be offensive to Scots?


If their logo was a cartoon drunken Scotsman in a kilt, yes. otherwise, your question is irrelevant.

I agree that racist caricatures (although I don't see how Chief Wahoo is any worse than the Notre Dame or Celtics logo) and names that are slurs (e.g. "Redskins") should go. But, I just don't see it for neutral usages.


A point no one but you seems to be arguing. Or a point no one argued against until you baited people into it.
   31. Nasty Nate Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:19 PM (#5335982)
It seems to me the obvious solution is to slowly, over a period of maybe 10 years, reduce the presence of the logo. I think they've already started emphasizing the classic 'C' a little bit more.
I agree. But I also think that process should already be further along than it is. As I said in another thread, it's strange they haven't come up with another logo (besides simply the letter C) that they could have been gradually using at the expense of Chief Wahoo.
   32. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:23 PM (#5335987)
1. They need to change the logo. It's horribly racist.

2. Snapper is conveniently ignoring lots of history. Teams are called "Indians" or "Redskins" or "Warriors " (as in "Indian warrior" - look at the mascots) because Indians were viewed as fierce fighters. But unlike the Celtics or Fighting Irish or Ragin' Cajuns, it's other people - non-Indians - pushing that image. That's what makes the former names troublesome and not the latter.

   33. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:24 PM (#5335989)
From Snapper:

It's pretty silly to say American Indians are distinct from Alaskan Natives, but Norwegians, Basques, Moroccan Berbers, and Iranians are all the same.


American Indians and Alaskan Natives are classified in the same category on the census so there's no separate distinction.

"White" is not a meaningful categorization. It includes Indo-European groups from Europe, Semitic groups from the Middle East, Turkic groups from the Near East and Central Asia, Indo-European groups from Central and Southwest Asia.


It's not that it's not "meaningful" but it's extremely broad in definition.

But that's a bit off tangent to the real question of whether the name and logo are offensive.
   34. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:32 PM (#5335993)
1. They need to change the logo. It's horribly racist.


Agree. And "Redskins" needs to go too.

2. Snapper is conveniently ignoring lots of history. Teams are called "Indians" or "Redskins" or "Warriors " (as in "Indian warrior" - look at the mascots) because Indians were viewed as fierce fighters. But unlike the Celtics or Fighting Irish or Ragin' Cajuns, it's other people - non-Indians - pushing that image. That's what makes the former names troublesome and not the latter.

Yet most actual Indians don't seem to mind.

I'm trying to stake out a reasonable middle ground.
   35. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:41 PM (#5335999)
Yet most actual Indians don't seem to mind.


That's false. That's a myth that's been perpetuated. They're not a large part of population and they don't have much political power, that's why the names and logos continue.
   36. winnipegwhip Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:49 PM (#5336007)
That's false. That's a myth that's been perpetuated. They're not a large part of population and they don't have much political power, that's why the names and logos continue.


A Washington Post Poll from April 2016

New poll finds 9 in 10 Native Americans aren’t offended by Redskins name
   37. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:50 PM (#5336009)
From Miserlou:

An honest reading of post #3 is that it's all about the racist caricature. snapper agrees about the logo, but somehow felt the need to argue against something no one argued.


Well most of my point was about the logo but I was also commenting on the use of "Indians" as a team nick name. I can't imagine an expansion team owned and operated by white people calling themselves "The Africans" even if there were no offensive logos or caricatures.



   38. Zonk is a Doppleclapper Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:50 PM (#5336010)
Speaking as a Cubs fan, this would be an excellent time for the Indians to be cursed not to win a WS until they get rid of the logo. I think the logo is offensive and anachronistic anyway, but this seems like a really good win-win situation.
   39. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:51 PM (#5336011)
That's false. That's a myth that's been perpetuated. They're not a large part of population and they don't have much political power, that's why the names and logos continue.

Polls don't seem to reflect this.
   40. winnipegwhip Posted: October 27, 2016 at 01:55 PM (#5336014)
Speaking as a Cubs fan, this would be an excellent time for the Indians to be cursed not to win a WS until they get rid of the logo. I think the logo is offensive and anachronistic anyway, but this seems like a really good win-win situation.


If that is what helps you cheer against Cleveland than all the power to you. Conversely I cheer for Florida State because they are called the Seminoles (which their people have signed off on.)
   41. Zonk is a Doppleclapper Posted: October 27, 2016 at 02:00 PM (#5336017)
If that is what helps you cheer against Cleveland than all the power to you. Conversely I cheer for Florida State because they are called the Seminoles (which their people have signed off on.)


