"God Made a Farmer" Super Bowl Commercial - and PC Idiots too

1. 89

   GA Andersonposted 10 years ago

   I hate when this happens...
   
   Checking my email and followed a link to my twitter acct. Saw this dumbass tweet - and had to check the article:
   ===================================
   Win Bassett �@winbassett
   "In Dodge's world, every farmer is white Caucasian..that's as realistic as Kincade painting." ....link snipped by OP...
   ====================================
   
   It is the only time I have seen this Madrigal guy's writing - and it will be my last - what an idiot. Yes, I said idiot. It's not polite, and reflects poorly on me. Too bad so sad.
   
   Here's the deal.
   Dodge made a fantastic commercial about America's farmers, here's a link to it.
   http://youtu.be/AMpZ0TGjbWE
   
   Wait - this is not a rant about religion, so don't even try...
   
   Now, this Madrigal guy has an issue because he doesn't think it's realistically representative of America's farmers - He calls it "the whitewashing of American farmers"
   
   Bullhocky! It's a great sentiment, a great tribute, AND accurate. Madrigal is is too full  of himself and only saw what he wanted to see. I saw something completely different!
   
   Here is his article - but you will have to fix the address - I'm not giving him a link!
   EDIT ....link snipped by OP... forget the link, I don't even want to give him the traffic - here are the relevant excerpts
   
   "But there's a problem. The ad paints a portrait of the American agricultural workforce that is horribly skewed. In Dodge's world, almost every farmer is a white Caucasian. And that's about as realistic as a Thomas Kincade painting.
   
   Stipulating that visual inspection is a rough measure for the complex genealogical histories of people, I decided to count the race and ethnicity of the people in Dodge's ad. Here's what I found: 15 white people, one black man, and two (maybe three?) Latinos.
   
   I couldn't help but wonder: Where are all the campesinos? The ethnic mix Dodge chose to represent American farming is flat-out wrong.
   
   It's true that whites are the managers of 96 percent of the nation's farms, according to the USDA's 2007 Census of Agriculture. But the agricultural workforce is overwhelmingly Mexican with some workers from Central America thrown in. The Department of Labor's National Agriculture Worker Survey has found that over the last decade, around 70 percent of farmworkers in America were born in Mexico, most in a few states along the Pacific coast. This should not be news. Everyone knows this is how farms are run.
   
   And yet when a company decided to pay homage to the people who grow our food, they left out the people who do much of the labor, particularly on the big farms that continue to power the food system. You want to tell a grand story about the glories of working the land? You want to celebrate the people who grow food? You want to expound on the positive 'merican qualities that agricultural work develops in people? Great! What a nice, nostalgic idea!
   
   Now, did God make Mexican farmworkers or only white farmers? Is the strength and toughness that comes from hard work God's gift to white people only?
   
   To borrow Ta-Nehisi Coates' phrase, the way this ad whitewashed American farming leaves Mexican farmworkers and their children "excluded from the process of patriotism," even though many identify as American. Almost 75 percent of foreign-born cropworkers have been in the states for more than five years. Hell, more than half of the farmworkers surveyed by the Department of Labor have been in the U.S. for more than ten years. These are members of American communities and prospective citizens. "
   
   Geez... It's about the concept of the American farmer - not farm workers or crop pickers.
   
   And this rant has nothing against farm workers, migrant workers, crop pickers. Of course they work hard. And yes, they provide valuable labor that has benefited America - but the commercial is not about that.
   
   GA
   
   ps. make sure you have your big boy pants on if you drop by - no facts to worry about - this is obviously strictly about perspective.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Odd, isn't it? that when this was first aired it was on the radio, with no video representation whatsoever. Obviously Paul Harvey meant it that way and perhaps it should have stayed that way. Kind of like taking someone's scenic painting and painting one's own figures into it. I wonder if he would have approved and as I see it he is the only one with any reason to be offended by it...and he is dead. In the end they portrayed FARMERS, despite what ethnicity. It is not meant to be a narrative of any one country or nationality or even the present, crimony he starts with creation (surprised they didn't attack that, I mean we are all taught farmers evolved from apes, right?).. Now if they had pictures of muslims with assault weapons and camels...I'd have a problem.   I won'tputit past wilderness to attack the creation concept - he probably buys the ape story hook line and sinker. .

      replyreport
      1. 89

         GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Well Bro,
         I saw it a little differently - I definitely saw it as portraying America's farmers. And I thought Dodge did a great job of including diversity; white, black, Hispanic, male, female, young old...
         
