China toys with a new propaganda technique: Irony

MY FAVORITE WEAPON

WEIXIANG WANG OANA BURCU


Screen shot from the “Once upon a virus” video released by China’s state news agency Xinhua

Published 11 Jun 2020

As the world struggles with the Covid-19 crisis, the US and China have been locked in a heated propaganda warfare over the handling of the virus. Hitting back at President Donald Trump’s claim that “China let it spread”, Chinese official media angrily accused the US of “groundless accusation” and “nefarious plotting”. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian’s twitter post incited an equally unsubstantiated claim that the virus was a bioweapon of the US military.

Amid this public condemnation, conspiracy theories and disinformation campaigns, an unconventional animation video released by the state news agency Xinhua stood out in China’s propaganda arsenal.

Featured in Lego figures taking part in a play act, the one-and-a-half-minute video suggestively entitled “Once upon a virus” presents a series of interactions over Covid-19 between China and the US, represented by a group of terracotta warriors and the Statue of Liberty. The video opens with a mask-wearing warrior informing World Health Organisation (WHO) of a “strange pneumonia case”. The ensuing conversation takes place between the warriors, all equipped adequately with masks and hazmat suits, and the “bare” Statue of Liberty.“We discovered a new virus”, the warriors say. “So what? It’s only a flu”, the Statue of Liberty replies. “Wear a mask”, “don’t wear a mask”, “stay at home”, “it’s violating human rights”, “build temporary hospitals”, “it’s a concentration camp” are the back and forth lines along which the debate develops.

The Statue of Liberty constantly defies whatever the warriors say and hence is portrayed as undermining the efforts of fighting the virus, while China’s advice and “achievements” are underlined. As the Statue of Liberty is too busy engaging in this war of words, her condition worsens. The video ends with her eventually wearing a mask and being attached to an intravenous drip, still blaming China and insisting that “even when we contradict ourselves, we are always correct”, to which the warriors ironically retort “That’s what I love about you Americans, your consistency”.

Three aspects of this video are important to highlight: communication strategy, symbolism of content and targeted audience. China’s sarcastic and light-hearted effort of fixing its already-damaged reputation stands in sharp contrast to the party-state’s previous approaches in conducting foreign propaganda, defined generally by charm offensive on the one hand and “fire and fury” on the other. Solemnity, dignity and formality are hailed as the rule of thumb of conducting politics in Chinese culture and are in turn reflected in propaganda materials.

China’s willingness to engage with the criticisms received sits in stark contrast with traditional propaganda approaches of denial and reaffirmations.

The party-state tends to distance itself from such political satire, reflected in one of the Global Times editorials response to South Park’s innuendo of Xinjiang’s detention of Uighurs as “knowing too little about China”. This time, however, China seems to be at ease to use some stereotyped charges against it, such as “violation of human rights” and “concentration camp”, as an irony to vindicate itself. While China presents the charges the US put forward, it does so in a way that portrays them linked to the Covid-19 policy in the US, making it easier to highlight the flaws and contradictions within both.

China’s willingness to engage with the criticisms received sits in stark contrast with traditional propaganda approaches of denial and reaffirmations of its own positions which generally paid little attention to what the interlocutor had said. The Xinhua video instead of bluntly reiterating the official position or all of governments’ arduous efforts so far, sarcastically ridiculed the US for engaging in a “blaming for blaming’s sake” game.

Markedly, China did not use more internationally renowned images such as a panda or dragon to represent itself. The choice of terracotta warriors symbolises the eternal power of Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of unified China endorsing legalism as the official state doctrine. In his lifetime, he used his military might to brutally conquer neighbouring territories; in his afterlife, the 8,000-warrior terracotta army was meant to protect his emperorship into perpetuity. Adopting this symbol, China might imply that its draconian measures of effectively containing the virus are the manifestation of the disciplined Qin’s rule under legalism; parallels with President Xi Jinping’s rule, with lifted restrictions on his mandate and characterised by a harsh clampdown on critics and an aggressive foreign policy inevitably come to mind.

The Statue of Liberty is equally symbolic. Its “liberty enlightening the world” is mocked for its reverse effect in times of crisis, implying that human lives are traded for “liberty”, and as a consequence the freest country in the world is now the worst hit by the virus. Moreover, all characters are made from Lego parts which is ironic given the company’s controversial decision back in 2016 of not fulfilling Chinese dissident artist Ai Weiwei’s order due to concern that the bricks will be used to make a political statement; in line with its apolitical stance, the company denied any involvement in the production of this video.

The video, produced in English, was not disseminated by domestic media but targeted a foreign audience. Nonetheless, it was picked up by Chinese social media, recording over 11 million views since 2 May.We can only suspect that the state is cautiously sounding out the public’s reactions on such undertakings. This would be in line with Xi’s administration interest in combining information technology with propaganda. In 2013, a video called “How Leaders Are Made”, similar to “Once upon a virus” in style, though far less sarcastic in tone, showcased how high-profiled politicians raise to power in China and the West. The production studio “Fuxing Road” (复兴路上) remained a mystery, though some lined it back to CCP’s International Department.