No help cheering is required... I'm just saying that if we are to have 'curses', better they be applied to something that can and should be changed rather than stupid made-up stories that are really marketing ploys concerning an actually didn't even happen instance of somebody supposedly trying to bring a farm animal into watching a sporting event.

   42. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 27, 2016 at 02:06 PM (#5336023)
The NBA attorney who represents brand names for the league has filed trademarks for five possible new names for the team: Mosquitoes, Bull Sharks, Swamp Dogs, Rougarou and Pelicans.


And in the process, likely committed fraud on the USPTO. To file a trademark application based on intent to use a mark, you have to have a bona fide intent and some level of preparation to use that mark, not to choose from a list. In the U.S., you can't file a trademark application to "reserve" a mark in case it's the one you eventually decide to use.

Just so's you know.
   43. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 02:10 PM (#5336025)
A Washington Post Poll from April 2016


That was one poll of 500 people out of a population of 5.4 million people. It's been found to be skewed:https://www.thenation.com/article/on-the-shameful-and-skewed-redskins-poll/

That always feels like cop out to me saying that "most" Native Americans don't care or are indifferent.
   44. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 02:12 PM (#5336027)
Link to article

EDIT: Link now works. No longer an email tag.
   45. Lassus Posted: October 27, 2016 at 02:17 PM (#5336034)
JohnQ, you turned that link into an email tag.
   46. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 02:39 PM (#5336042)
JohnQ, you turned that link into an email tag.


Yeah, I goofed that one. Do you know how to delete that comment?
   47. RMc Has Bizarre Ideas to Fix Baseball Posted: October 27, 2016 at 04:08 PM (#5336107)
five possible new names for the team: Mosquitoes, Bull Sharks, Swamp Dogs, Rougarou and Pelicans.

This is the way they choose team names these days: a list of five, including four really idiotic choices and the name they were planning to use in the first place. (Usually, it's the one the owner's wife thinks is cute.)
   48. Tim M Posted: October 27, 2016 at 04:13 PM (#5336112)
Yeah, I goofed that one. Do you know how to delete that comment?


Edit the post and remove "mailto:" from the link.
   49. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 04:33 PM (#5336137)
From Tim m

Edit the post and remove "mailto:" from the link.


How do I go back to edit?
   50. Tim M Posted: October 27, 2016 at 04:37 PM (#5336143)
Whups - gotta edit quickly, or the link goes away. Folks can click here or copy/paste the URL into their browser.
   51. Styles P. Deadball Posted: October 27, 2016 at 06:03 PM (#5336241)
Is Yankees offensive to New Englanders?


I'd say the Yankees tend to be offensive to most New Englanders... if their general attitude toward the team is any indication.
   52. Spahn Insane Posted: October 27, 2016 at 06:05 PM (#5336243)
So I'm not quite up on the Manfred lexicon here. Is "hinting at" something more serious than "considering" it, or less so?
   53. Spahn Insane Posted: October 27, 2016 at 06:09 PM (#5336246)
If their logo was a cartoon drunken Scotsman in a kilt, yes. otherwise, your question is irrelevant.

What if the drunk kilted Scotsman's tossing a caber? Cause that shite's badass.
   54. Styles P. Deadball Posted: October 27, 2016 at 06:36 PM (#5336257)
Is "hinting at" something more serious than "considering" it, or less so?


I couldn't say, but it sounds like him saying "I'd like you guys to deal with this so I don't have to."
   55. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 27, 2016 at 06:48 PM (#5336271)
That was one poll of 500 people out of a population of 5.4 million people.
And? You seem to be unfamiliar with how polls work; pollsters talk to a sample of the population, not every person.
It's been found to be skewed: https://www.thenation.com/article/on-the-shameful-and-skewed-redskins-poll/
It's been "found" to not mesh with left wing orthodoxy, not "skewed." That doesn't identify "skewing" any more than Dean Chambers did.

And it's not the first poll that has found this, either. SI did a poll in 2002; Annenberg did one in 2004.
   56. Shibal Posted: October 27, 2016 at 08:58 PM (#5336341)
Skewed polls!

The argument of everyone who has lost the argument.
   57. JohnQ Posted: October 27, 2016 at 11:48 PM (#5336395)
From David Nieporent:

And? You seem to be unfamiliar with how polls work; pollsters talk to a sample of the population, not every person.


Yeah, I understand how polls work and you don't have to be condescending. Polls have flaws in methodology. Also, this was also a poll about the team name, "Redskins" not whether they were bothered by the racist caricature of Chief Wahoo which was the original point.

