Readers weigh in on the use of offensive language during an interview

By Mary Ann Hogan
Special to chipsquinn.org

Posted: Jan. 5, 2007

Dear Coach:

In a recent column, Sensitive Ears was offended when a World War II vet residing in a Veterans Home used the term “Japs” while she was interviewing him, and asked: “Should I have told him that I found his language offensive?”

Your response was: “You were right to let it slide. The world has changed since World War II. Many of the nicknames and labels even newspapers used back then …make us cringe today …”

Coach, Sensitive Ears should not have “let it slide.”

The label is associated with hate of the time. It is as inappropriate as the n-word is today. Letting it slide perpetuates the slur. Unfortunately, before this veteran passes on, he will have passed the slur on for 60-some years to other generations. Given recent events involving actors Mel Gibson’s and Michael Richards' racist tirades, it is clear that hate is alive and well in America today.

You surely are familiar with the incarceration of American citizens of Japanese descent, who also were called “Japs.” Also, many Japanese Americans volunteered for the segregated 442^nd and 100^th combat infantry battalions – while in America’s concentration camps. They were among the most decorated units of the war.

Coach, no racial slur or injustice should be allowed to slide.

 -- For the Record

Dear Record:

Thank you for your important letter.

My response to Sensitive Ears has generated more interest than any other column, ever.

The overwhelming opinion: That I should not have told the young journalist to “let it slide.”

Below please find a number of voices, including Chipsters and nationally recognized scholars and journalists, weighing in.

I have learned loads by hearing everyone’s view, beginning with yours.

If I had to do the column over again, I think the answer would be quite different.

I would still insist that the young journalist be respectful of the vet’s age and failing health – but that she (respectfully) not let the use of the word “slide.”

Thanks again, Record, for generating a wonderful conversation, and for giving me pause to grow.

Response to Ask the Coach column:

Should the young journalist Sensitive Ears have “let it slide” when a World War II veteran used the term “Japs” in an interview?

• Jon Funabiki, professor of journalism, San Francisco State University
• Kristen Go (Summers 1996 and 1997), action team leader, The Arizona Republic, Phoenix
• Bill Wong, columnist and author of “Yellow Journalist: Dispatches from Asian America”
• Elaine H. Kim, professor of Asian American studies, University of California-Berkeley
• Sean Jensen (Summer 1995), Vikings beat reporter, St. Paul (Minn.) Pioneer Press
• Sharon Rosenhause, managing editor, South Florida Sun-Sentinel

t t t

Jon Funabiki

Jon Funabiki, professor of journalism, San Francisco State University

My advice would have been slightly different. I think that there are two audiences to consider.

The first is the aging veteran, or the interviewee. I wouldn't have advised the young journalist to "let it slide," nor would I have encouraged her to scold or attack the aging veteran.

Instead, she could have taken advantage of yet another reporting opportunity by asking another set of questions, such as: “While I realize that it was a time of war, I wonder if you realize that these days, many people take offense at the term ‘Jap’?”

Who knows where this line of questioning might have led? Reconciliation? A discussion of the internment? Continued bitterness?

The second audience is the readers. The proposed line of questioning offers an opportunity to educate readers and let them know that the journalist is not just letting it slide but doing due diligence, tempered.

The journalist could go even further by discussing the role of stereotypes, slurs and how the media contributed to the anti-Japanese sentiment during WWII, and drawing parallels to modern-day instances of xenophobia.

More about Jon Funabiki.

t t t

Kristen Go

Kristen Go (Summers 1996 and 1997), action team leader, The Arizona Republic, Phoenix

As journalists, we often cover ideologies we do not agree with and hear language that we may not consider acceptable. But it is not our responsibility to impart our views to others.

That said, I think there is a way Sensitive Ears could have handled the situation to get her point across.

For example, she could have asked a follow-up question to get more insight into why her interview subject used the phrase, and then taken the time to explain that this word is now considered a racial slur.

More about Kristen Go.

t t t

Bill Wong

Bill Wong, columnist, author of “Yellow Journalist: Dispatches from Asian America”

I would have suggested that this young journalist of color seize the moment as a teaching opportunity.

At the end of the formal interview, ask the vet how he feels today about Japanese (or other Asians). Ask him whether he knows the term “Japs” is considered offensive today.