For now, it remains to be seen whether China is truly turning a new creative page in its propaganda manual.

With Aunt Jemima, Mrs. Butterworth’s and Uncle Ben’s set to disappear from American kitchens, a look back at their racist origins

‘The Aunt Jemima caricature was a product of the white imagination and the minstrel shows of 19th-Century America’

Common household products such as Aunt Jemima pancake mix, Mrs. Butterworth’s syrup, Cream of Wheat and Uncle Ben’s rice all feature racist imagery that dates back to the Jim Crow and slavery era. MARKETWATCH PHOTO ILLUSTRATION/ISTOCKPHOTO

For 131 years, Aunt Jemima syrup and pancake mix have been breakfast staples in Americans’ homes. But behind the smiling face featured prominently on these products is a history of slavery and African-American oppression.

In the wake of the international protests over the deaths of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and Rayshard Brooks, PepsiCo PEP, +0.06% announced Wednesday that it will remove the image of Aunt Jemima from its packaging and change the name of the brand, acknowledging its racist origins.

‘Aunt Jemima, like other Mammy representations, portrays African-American women as one-dimensional servants. Despite this, many Americans nostalgically associate her with fond familial memories. For me, I see the vestiges of enslavement and segregation.’— David Pilgrim, the director of the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia

On Wednesday afternoon, Mrs. Butterworth’s CAG, +0.14% announced it has “begun a complete brand and packaging review on Mrs. Butterworth’s,” according to a statement made by its parent company, Conagra Brands. “The Mrs. Butterworth’s brand, including its syrup packaging, is intended to evoke the images of a loving grandmother,” it stated. “We stand in solidarity with our Black and Brown communities and we can see that our packaging may be interpreted in a way that is wholly inconsistent with our values.”

Cream of Wheat BGS, -0.08% did not respond to MarketWatch’s request for a comment in regard to whether they will make any changes to their branding.

Quaker Foods North America stopped short of using the word racist in its official statement. “We recognize Aunt Jemima’s origins are based on a racial stereotype,” said Kristin Kroepfl, vice president and chief marketing officer for the company. “While work has been done over the years to update the brand in a manner intended to be appropriate and respectful, we realize those changes are not enough.”

Kroepfl added, “We acknowledge the brand has not progressed enough to appropriately reflect the confidence, warmth and dignity that we would like it to stand for today. We are starting by removing the image and changing the name. We will continue the conversation by gathering diverse perspectives from both our organization and the Black community to further evolve the brand and make it one everyone can be proud to have in their pantry.”

Hours later, Mars Inc., the parent company of Uncle Ben’s rice, said it will be “evolving the visual brand identity.”

“As we listen to the voices of consumers, especially in the Black community, and to the voices of our associates worldwide, we recognize that now is the right time to evolve the Uncle Ben’s brand, including its visual brand identity, which we will do,” Caroline Sherman, a Mars spokeswoman said.

PepsiCo’s elimination of the Aunt Jemima character is long overdue, said David Pilgrim, the director of the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia at Ferris State University in Big Rapids, Mich. The museum features Pilgrim’s own collection of over 2,000 racist artifacts including white-only signs, commemorative postcards of lynchings and an entire section dedicated to Mammy caricatures.

Dating back to slavery through the Jim Crow era, white Southerners, in an effort to justify having slaves, designed propaganda which displayed black women in particular as happy and filled with laughter ‘as evidence of the supposed humanity of the institution of slavery.’

Dating back to slavery through the Jim Crow era, white Southerners, in an effort to justify having slaves, designed propaganda which displayed black women in particular as happy and filled with laughter “as evidence of the supposed humanity of the institution of slavery,” Pilgrim stated in an online blog post.

“The caricature portrayed an obese, coarse, maternal figure. She had great love for her white ‘family,’ but often treated her own family with disdain. Although she had children, sometimes many, she was completely desexualized. She ‘belonged’ to the white family, though it was rarely stated.”

One of the most well-known Mammy figures is Aunt Jemima, a fictional character that the brand is based on.

“The Aunt Jemima caricature was a product of the white imagination and the minstrel shows of 19th-Century America,” said Gregory Smithers, a history professor at Virginia Commonwealth University. “Aunt Jemima was also part of the ‘blackface’ tradition that, in the decades after the Civil War, harkened back to a simpler time of plantations and ‘happy slaves’.”

In the late 19th century, marketing agencies began to commodify racism and make it profitable, Smithers, who co-authored the book “Racism in American Popular Media: From Aunt Jemima to the Frito Bandito.” That dynamic “harkens back to the racial and economic order of the early 19th Century when slave markets were ubiquitous in the United States.”