He brought up 5 flaws of methodology in the WP poll:

*They did not verify the actual Native American identity or tribal enrollment of its respondents.

*56 percent of those asked said they were not part of any tribal nation or could not name what tribe their ancestors claimed. The author compared that to asking 500 random white people a question about Europe and half of them not having any connection to their ancestral place of origin.

*They poll skewed older and more towards men.

*Only 15% were under 29 years of age, nobody was polled under the age of 18.

*There was a geographic flaw in that tribes that live in the Mountain region were underrepresented and populations in the south were overrepresented.

   58. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 12:53 AM (#5336409)
Yeah, I understand how polls work and you don't have to be condescending.
I do lots of things I don't have to do. But if you understand how polls work, why did you raise a non-issue ("they only asked 500 out of 5.4 million") as if you had scored a point against the poll?
Also, this was also a poll about the team name, "Redskins" not whether they were bothered by the racist caricature of Chief Wahoo which was the original point.
The poll was raised in response to the claim -- your claim -- that it's a "myth" that most Indians don't mind the name Redskins.

He brought up 5 flaws of methodology in the WP poll:
She didn't. Of the five things you cite that she listed in her polemic, only the first actually relates to methodology at all. And it's not clear why that's a "flaw." When pollsters survey people -- whether it's about which candidate they're going to vote for, what television shows they watch, or which brand of laundry detergent they use -- they always rely on racial self-identification; they don't conduct DNA tests to see if the respondents are telling the truth. The figure you yourself cited above about there being 5.4 million Indians -- where do you think it comes from? People's self-identification. And as the Post explained, there's no reason, given the design of this poll, why people should have lied about being Indian. One could imagine, perhaps, that if asked the question, "Are you Indian and if so do you mind the name Redskins?" that some people might falsely claim to be Indian to skew the results, but that's not the way the poll was designed. It asked for people's race at the beginning of the survey, and then later on asked those who identified as Indian what they thought of the name.

As to the other four points, those are not "methodology"; those are just the results of sampling. As an initial matter, pollsters know how to -- and do -- adjust for the breakdown of respondents in polls. Polling isn't like going around the table at a restaurant and tallying the number of people who express each view; if 'too many' old people are among the survey respondents, then the younger respondents will be weighted more heavily in reporting poll results.

In any case, this woman didn't actually show that the sample was skewed; handwaving an anecdote about her dad's high school class is not a substitute for actual data.

But more importantly, it doesn't matter in this particular instance; it can't, because the result was so overwhelmingly in favor of the name. If the "true" split were 55-45, then a disproportionate share of men or old people might cause a poll to misreport which side is the majority view. But when it's 90-10, it doesn't matter whether there are a few too many men in the sample; even if you have to adjust for that -- and note that she doesn't actually do so -- the result is still going to be strongly in favor of the name. And, in fact, the Post explained that the breakdown was similar among the various subgroups. (Again, mathematically, it has to be.) She herself quoted the Post as noting that Mountain region respondents supported the name just as much as others did.


Finally, I would reiterate that two prior surveys came to the same result. One survey can always be an outlier. Two can be. But at some point, one has to accept that just because one strongly believes that a particular thing should be true does not mean that it is. This woman is free to find the name offensive if she wants; she's certainly not required to bow to the majority and announce her approve of the name. But that doesn't mean she's free to make up her own facts about what other people think. (Although, given that her college degree was in "sociology/film studies," I'm not sure what else there is for her to do but make up facts.)
   59. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: October 28, 2016 at 01:09 AM (#5336411)
It seems to me the obvious solution is to slowly, over a period of maybe 10 years, reduce the presence of the logo.

Exactly right, and I thought this is what they were starting to do about 5-7 years ago. If they announce they are getting rid of the logo, a contingent of ######## who pride themselves on being un-PC would protest and make it a huge deal and cause all kinds of unnecessary headaches for the team. If they just started using the logo less and less until it was gone, without ever drawing attention to that fact, it would be a lot easier. It's harder to recognize the absence of something if you've only been seeing it once a week, once a month ..... Just dead the #### and move on in silence.
   60. DFA Posted: October 28, 2016 at 01:56 AM (#5336415)
It would be pretty rad if the Indians changed their logo to a spider. A quick google search did not reveal the old 1899 logo, though now I wonder if logos were a thing back then.
   61. canadian shield Posted: October 28, 2016 at 03:05 AM (#5336420)
If it ended up being 'Baltimore Jews' back in the day (with a logo out of Der Sturmer), we'd be defending that? I dont think we need to have polling, its 2016 name the team after a bird or something...
   62. Dock Ellis Posted: October 28, 2016 at 04:00 AM (#5336421)
Personally, I'd rather move on from team names like this and we should give up the logo and change the name. Call them the Cleveland Rock-n-Roll.
   63. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 06:31 AM (#5336422)
If it ended up being 'Baltimore Jews' back in the day (with a logo out of Der Sturmer), we'd be defending that