This approach may not sway the old vet, but at least it seeds some doubt – and maybe a lesson, to boot.

This approach should not be threatening or confrontational – easier said than done, of course, given the natural emotions at play here.

Maybe it's a function of getting older and having seen, heard, read and experienced a variety of slur moments myself, but I fully understand your advice to "let it slide." Or at least I view it as understandable as a historical footnote in that such terms reflect a time and place when slurs of all sorts were used regularly and not monitored or regulated.

Our society – and maybe the "civilized" world at large – has gone through, and may still be going through, a necessary correction period (i.e., the civil rights movement, the “political correctness” movement, the anti-hate speech movement).

At times, the pendulum swings too far, and some of us have become “over-sensitive” – something I've occasionally been accused of when I was writing my Oakland Tribune columns on race and ethnic topics.

I don't believe there is an absolutism to slur and so-called hate words. Of course, I still react emotionally and strongly if the intent of the speaker of such slurs is to spew hate. Yes, I know intent is sometimes difficult to discern, but, as that Supreme Court Justice once said about pornography, you know it when you see (hear) it.

Context is crucial, as is intent.

I wrote a column shortly after Sen. John McCain used “gook” to describe his North Vietnamese captors. I thought hard about that, and decided to appropriate the term in a prose-poem addressed to McCain that began, "I am a gook, even though I was not one of your North Vietnamese captors..."

I repeated the "I am a gook" line throughout this column as a way of reviewing a long stretch of history dealing with anti-Asian and anti-Asian American actions.

When I am asked to read passages from “Yellow Journalist,” I read this piece because it has some power when read aloud.

More about Bill Wong.

t t t

Elaine Kim

Elaine H. Kim, professor of Asian American studies, University of California-Berkeley

I think we can let “Japs” slide if we let the old vet refer to African Americans as “n-----s” and women as “sluts” or “bitches.”

“N-----s” was used in official discourse back in the day, though the other two probably weren't.

The point here isn't beating up on a 90-year-old white man for the sake of “political correctness.” Surely the others who witness the “slide” could stand an experience of seeing, once again, that what matters is the perspective of those with the power to name and represent. Many a white person didn't feel offended when saying or hearing a black person called a “n------.” Many a man who catcalls and leers at a woman feels he should be free to express himself, and then wonders why women are so self-righteously “politically correct” about it.

I am old enough to remember being called “chink” and “gook” and “Jap” as a child. I hated it then and hate it now.

Surely there was a way to say something diplomatic that was not beating up the old vet – for the sake of the other people in the room, which probably included staff of various races, and might have even included some Japanese Americans.

More about Elaine H. Kim.

t t t

Sean Jensen

Sean Jensen, Vikings beat reporter, St. Paul (Minn.) Pioneer Press

Despite the perception, journalists are people.

If someone offends you, then by all means speak out. If you don’t, then you are empowering that person.

I think the young reporter wrongly assumed that to point out that “Jap” was a slur would result in a clash. That did not have to be the case.

The reporter could have politely said: “Mr. (fill in the blank), thank you for inviting me into your room and agreeing to chat with me about World War II. But I take offense to you referring to Japanese people as ‘Japs.’ ”

Me? I probably would have conducted the interview, and then told him afterwards that the word offended me. Then, perhaps we could have had a civilized discussion. Likely not.

Not to excuse him, but he may have used the word as a reference to Japanese soldiers, and he may not have meant it in a derogatory way.

But know this: The word “Jap” is offensive and meant to devalue a group of people, just like the n-word and multiple slang terms for Hispanics and Muslims.

Regardless of one’s race, one should be offended by someone who uses those terms.

More about Sean Jensen.

t t t

Sharon Rosenhause

Sharon Rosenhause, managing editor, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, and 2006 recipient of the Robert G. McGruder Awards for Diversity Leadership

I would not have let it slide.

I think you could have been respectful of the WWII veteran's age and service while also being true to (and respectful of) yourself and to what you believe in and know to be right.

Surely there was a nice, in fact a polite, way to explain to the veteran that this language was not acceptable and why the phrase is offensive and a slur.

We're all capable of learning and even of redemption.

More about Sharon Rosenhause.

Back to top