The brand model featured on Aunt Jemima products was replaced two times. Once in 1933 with Anna Robinson, a heavier and darker in complexation model than Nancy Green, a slave from Kentucky who was the original Aunt Jemima brand figure. After Robinson came Edith Wilson in the 1960’s, who played Aunt Jemima on radio and TV shows. Wilson has remained on Aunt Jemima products to current day though in recent years “has been given a makeover: her skin is lighter and the handkerchief has been removed from her head. She now has the appearance of an attractive maid — not a Jim Crow era Mammy,” Pilgrim wrote.

In the late 19th Century, marketing agencies began to commodify racism and make it profitable. That dynamic ‘harkens back to the racial and economic order of the early 19th Century when slave markets were ubiquitous in the United States.’— Gregory Smithers, a history professor at Virginia Commonwealth University

“Aunt Jemima, like other Mammy representations, portrays African-American women as one-dimensional servants,” Pilgrim, a former sociology professor, told MarketWatch. “Despite this, many Americans nostalgically associate her with fond familial memories.”

“For me, I see the vestiges of enslavement and segregation,” said Pilgrim, who is black and grew up in Mobile, Ala., where he first began collecting racist artifacts at age 12.

“Any object that reduces African-Americans to a caricature, with accompanying stereotypes, is problematic,” he said. That applies to Uncle Ben’s Rice, Mrs. Butterworth’s and Cream of Wheat, which have similar racist connotations to Aunt Jemima.

The Black figures featured on these products “are carryovers from the ugly days when black people were relegated to servant roles,” Pilgrim said. “There is nothing inherently wrong with serving others, but when those were the dominant images of black people, it was easier to dismiss African Americans as real people.”

Aunt Jemima brand to change name, remove image that's 'based on racial stereotype'

Ben Kesslen, NBC News•June 17, 2020



The Aunt Jemima brand of syrup and pancake mix will get a new name and image, Quaker Oats announced Wednesday, saying the company recognizes that "Aunt Jemima's origins are based on a racial stereotype."

The 130-year-old brand features a Black woman named Aunt Jemima, who was originally dressed as a minstrel character.

The picture has changed over time, and in recent years Quaker removed the “mammy” kerchief from the character to blunt growing criticism that the brand perpetuated a racist stereotype that dated to the days of slavery. But Quaker, a subsidiary of PepsiCo, said removing the image and name is part of an effort by the company “to make progress toward racial equality.”

“We recognize Aunt Jemima’s origins are based on a racial stereotype," Kristin Kroepfl, vice president and chief marketing officer of Quaker Foods North America, said in a press release. “As we work to make progress toward racial equality through several initiatives, we also must take a hard look at our portfolio of brands and ensure they reflect our values and meet our consumers’ expectations."

Kroepfl said the company has worked to "update" the brand to be "appropriate and respectful" but it realized the changes were insufficient.

Aunt Jemima has faced renewed criticism recently amid protests across the nation and around the world sparked by the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody.

People on social media called out the brand for continuing to use the image and discussed its racist history.

The company's own timeline of the product says Aunt Jemima was first "brought to life" by Nancy Green, a black woman who was formerly enslaved and became the face of the product in 1890.

In 2015, a judge dismissed a lawsuit against the company by two men who claimed to be descendants of Anna Harrington, a black woman who began portraying Jemima in the 1930s, saying the company didn't properly compensate her estate with royalties.

Quaker said the new packaging will begin to appear in the fall of 2020, and a new name for the foods will be announced at a later date.

The company also announced it will donate at least $5 million over the next five years "to create meaningful, ongoing support and engagement in the Black community."

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Uncle Ben's rice to change brand as part of parent company's stance against racism

The announcement from Mars Inc. comes after a similar decision from Aunt Jemima's parent company, recognizing the racial stereotypes in the brands' origins.

Uncle Ben's parboiled rice has been sold in the United States under that name in 1947.Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

June 17, 2020, By Doha Madani NBC

The parent company of Uncle Ben’s rice said Wednesday that "now was the right time to evolve" the brand, including visually, but did not release details of what exactly would change or when. The move follows a similar announcement earlier in the day by Quaker Oats, the company that owns Aunt Jemima’s syrup.

Mars Inc., the parent company, said in a release that as a global brand, "we know we have a responsibility to take a stand in helping to put an end to racial bias and injustices."


“Racism has no place in society. We stand in solidarity with the Black community, our Associates and our partners in the fight for social justice,” Mars said. “We know to make the systemic change needed, it’s going to take a collective effort from all of us — individuals, communities and organizations of all sizes around the world.”

Uncle Ben’s was founded as Converted Brand Rice by co-founders Erich Huzenlaub and Gordon Harwell, according to the brand’s website. The name “Uncle Ben’s” began being used in the 1940s after Harwell and his business partner discussed a famed Texas farmer, referred to as Uncle Ben, known for his rice.

The image of the Black man on the box was modeled after Frank Brown, a waiter at the Chicago restaurant where Harwell had the idea, according to the website.