I'd love to see a Jewish-themed team name. Dance the hora after a home run, salt bagel vendors replacing pretzel men in the stands, yarmakule nights, the whole shebang. I don't think Baltimore makes much sense per se, but a Brooklyn Hebrews team would be fantastic.

Of course since I've been a Yankees fan since I was 7 I'd be accused of dual loyalties, but we're used to that.

"Oy, don't throw me into that briar patch goyim!"
   64. RMc Has Bizarre Ideas to Fix Baseball Posted: October 28, 2016 at 06:35 AM (#5336424)
Who cares what actual native Americans think? It's what guilty white liberals think that really matters!
   65. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 09:00 AM (#5336442)
Who cares what actual native Americans think? It's what guilty white liberals think that really matters!

Also, they prefer to be called American Indians, but the guilty white liberals don't care about that either, and have drilled "Native Americans" into our skulls.
   66. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 09:14 AM (#5336449)
only the first actually relates to methodology at all. And it's not clear why that's a "flaw."


Because a lot of people who don't actually have any familial connection to a particular tribe or group like to claim that they do because they think it makes them exotic or interesting to say that their great-great-grandmother was Cherokee. It ties into the romantic (but still racist) image of native people as noble savages. There's a good piece on the subject by an Ojibwe writer here.

That becomes a problem because all these fakes (who are really just doing the same thing as Rachel Dolezal) don't have any genuine connection to that culture or heritage, so it doesn't bother them to see it disparaged. It was just an identity that they borrowed to seem cool, and if they can get additional social credit by saying that they aren't offended by offensive stuff, why wouldn't they do that?
   67. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 09:22 AM (#5336451)
Vlad - you misread my post. As to the first, it doesn't give street cred to tell an anonymous pollster that you're Indian. Which is, presumably, why we don't see vast numbers of people claiming to be Indian in other polls, consumer surveys, etc. And as to doing it specifically so that they can say that they aren't offended, they didn't know that this was what the poll was about at the time they self-identified.
   68. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 09:25 AM (#5336452)
Who cares what actual native Americans think? It's what guilty white liberals think that really matters!


Well, white people and the official representatives of the Penobscot Indian Nation, the group of which Sockalexis was a member. They made a formal request that the Indians stop using the Chief Wahoo in 2000, terming it "an offensive, degrading, and racist stereotype that firmly places Indian people in the past, separate from our contemporary cultural existence".

But who cares what they think, right?
   69. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 09:29 AM (#5336456)
As to the first, it doesn't give street cred to tell an anonymous pollster that you're Indian.


If you've said as social proof it in casual conversations all your life, there's no reason why you'd stop just because you happen to be talking to a pollster instead of a lady on the bus or your son's basketball coach.
   70. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 28, 2016 at 09:43 AM (#5336465)
If it ended up being 'Baltimore Jews' back in the day (with a logo out of Der Sturmer), we'd be defending that? I dont think we need to have polling, its 2016 name the team after a bird or something...


Just change the logo to a motorcycle.
   71. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: October 28, 2016 at 09:45 AM (#5336466)
five possible new names for the team: Mosquitoes, Bull Sharks, Swamp Dogs, Rougarou and Pelicans.

This is the way they choose team names these days: a list of five, including four really idiotic choices and the name they were planning to use in the first place.
I count no more than two "really idiotic":

Mosquitoes: Awful.

Bull sharks: Bull sharks are pretty bad-ass. This would make a great team name.

Swamp Dogs: As noted, sounds like a low minor baseball team.

Rougarou: What the hell is a Rougarou? Oh, it's a French werewolf! Awesome!!

Pelicans: OK, 3 idiotic choices, but also the name they planned on using in the first place. Either that, or they really wanted Rougarou but the fans are dumb and the team doesn't know how to rig a ballot.
   72. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 09:51 AM (#5336469)
Because a lot of people who don't actually have any familial connection to a particular tribe or group like to claim that they do because they think it makes them exotic or interesting

or if it accelerates their climbing the ranks in the circles of Ivy League academia.
   73. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 28, 2016 at 10:36 AM (#5336498)
Call them the Cleveland Rock-n-Roll.

