Overthinking Clickbait
Feb. 26th, 2019 09:00 amYelp Reviewers’ Authenticity Fetish Is White Supremacy in Action
https://ny.eater.com/2019/1/18/18183973/authenticity-yelp-reviews-white-supremacy-trap
According to my data, the average Yelp reviewer connotes "authentic" with characteristics such as dirt floors, plastic stools, and other patrons who are non-white when reviewing non-European restaurants. This happens approximately 85 percent of the time. But when talking about cuisines from Europe, the word "authentic" instead gets associated with more positive characteristics.
This article makes two main points. The first point is that sometimes people are racist on Yelp, and the second point is that racist reviews on Yelp hurt nonwhite business owners. These are both good points, but the writing and research are full of problems.
This article is a representative example of a bizarre fallacy I keep seeing in leftist social media spaces: deciding that a specific group is bad and that therefore every bad thing is the doing of the bad group. I see this a lot with people who use the word “cishets” as a pejorative, but what the writer of this article in particular is doing is assuming that, since white supremacy is bad, everything she finds problematic is therefore the fault of white people. This syllogism sort of makes sense on a superficial level, but the reification of “white” as the automatic default for all people in all circumstances has major issues.
( Read more... )
It’s important to say what the author is saying, but I really wish she could have found a more meaningful and nuanced way to say it. The restaurant industry in America is super fucked up on multiple levels, but a reliance on statistically meaningless generalizations and cultural essentialism doesn’t strike me as a productive way to start a conversation. And again, it’s not as if the author’s main points aren’t valid – it’s just that her research is flawed in so many easily avoidable ways (at least as it’s presented in this short article). So it’s not that the conclusions are wrong, necessarily, but rather that this article is mainly useful as an example of how social justice can’t really do the work it’s supposed to do without the critical thinking, empathy and compassion, and basic acknowledgement of diversity that are the foundations of progressive thinking.
https://ny.eater.com/2019/1/18/18183973/authenticity-yelp-reviews-white-supremacy-trap
According to my data, the average Yelp reviewer connotes "authentic" with characteristics such as dirt floors, plastic stools, and other patrons who are non-white when reviewing non-European restaurants. This happens approximately 85 percent of the time. But when talking about cuisines from Europe, the word "authentic" instead gets associated with more positive characteristics.
This article makes two main points. The first point is that sometimes people are racist on Yelp, and the second point is that racist reviews on Yelp hurt nonwhite business owners. These are both good points, but the writing and research are full of problems.
This article is a representative example of a bizarre fallacy I keep seeing in leftist social media spaces: deciding that a specific group is bad and that therefore every bad thing is the doing of the bad group. I see this a lot with people who use the word “cishets” as a pejorative, but what the writer of this article in particular is doing is assuming that, since white supremacy is bad, everything she finds problematic is therefore the fault of white people. This syllogism sort of makes sense on a superficial level, but the reification of “white” as the automatic default for all people in all circumstances has major issues.
( Read more... )
It’s important to say what the author is saying, but I really wish she could have found a more meaningful and nuanced way to say it. The restaurant industry in America is super fucked up on multiple levels, but a reliance on statistically meaningless generalizations and cultural essentialism doesn’t strike me as a productive way to start a conversation. And again, it’s not as if the author’s main points aren’t valid – it’s just that her research is flawed in so many easily avoidable ways (at least as it’s presented in this short article). So it’s not that the conclusions are wrong, necessarily, but rather that this article is mainly useful as an example of how social justice can’t really do the work it’s supposed to do without the critical thinking, empathy and compassion, and basic acknowledgement of diversity that are the foundations of progressive thinking.