Aunt Jemima image to be removed and brand will be renamed, Quaker Oats announces JUNE 17, 2020

Critics have pointed out the problematic use of a Black man to be the face of a white company, noting that Black men were often referred to as “boy” or “uncle” to avoid calling them “Mr.” during the country's Jim Crow era.

Uncle Ben’s had a re-branding in 2007, when Mars portrayed the “Uncle Ben” character as a businessman, according to The New York Times.

Quaker Oats said Wednesday that it plans to change its Aunt Jemima syrup brand after acknowledging the character’s roots in racial stereotypes. The 130-year-old brand features a Black woman who was originally dressed as a minstrel character.

Brands have faced intensified scrutiny in recent weeks as protests have sprung up around the world following the death of George Floyd during an arrest in Minneapolis on May 25. Consumers have been vocal in their expectations that companies take a moral stance on racism and systemic injustices against Black people.

'Unorthodox,' 'abuse of power': ICE is hitting lawful asylum-seekers with a new obstacle

Carmen Sesin,NBC News•June 16, 2020


SEE Executive Overreaching in Immigration Adjudication PDF 
  TULANE LAW REVIEW APRIL 2019 AT THE END OF THIS ARTICLE

Karina Serrano Rodríguez was being escorted to a computer terminal at the South Louisiana Detention Center two weeks ago to prepare for her asylum case before an immigration judge when she learned that she would finally be paroled.

Rodríguez, 27, an asylum-seeker from Cuba, had spent eight months at the detention center, located in Basile, after having waited three months in Ojinaga, Mexico, for her turn under the Trump administration's Migrant Protection Protocols, also known as the Remain in Mexico policy.

Rodríguez was ecstatic when she learned the news — until she found out that the parole came with a $10,000 bond.

"It was like a bucket of cold water over my head," said Serrano, who is now living with relatives in Tampa, Florida. "I was desperate, because I didn't know where my family would come up with the money."

Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

Lawyers and advocacy groups say Serrano is part of a small but growing number of asylum-seekers in Louisiana detention centers who are being paroled with condition of bonds — something unusual for "arriving aliens," the official term for immigrants who present themselves at ports of entry and request asylum from authorities.

Karina Serrano Rodriguez (Courtesy Rolando Lopez Turruellas)"It's an unorthodox move," said Mich Gonzalez, a staff attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center who has been working on litigation against the New Orleans field office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement for its constant refusal to parole asylum-seekers.

"Now that they're granting some paroles, they're placing as many hurdles as possible," Gonzalez said.

Immigration judges and ICE officials routinely require bonds for people with specific circumstances, like criminal histories or having entered the country in unauthorized ways, Gonzalez said.

They are not traditionally issued as a condition for releasing lawful asylum-seekers on parole, according to a 2009 ICE directive. Immigration judges have no jurisdiction over the custody of such asylum-seekers, and only ICE decides whether they get parole.

"The 2009 Parole Directive explicitly states that absent adverse factors, such as an indication that someone is a flight risk, ICE should grant release on parole," Gonzalez said.

But ICE officials are issuing bonds from $10,000 to $30,000, a hefty price for relatives and friends of detainees to come up with.

Asylum-seekers and lawyers say they are not telling detainees why they are being released with a bond.

In an email, Bryan Cox, the public affairs director for ICE's Southern region, told NBC News that he is not sure whether ICE tracks that type of data, and he said that if it does, he is not sure he could provide it because of ongoing litigation.

The Southern Poverty Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union have brought a slew of cases against the New Orleans ICE field office for what they call a "blanket policy" of keeping asylum-seekers locked up. The groups won an injunction in September, when a federal judge ordered ICE to report each month the number of asylum-seekers paroled in the New Orleans field office.

Although ICE began releasing numbers after the lawsuits, Gonzalez criticized it, saying it is inconsistent. "We don't think they're accurate. We feel they're underreporting the number of applications they're receiving," Gonzalez said.

The New Orleans ICE field office has become notorious for being at a virtual standstill with the number of parole approvals.

In 2016, over 75 percent of asylum-seekers under its jurisdiction were granted parole. The number dropped dramatically, to 1.5 percent, in 2018, and in 2019, it paroled three people out of thousands in detention.
'It's extremely unusual'

There are no recent figures for the number of asylum-seekers who have been released on bond. The evidence is anecdotal, based on interviews with attorneys and people who have been released.

When Serrano was notified of her parole, three other women were granted parole, as well, also on $10,000 bonds. According to Serrano, the three women, like her, were Cuban, had no criminal histories and had family in the U.S. claiming them.

Homero López, executive director of Immigration Services and Legal Advocacy in New Orleans, said he has seen some asylum-seekers paroled with high bonds.

"It's extremely unusual," said López, who said he has seen it only a handful of times in his 10 years of experience.

He recently handled what he called a strong case for an LGBTQ person from El Salvador with family and friends in the U.S. She was released on $15,000 bond, which a nonprofit in Texas helped pay.