Non-plural team names are for the lesser sports.
   74. JJ1986 Posted: October 28, 2016 at 10:59 AM (#5336510)
They could go with the Cleveland Rocks.
   75. BDC Posted: October 28, 2016 at 11:04 AM (#5336512)
A couple of the Indians were wearing red socks the other night and La Dernière asked me, "Are those the Red Sox?"

This leads me to think they should have to wear blue socks and be called the Blue Sox.
   76. Booey Posted: October 28, 2016 at 11:11 AM (#5336522)
Bull sharks: Bull sharks are pretty bad-ass. This would make a great team name.


And people would call them the "Bulls" for short. Good thing there isn't already another NBA team named the Bulls! Or they would call them the "Sharks", which is already used by an NHL team.

Rougarou: What the hell is a Rougarou? Oh, it's a French werewolf! Awesome!!


Any team name that fans would have to look up the meaning and/or pronunciation isn't awesome.
   77. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 28, 2016 at 11:37 AM (#5336557)
If you've said as social proof it in casual conversations all your life, there's no reason why you'd stop just because you happen to be talking to a pollster instead of a lady on the bus or your son's basketball coach.
Of course there is. Saying, "I'm 1/4th Cherokee" at the company picnic to impress people is very different than checking off a box on a form as "Indian," when one actually identifies as white. And we know that this doesn't happen; there are no surveys where the Indian results are overstated to any significant extent.
   78. JRVJ Posted: October 28, 2016 at 11:46 AM (#5336563)
Just to add something, there's a professional Rugby Union club in England named the Saracens (they're the current European champions).

Not entirely sure Saracens is a nice term, so there's that.

(There's also professional clubs named London Irish and London Welsh, FWIW).
   79. Morty Causa Posted: October 28, 2016 at 11:51 AM (#5336565)
Any team name that fans would have to look up the meaning and/or pronunciation isn't awesome.

I doubt that it would take very long for the meaning of any name, however esoteric-seeming, to be become commonly known. The Rougarou, by the way, is part of the legend and lore of Cajuns. There's even a festival in Houma (coincidentally named after the Houma Indians). Acadiana's main university, home of the Ragin' Cajuns, has an online literary journal that is called Rougarou.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogFive Tool Players | Articles | Bill James Online
(17 - 8:58am, Sep 24)
Last: Rally

NewsblogOTP 2018 September 17: How Brett Kavanaugh explains his baseball ticket debt
(2452 - 8:58am, Sep 24)
Last: BrianBrianson

Gonfalon CubsThe Final Push
(165 - 8:55am, Sep 24)
Last: Andere Richtingen

Sox TherapyDecisions Decisions
(1 - 8:46am, Sep 24)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogLong-time White Sox broadcaster 'Hawk' Harrelson bids emotional farewell in home finale vs. Cubs
(2 - 8:39am, Sep 24)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Force of Nature

NewsblogKen Giles: ‘I’m actually enjoying the game more than I did for my entire tenure in Houston’
(1 - 8:37am, Sep 24)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Force of Nature

NewsblogMariners extend longest postseason drought in major North American sports to 17 years
(10 - 8:29am, Sep 24)
Last: Don August(us) Cesar Geronimo Berroa

NewsblogTim Anderson's eventful day at the yard ends with shot at Joe West: 'Everybody knows he's terrible'
(10 - 6:15am, Sep 24)
Last: Leroy Kincaid

NewsblogMadden: Hey, Rob Manfred! The analytic geeks are ruining starting pitching and it's making a joke of the game - NY Daily News
(2 - 4:18am, Sep 24)
Last: Endless Trash

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (September 2018)
(385 - 2:09am, Sep 24)
Last: Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB)

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(829 - 1:37am, Sep 24)
Last: Baldrick

NewsblogFancred Sports : A lot of intrigue over Mets GM pursuit: old school vs. new school
(1 - 1:33am, Sep 24)
Last: ReggieThomasLives

NewsblogTickets available as Marlins host Reds
(47 - 12:39am, Sep 24)
Last: DFA

NewsblogOT - 2018 NBA Thread (Pre-Season Edition)
(537 - 10:49pm, Sep 23)
Last: TFTIO is Lounging from the flat one

NewsblogWeekend OMNICHATTER for September 22-23, 2018
(166 - 8:55pm, Sep 23)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

Page rendered in 0.5471 seconds
46 querie(s) executed