         I think Paul Harvey would have liked it, and would have populated a visual of his radio version similarly to how Dodge did.
         
         I did. I used to listen to him whenever I could. I can just imagine what his comments about being "PC"
         
         GA

         replyreport
2. 0

   Motown2Chitownposted 10 years ago

   Speechless.

   replyreport
3. 77

   Mighty Momposted 10 years ago

   I'm with you on this one, GA Anderson.
   Really dude?
   I remember the little yellow chick and some amazingly straight rows in a field. Other than that, I couldn't tell you what the visuals were. But remember thinking the production was stunning.
   Mostly, I (and I suspect most of the unPC audience) was listening intently to this fabulous auditory paean to America's farmers and waiting to see what product it was for.
   
   But hey. If we're going to talk about SB ads for vehicles --- how about the Jeep ad about our military?
   I know others loved it.
   I found it -- cheaply exploitive and emotionally manipulative.
   In fact, Hallmark should sue Jeep for sap infringement.
   

   replyreport
4. 90

   Zelkiiroposted 10 years ago

   I feel conflicted about this. On one hand, yes, this ad is a horrific display of narrow-minded racism in an attempt to continue the false narrative that only white people matter. On the other hand, it's a fscking Super Bowl commercial, and thus is worth as much of my time as the notion of stapling my hand to a car tire.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Based on your perspective - You can borrow my stapler - at least you will have one part right.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Dont Taze Me Broposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         I really thought that was a comment not even worth replying to but GA Anderson you have proven me wrong by posting the appropriate response!

         replyreport
5. 94

   wildernessposted 10 years ago

   I really liked the ad, except for the very first sentence, where God needed a caretaker for His perfection and made a farmer.  At that instant a mental picture of the midwest dustbowl came to me and it nearly ruined the rest of the ad. 
   
   In spite of that I liked it, but then I'm not very PC.  Actually, "not very" is an understatement; I hate nearly everything that is PC and it didn't occur to me to ask where the other races were.
   
   Personally, anyone that puts that much importance to "balancing" the races is an idiot.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      You have to pick another adjective - I already claimed "idiot and dumbass"
      
      And like you - racial/ethnic diversity didn't occur to me either. But it sure did when I saw that stupid tweet.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 94

         wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         How about "fool", particularly in conjunction with "racist"?  In my limited experience those that complain the most about racism are the biggest racists.

         replyreport
         1. 89

            GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Or claim they can't be because "one of their best friends is..."
            
            Bit even though that may be a valid thought - it is still not the point.
            
            My ire was directed at the issue that even something as innocent and well-intentioned as that ad could be twisted to suit someone's agenda - AND - people buy into it.
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Motown2Chitownposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               That was exactly the thought I had when I read the article.  And I was so disgusted by it that I could find nothing nice to say.

               replyreport
6. 0

   Sooner28posted 10 years ago

   Why are you completely dodging the issue brought up by the author?  You provided no evidence against him except to say, "he's an idiot."  Yeah, that's insightful and helps move the discussion forward.
   
   Why would a commercial about something "quintessentially American" be portrayed as overwhelmingly white?  Corporate brainwashers (marketers) go through every single detail of a commercial, and do endless focus groups before airing it.  It's likely they did consider including more African Americans, Latinos, Asians, etc, but it didn't poll well. 
   
   Thus, the commercial is actually indicative of a deeper racial problem that is still staining the soul of America.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Motown2Chitownposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      When did farming become 'quintessentially American?'  I'm thinking agriculture and farmers have been in existence far longer than the USA.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Sooner28posted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Why do you think I put it in quotes?  The commercial was the one portraying it as such, not I.  Our culture has a romanticized idea of the farmer, so there is a real undercurrent there, but obviously it is absurd to claim that farming is only "American."
         