A detainee sits in a room to use a telephone inside the Winn Correctional Center in Winnfield, La., on Sept. 26, 2019. (Gerald Herbert / AP file)

Lara Nochomovitz, a private lawyer with a large client base in Louisiana who helps coordinate post-release services, told NBC News, "I see an uptick in releases, but most are coming with a bond attached."

Nochomovitz said she has seen up to a dozen paroles in Louisiana with $10,000 and $15,000 bonds. "That's obviously a lot of money for people to have to come up with," she said.

Coming up with money is complicated. With many people out of work because of the coronavirus pandemic, families are finding it difficult to gather the money. Bond funds have been depleted across the country and now have very limited resources.

"The National Bail Fund Network's referral system currently has $1.5 million of requests that no bond fund can meet at this time," said Elizabeth Nguyen, the immigration bond coordinator for the National Bail Fund Network.

Nguyen added that no matter how strong the fundraising is, bond funds cannot get everyone out because of the large number of people in detention whose paroles come with bonds.

Yaneici Peña Torres, 29, from Cuba, was paroled from South Louisiana Detention Center on June 3 after 10 months in detention and having been denied parole twice.

Peña Torres signed a contract with a bond company to pay the $10,000 that was attached to her parole.

Peña Torres, now in Miami, is filing paperwork so she can start looking for a job, but she worries that with the pandemic, she will not be able to find one. She owes the bond company $300 a month.

"This is an abuse of power. They don't care about us," Peña Torres said. But her mind is also on the detainees she left behind. "There are women who have been detained for over a year that are going crazy in that hell."

TULANE LAW REVIEW

VOL. 93 APRIL 2019 No. 4

Executive Overreaching in Immigration Adjudication

Fatna E. Marouf*

        PDF  https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?         article=2304&context=facscholar

While Presidents have broad powers over immigration, they have traditionally shown restraint when it comes to influencing the adjudication of individual cases. 

The Trump Administration, however, has pushed past such conventional constraints.  

This Article examines executive overreaching in immigration adjudication by analyzing three types of interference.

First the Article discusses political interference with immigration adjudicators, including politicized appointments of judges, politicized performance metrics, and politicized training materials. 

Second the Article addresses executive interference with the process of adjudication, examining how recent immigration decisions by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions curtail noncitizens 'procedural rights instead of making policy choices and promote prosecution rather than fair adjudication. 

Third the Article examines executive policies that prevent aitudication from taking place, such as turning asylum seekers away at ports of entry, criminally prosecuting them if they enter illegally, and separating them fimm their children.

After discussing how these forms of executive interference threaten constitutional and statutory rights, the Article explores how the judiciary, Congress, and agencies can help protect against presidential influence in immigration adjudication.

Mississippi official: Black people 'dependent' since slavery

THIS IS THE AMERICAN WHITE SUPREMACIST ARGUMENT AGAINST WELFARE MOTHERS, 
IDENTIFYING THOSE IN NEED AS BLACK FOLK
WHEN IN REALITY IT'S PO'R WHITE TRASH

EMILY WAGSTER PETTUS, Associated Press•June 16, 2020



Confederate Symbols Mississippi
Lowndes County supervisor Harry Sanders listens as Bishop Scott Volland, unseen, asks the county to consider removing a Confederate monument from the courthouse lawn during a Lowndes County Board of Supervisors meeting, Monday, June 15, 2020, in Columbus, Miss. After rejecting a proposal to move the monument, Sanders said this week that African Americans “became dependent” during slavery and have had a harder time “assimilating” into American life as other groups who have been mistreated have. His remark has prompted calls for his resignation. (Claire Hassler/The Commercial Dispatch, via AP)


JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — After rejecting a proposal to move a Confederate monument, a white elected official in Mississippi said this week that African Americans “became dependent” during slavery and as a result, have had a harder time “assimilating” into American life than other mistreated groups. Critics said his remarks were outrageous and called on him to resign.

Confederate symbols are being debated in many states amid widespread protests across the U.S. against racism and police violence. Monuments that have stood for more than a century outside courthouses and on other public property have been removed or relocated in other Southern states in recent days, and supervisors in several Mississippi counties are discussing the matter.

In northeastern Mississippi's Lowndes County, supervisors voted along racial lines Monday against moving a Confederate monument that has stood outside the county courthouse in Columbus since 1912. The monument depicts a Confederate soldier and says the South fought for a “noble cause.” Three white supervisors voted against the proposal and two black supervisors voted for it.

At one point during the meeting, a white supervisor, Harry Sanders, said moving the monument would solve nothing and would be an attempt to erase history.

“We need to be reminded of some atrocity that happened," he said. “If we are not reminded about it, we are going to have a tendency to forget it and (the history) is going to repeat itself.”

After the meeting, Sanders, a Republican, was quoted by the Commercial Dispatch as saying that other groups of people who had also been mistreated in the past — he cited Irish, Italian, Polish and Japanese immigrants — were able to successfully “assimilate” afterward.

