27 Oct 2022 18:20 GMT
The recommendations unleashed a wave of ridicule and criticism, since many users consider that it proposes a ‘naive’ or childish language.
Say “afro” instead of “black.” Avoid offensive chants. Do not use warmongering language, do not compare people to animals, and do not objectify or sexualize women.
These are some of the premises of the Handbook ‘Recommendations for the coverage of the 2002 Qatar Soccer World Cup’ published in Argentina by the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism (Inadi) and the Audiovisual Communication Services Public Defender’s Office and which sparked a strong controversy.
Although the document calls for combating discriminatory and hate speech that promotes different types of violence in football, which is laudable in principle, it was criticized above all because some journalists and social network users they considered that it proposes a ‘naif’ or infantilizing language.
Others accused government agencies of wanting to “impose” coverage rules or of wasting public resources.
“While retirees can’t make ends meet, fortunes are spent on a manual“, “The Inadi manual that recommends not commenting on haircuts in a soccer game but says nothing about the kids who can’t go to school due to lack of shoes offends us all,” some users pointed out.
“The guide is a crazy thing. It seems written in a glass tower of guilty pseudo-intellectuals“, “What will make Donda think that he can use public funds, to put together a manual of recommendations for the few Argentine journalists, that we will cover a World Cup? I thought it was a joke,” others wrote.
The 21-page booklet recommends saying phrases such as: “he knelt down and raised his arm because there is a tradition in the United States where Afro-descendant athletes usually make their fight visible through that gesture”, since this avoids mentioning the word “black” .
He also suggests not linking that word to negative facts or to illegal and clandestine practices, such as: “luck looks black for the team” or “he bought the ticket on the black market.”
Similarly, he proposes say “original peoples” instead of “indian” and do not use this definition as an insult.
“We recommend avoiding ethnic-racial discrimination through comments based on generalizations and stigmatization,” it states in another of its sections.
To do this, he urges to say: “there are very different realities in African countries, the same as between Afro people among themselves”, instead of: “blacks are a lot of running”.
Among the most controversial points is the suggestion not to promote situations of violence against referees, assistants and technical staff of the teams and avoid the dissemination of images such as kicks, riots, flags or field invasions, since this, in any case, is information.
Singing and discrimination
Another suggestion is “not to positively evaluate plays that involve malicious actions and/or injuries to the rival”, with justifications such as: “the rival is the enemy on the field of play”.
In addition, it advises not to promote or reproduce songs or comments offensive to the biases of the teams. With this, he leaves out one of the quintessential Argentine songs in the World Cups against his historic rival: “Brazil, tell me what it feels like to have your father at home…”.
On the other hand, it recommends not using “warmongering language”, that is, comparing sports comments to references to a confrontation or a war, as “today is to kill or be killed” or “it is a game of life or death”.
In the discrimination chapter, it promotes “respectful approaches to bodily diversity and avoiding ridicule and stigmatization based on physical appearance.”
Thus, instead of saying: “he is more attentive to the hairdresser than to training” or “he can’t jump or run that fat”better: “a goal is worth the same, no matter what haircut the athlete has”.
In another section, he suggests not using stigmatizing metaphors or resorting to comparisons with animals, in the style: “that fan behaves like monkeys” or “they are donkeys”.
Regarding respect for gender diversity, he recommends saying things like: “he is an athlete who publicly said he was homosexual and from then on he was supported by his teammates, the leadership and the fans”, instead of: “there are some players who would have to give proof of manhood”.