         I guess I wasn't clear enough.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Motown2Chitownposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            To be fair, though, I think the only Americana aspect of the spot was the truck.  Dodge is an American brand, after all, and the spot was being broadcast to an American audience.  I can see your point as far as that goes.  BUT, I don't recall Paul Harvey once mentioning that God made an American farmer. 
            
            We see in things what we want to and don't see what we don't want to.  Anything can be read into something completely benign - if the perspective with which it's observed is skewed to begin with.
            
            I saw the spot as a tribute to 'farmers.'  It did not once, and still hasn't, occur to me that it was a tribute to only 'white' farmers, 'latino' farmers, 'black' farmers.  It was a tribute to 'farmers.'  And, I'd venture that even those who view the world through a lens of any sort of bigotry saw it as nothing more than that until this author drew his racist brush across the canvas.

            replyreport
            1. 89

               GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               "
               We see in things what we want to and don't see what we don't want to.  Anything can be read into something completely benign - if the perspective with which it's observed is skewed to begin with.
               
               That was spot on!
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Motown2Chitownposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  Thanks, GA.  Took me a while to intelligently articulate my response to that piece of crap article.

                  replyreport
   2. 89

      GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Greetings Sooner28, I thought you might drop by.
      
      I did not mean "idiot" to be "insightful." I don't think it needed insight - It was fairly obvious he was an "idiot"
      
      Alas, I do have to agree with you that calling him an idiot did not reflect well on me, (I even said as much when I did it), but... sometimes you just have to call a spade a spade. (when it's not a shovel)
      
      But I do agree with you that the subject is "quintessentially American," to use your own term, - I don't see why you have an issue with it.
      
      However... I will address this "idiot" author's perspective if you feel I misunderstood it. But first maybe we should see if we agree are what is being discussed - rather than just engaging in a battle of semantics.
      
      I see the topic focus as "the American Farmer"
      - the one who shoulders the burden of whether the farm succeeds or fails. Pays the mortgage or loses the farm to foreclosure.
      - the one who is responsible for paying the bills - making do when there is no money for what is needed.
      *wasn't one of the examples about mending a halter with wire and baling twine because there was no money to buy a new one? Or shoeing a horse with parts of a car tire because there wasn't a live-in blacksmith, (or whatever was needed)? Or working sun-up to sun-down, AND THEN, going to meetings and doing things, (was it the school board they mentioned?), to support his community?
      - etc, etc. etc. Is this the guy you are talking about too?
      
      So, by  this "idiot" author's count, (admittedly rough), "... 15 white people, one black man, and two (maybe three?) Latinos."
      - so that's 18-19 people. I think he was off by at least 1 black ( I saw two black visuals, and at least 1 other Hispanic - so lets split the difference and just add one more minority - the black, because I am positive of those two visuals. So lets call it 15 - 2 - 3 for a total of 20.
      
      Are we still on the same page so far? Or do you disagree with me already?
      
      Now, more "semantic" definitions - I used the term "farmer" for the guy described above. In presenting some of his "research" he used the term "manager" - I will go along that the two are synonymous for this discussion - Will you?
      
      So, the data he presents that "validates" his perception of reality says that "...whites are the managers of 96 percent of the nation's farms, according to the USDA's 2007 Census of Agriculture."
      
      Well - 15/20 is 75% so the commercial actually appears to "over-represent minorities as "quintessential American farmers" So why does he have a beef? His own data seems to contradict what he is saying - and you also.
      
      Wait, I know, you're saying "What about the Mexicans? The migrants who work his fields? The crop workers that pick his crops? The black field hands? And in his words... the campesinos?
      
      Is that your perspective, and problem with the ad, too?
      
      They are not in the picture are they? Of course not - the ad wasn't about them. Or picking crops?
      
      It wasn't about people who work on the farm as a day-job. It wasn't about Mexican crop workers, or black field hands, or Latino migrant fruit pickers - it was about the American farmer - as portrayed.
      