“The only ones that are having the problems: Guess who? The African Americans,” Sanders said. "You know why? In my opinion, they were slaves. And because of that, they didn’t have to go out and earn any money, they didn’t have to do anything. Whoever owned them took care of them, fed them, clothed them, worked them. They became dependent, and that dependency is still there. The Democrats right here who depend on the black vote to get elected, they make them dependent on them.”

Democratic State Rep. Kabir Karriem of Columbus, who is African American, told The Associated Press on Tuesday that Sanders should resign. Karriem called Sanders' remarks “appalling.”

“It's really unforgivable how outlandish they were, knowing that he has black people in his district,” Karriem said. “His revisionist history is not accurate at all. Our ancestors didn't want to be slaves.”

Sanders did not immediately respond to a message the AP left on his cellphone voicemail Tuesday.

A Mississippi law enacted in 2004 says no war monument may be “relocated, removed, disturbed, altered, renamed or rededicated.” But the law also says: “The governing body may move the memorial to a more suitable location if it is determined that the location is more appropriate to displaying the monument.”

Lowndes County is 53% white and 45% black. Several black and white residents asked supervisors on Monday to move the Confederate monument. One of the two black supervisors, Democrat Leroy Brooks, said people were not trying to change history, but wanted to “rechannel some things that are offensive."

“We are not saying tear it down," Brooks said. "We are saying relocate it, so when people come to the courthouse and they look at it from a certain angle, they don’t see something that looks like a Ku Klux Klan.”

In Mississippi's second-largest city, Gulfport, officials voted Tuesday to stop flying the state flag on city property because it includes the Confederate battle emblem that critics say is racist. Workers quickly removed the banner from City Hall.

Mississippi is the only state with a flag that includes the emblem: a red field topped with a blue X with 13 white stars. White supremacists embedded it in the upper left corner of the flag in 1894.

Several other Mississippi cities and counties and all eight of the state’s public universities have stopped flying the state flag in recent years, saying that the Confederate symbol does not properly represent a state with a 38% black population. People who voted in a 2001 statewide election chose to keep the symbol on the flag, but recent protests are reviving debate about changing the design.

Republican Gov. Tate Reeves has said that if the flag is going to be changed, it should be done in a statewide referendum.

____

Follow Emily Wagster Pettus on Twitter: http://twitter.com/EWagsterPettus.

Bail Denied To Murder Suspect In Alberta Metis Hunters' Deaths

Anthony Bilodeau is charged with killing Jake Sansom and Morris Cardinal.

By Brandi Morin, On Assignment For HuffPost Canada


BRANDI MORIN/HUFFPOST CANADA

Sarah Sansom hugs her daughter on the steps of the Edmonton courthouse.

EDMONTON — Sarah Sansom cherishes the last time her husband of 10 years kissed her before he left for a hunting trip in northern Alberta in late March. And she said she felt the moment he died, like a punch in the stomach.

“I knew when it happened,” Sarah told HuffPost Canada in an interview. “I felt it. I had pain and knew something was wrong. He was my soul mate.”

Jake Sansom, 39, was killed on the evening of March 27, along with his uncle Morris Cardinal, 57. RCMP said a verbal confrontation turned physical, and the pair were shot dead on a rural road near Glendon, northeast of Edmonton.

The three Sansom children haven’t slept alone since his killing. Two of them pile in with Mom at night, while the oldest sleeps on the floor next to the bed.
Bail denied to murder suspect

Anthony Bilodeau, 31, was charged with two counts of second-degree murder in April. Over the weekend, Roger Bilodeau, 56, was also charged with the same offences. RCMP confirmed the two, who are from Glendon, are related but have not revealed how.

The younger Bilodeau applied for bail Tuesday for a second time, and was denied.

Sarah drove almost six hours north from her home in Nobleford to be at the Edmonton courthouse Tuesday to try to make sure the accused remains behind bars.

“Do I wish them harm? No. But I’d love for them to sit there in jail for the rest of their lives and think about what they did,” she said of those responsible for her loved ones’ deaths.
BRANDI MORIN/HUFFPOST CANADA

From left to right: Michael Sansom in the back, Ruby Smith, left, Sarah Sansom, centre, and her daughter were at the Edmonton courthouse on Tuesday to oppose the bail request by the accused.

Sansom and Cardinal, who were part of the Metis Nation of Alberta, had designated hunting rights, including out of season. They had gone into the woods to go moose hunting after Sansom was laid off as a heavy equipment operator at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Sarah Sansom believes her husband, who was also a volunteer firefighter, and his uncle were killed because of racism.

“My husband was killed over it. It’s disgusting. It destroys families. To look at someone and take their life because of the colour of their skin,” said Sansom.

The RCMP have said they have no evidence at this point that the killings were racially motivated.

Byron Carr, who is part of the Métis Nation of Alberta, was among dozens of supporters outside the Edmonton courthouse Tuesday morning.

“It’s such a tragic loss. Everyone who has harvesting rights should be able to harvest in our own lands free of worry. We hunt in order to feed our families bellies and not get a bullet for it. I hope justice is served,” said Carr.
BRANDI MORIN/HUFFPOST CANADA

Father Mark Sych was at the Edmonton courthouse in support of Anthony Bilodeau and his family.

There were also people outside the courthouse in support of the two accused.

“There’s no racism in any of these hearts, not one ounce,” said a woman who identified herself as Anthony Bilodeau’s godmother.

Father Mark Sych added that the family “prayed for their souls” of the two dead Metis men.

Some of those opposing bail for Anthony Bilodeau shared their feelings through a megaphone.

“We all know too well the process you guys are going to go through,” Jade Tootoosis told the Sansom and Cardinal families on the courthouse steps. “And we know it’s not kind to Indigenous people. So we pass along our strength.”

We’re broken into pieces.Ruby Smith, Jake Sansom's mother

Tootoosis is the sister of Colton Boushie, 22, from Red Pheasant First Nation, who was shot and killed by a white farmer on his property in 2016. Gerald Stanley was acquitted of second-degree murder, which sparked protests across the country.

“We’re broken into pieces,” said Ruby Smith, who lost her brother as well as her son. “We won’t be able to put those pieces back again because Morris and Jake are those pieces.”

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, no funerals have been held. But Sarah is planning a celebration of life for Jake that will include traditional powwow singers, dancers and room for hundreds of people to attend.

RELATED
Alberta Widow Mystified After Husband, Uncle Killed On Hunting Trip
Metis Hunters' Killings Not Racially Motivated, Say RCMP. Locals Aren't So Sure.
Finding Healing After The Gerald Stanley Verdi

Amazing Cover Shot Challenges The Biggest Taboo For New Moms

Today's Parent shows a post-birth moment between mother and child in its full un-retouched glory.

By Valerie Howes 06/16/2020

HANNAH SPENCER

Baby Archer has to be Canada's youngest cover model, at just minutes old, when this shot was taken.

Canadian magazine Today’s Parent just released its July cover and not only does it feature what must be the youngest cover model of all time, it shows the tender moment Archer’s mom, Siarre Massey, first nurses her newborn son.

Baby Archer is seen literally fresh from the birth canal.

The photo was taken by U.S. birth photographer Hannah Spencer, who describes her aesthetic on her website as “real-shit birth imagery.”

Today’s Parent editor-in-chief Kim Shiffman said of the raw and intimate image:

“This photograph powerfully tells a story of the beautiful, emotional moment when your baby latches on to the breast for the first time. I love the mother’s left hand, protectively cradling her baby, and her gaze, loving and observant as she assesses her baby’s latch. I love the baby’s wrinkly newborn skin and little tushy (how could you not?). I love that this photo celebrates a beautiful Black mother and her baby.”

In 2020, for such a sweet moment to be cover-worthy shouldn’t be such a big deal, and yet it is

Just last year, it was reported that women still find themselves humiliated for pumping milk at work, asked to cover up while breastfeeding and ordered to leave a public swimming pool because they were nursing.

As recently as 2015, images of women breastfeeding were still banned from Facebook and Instagram. That same year, across North America, moms reported being kicked out of doctors’ offices, airplanes, locker rooms, restaurants, change rooms, churches, post offices and even an airplane bathroom, for daring to breastfeed their infants in these spaces.

Even though the right to nurse anywhere is protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in a 2017 survey, 17 per cent of Canadian moms stated that they have still felt embarrassed while nursing in public. Meanwhile, in the U.S., some workers are still denied basic protections around the right to pump breastmilk at work.

In 2020.

However a parent nourishes their baby, they should be supported and respected. Fed is best. Mainstream media images like the cover of Today’s Parent will go a long way to helping smash dated taboos around breastfeeding and celebrate the beauty of the bond it can help to forge.

This Arctic Greenhouse Is Helping To Feed Northern Families During The Pandemic

Yes, it is possible to garden in the Arctic.

By Al Donato06/16/2020

INUVIK COMMUNITY GREENHOUSE

Inuvik Community Greenhouse staff pose with seeds donated by southern Canadians.

This is part of an ongoing HuffPost Canada series on food insecurity and how it’s affecting Canadians during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this edition, we explore how North America’s most northern greenhouse promotes local food production as an answer to food insecurity during the pandemic.

Getting kids to eat vegetables isn’t hard in the Arctic, especially when they’re grown under the midnight sun. In fact, Inuvik Community Greenhouse executive director Ray Solotki remembers one boy from the hamlet of Aklavik last year heading straight from the local airport to a garden plot to do just that.

“He was so excited and ran straight for the greenhouse to go and see how his kale was … we have kids eating kale like candy because it’s so fresh and delicious,” Solotki told HuffPost Canada.

To the uninformed, Arctic gardening can sound like an oxymoron. In reality, summers with 24 hours of sunlight make the greenhouse lush and balmy from March to October. What’s grown can take on delicious flavour profiles because of the unique surrounding area, as Inuvialuit gardener Lanita Thrasher can attest.