      My original post stated that this was a perspective issue, not a debate of "facts" - yet I used the  this "idiot" author's (who you seem to agree with), own presented data to respond.
      - I feel very comfortable saying you are wrong.
      Wrong about what the ad was about.
      Wrong about the ad representing blatant "white" bias.
      Wrong about its composition being a "corporate brainwashing" effort.
      Wrong about this ad representing a hidden racism and a "racial crisis" in this country.
      
      And I will answer your question:
      "Why would a commercial about something "quintessentially American" be portrayed as overwhelmingly white?
      Because the American farmer - as portrayed, and discussed - Is and has been - overwhelmingly white.
      
      Farm workers were not in the discussion - so the "idiot" author changed the discussion so he could pursue an agenda. Does that shoe fit you also?
      
      In short - the author, and you are trying to create an issue where none exists. You are both wrong.
      
      But, as mentioned, I did expect you to drop by. And I did expect your perspective to be that of the "idiot" author. And you did not disappoint.
      
      GA

      replyreport
   3. 60

      bBereanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      You said 96% of the Managers (Farmers) are white, but overwhelmingly the laborers are not.  Can you honestly say that if this ad had been based completely on your own description, showing a white farmer directing a minority farm crew, you would not have been complaining the ad was racist for that depiction?  Would you not have been complaining that it showed the white person directing minorities?  Please take a moment to think about this and reply honestly.

      replyreport
      1. 89

         GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         I did not say that - the "idiot" author said it - I was quoting him.
         
         Since the ad had nothing to do with a white farmer directing minority workers - why do you bring it up?
         
         Are you unable to address the ad as it was, and not what you may want to twist it to be?
         
         If you look at the moon do you address the visage as the sun? That seems to be the tangent you are on here.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 60

            bBereanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Seriously GA? 
            
            Perhaps if you take another look, you will see I attached my comment to a quote of Sooner, and referenced another comment they made earlier.  That is who my response was directed to.  Sooner, not you.  Perhaps if you reread it in that context it will make a bit more sense to you.  I had your back on this one.  Looks like it might be a full sun this twilight, don't you think? 
            
            Loved the ad and miss Paul Harvey, btw.

            replyreport
            1. 89

               GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               Well, obviously I was wrong - and a bit sarcastic to boot - please accept my apology.
               I'll go stand in the corner until I get your reply...
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  bBereanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  Apology accepted, but not needed.  I was a little embarrassed for you with the response, especially since I could see myself making the same error and thinking "oops, what was I thinking?"

                  replyreport
7. 80

   psycheskinnerposted 10 years ago

   I think the minorities were token and the inheritance was described as father to son only which was unfortunate.  But it was a nice ad overall.

   replyreport
8. 85

   Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years ago

   I didn't see the Super Bowl, but I watched the clip you posted, and I read the text of what you posted.  I agree with you - it's a beautiful tribute, and the written criticism is so off target that it's astounding and defies logic.
   
   The commercial is not a racial statement, it's about hard-working people who have a heritage and a way of life spanning generations  I grew up on a farm, the same farm my great-grandparents and grandparents owned and after that, my parents owned it, in a house built by my great-grandparents. We squeaked out a living with worn-out tractors, barns that my grandparents built & were in need of repair, unpredictable weather, fickle crop prices and encroaching 'industry' that eventually pushed out the farmers. 
   
   My grandfather was killed in a tractor accident, in front of my older brother, who, at 13, frantically tried to get the tractor off of our grandfather to keep it from crushing his chest. My dad would work all day at a 'regular' job and plow fields at night by the light of a lamp suspended to a rod on the tractor.
   
   Maybe I should complain because I'm German and the commercial didn't give homage to Germans?

   replyreport
   1. 89

      GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Mary, your description of your farm heritage is also the perspective I have of an American farmer.
      
      That's why this whole thing ticked me off so quickly, and why I could not suppress the urge to call it out for the idiocy that it is.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks, GA (it's Marcy, by the way, not Mary).  My family came here from Germany, in the mid-to-late 1800s, as did many farming families. Others came from many other countries. Family farming is disappearing, year by year, and the commercial clip was a nice tribute to that hard life.

         replyreport