“One year, we had cold wind coming off the Arctic Ocean all summer and it made for the sweetest strawberries I’ve ever tried in my life,” Thrasher recalled. She hails from the nearby hamlet of Paulatuk, where they run a garden named for the local Qungulliq plant, but previously worked and volunteered at the greenhouse.

Normally, the greenhouse is a thriving community space, where people can partake in yoga classes, tours, cooking workshops, and harvest delicious produce like rhubarb, lettuce, and peas.

But since the COVID-19 pandemic intensified in March, the 18,000-square-foot “oasis of the north” needed to change operations entirely to ensure northern families could access fresh produce even during a health crisis. Almost a quarter of N.W.T. households have trouble buying groceries.

“This is our tester year,” Solotki explained. “Can we be a farm instead of a greenhouse?”


INUKVIK COMMUNITY GREENHOUSE

Normally $35, the weekly food boxes are now $20 each all summer, NNSL reports.

Usually, 90 per cent of its 180 soil-filled plots are used by paying members, who use them to grow whatever they’d like. The rest of the plots are used by the greenhouse to grow plants and produce for sale.

This year, that ratio has flipped because only staff and a restricted number of members are allowed to enter. Thanks to a $25,000 grant from Community Food Centres Canada, the greenhouse can sell subsidized weekly boxes of fruits and vegetables to those in need. So far, over 50 families have applied, four times the usual amount of applicants.

Additionally, seniors on fixed incomes are receiving free flowers, herbs, and mixed greens, funded by a United Way grant. Donations to homeless shelters have also been made.

Some plots have also been used to grow plants on behalf of members who continue to pay their dues, meaning Solotki — who also serves as a councillor and a firefighter for the community — and her part-time staff have kept busy watering and harvesting what grows at a breakneck speed, all while social distancing.

Aside from providing fruits and vegetables, the greenhouse hopes that the plants they distribute through starter sales encourage people to grow in their own backyards. The greenhouse’s ultimate goal this year is for town residents to realize they can grow food anywhere, not just in the greenhouse.

Most Inuvik residents are Inuvialuit and food sovereignty is an important value for the greenhouse. Defined by Food Secure Canada as “the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food,” having autonomy over what’s on the dinner table is something they believe cultivating locally supports for all community members. In Thrasher’s view, the pandemic might be a good time for people new to gardening to try it out.

Country food, which refers to the Northern cuisine made by food sourced from the surrounding area, is largely covered by outlets in relation to local animals and fish. Culturally appropriate fresh produce, such as blueberries grown in the greenhouse, is also important to make available.

“People don’t equate the Arctic with food security, but we have the ability. We have the intelligence,” Solotki said. “There’s this misconception that Indigenous people in the north don’t eat vegetables. That’s not true. The truth is, they would eat vegetables if they were readily available to them and were in good quality.”

Growing local is part of food security solution

Availability and cost is a huge issue when it comes to making food accessible to people in the territory.

Does $21 for a bag of flour sound reasonable? Even at the height of quarantine baking, shelling out four times the average Canadian cost would make many balk. But for an Inuvik resident, high food prices are normal year-round. The territorial government reported a bag of grapes sold for $10 in the small town last year.


The price of a watermelon in Inuvik. @JustinTrudeau Nobody can afford this. Please do something. pic.twitter.com/9R2q62dNAe— Diane Reid 🇨🇦🌎 ☮️ (@dianemariereid) August 12, 2019


Food prices in northern Canada can make grocery trips costly for families, although some items in Yellowknife, the territory’s biggest city, and nearby communities, are on par with southern prices. Financial incentives like government allowances and higher wages for certain jobs can help alleviate hunger, but lower-income residents aren’t as fortunate.

Grocery stores aren’t experiencing the food shortages seen at the pandemic’s start, but the effects of potential summer supply chain disruptions could mean whatever problems southern Canadians face grocery shopping this season will be worse for northern residents.

“When people rely on social assistance or income assistance, and they are living paycheck to paycheck ... you can’t stock up on three months worth of groceries,” Solotki said.

The lack of options and lack of freshness sold in stores can be a problem too.

“Instead of bringing trucks up the highway, full of potatoes and carrots and onions, we should look at growing a lot of things locally,” Inuvialuit gardener Lucy Kuptana told HuffPost Canada.

However, Arctic crop-growing for sustenance isn’t as widespread as it could be.

“This is our tester year. Can we be a farm instead of a greenhouse?”- RAY SOLOTKI

One of the barriers is apprehension over gardening from newbies, which Solotki hopes will be less daunting over time. Maybe by trying to grow carrots or another vegetable during the pandemic, they can slowly build up their confidence in crop-growing, she suggested.

Another barrier Solotki and Kuptana list is the after-effects of colonialism. The location of the greenhouse is closely associated with a now-demolished residential school.

“If [locals have a gardening background], it might have come from residential schools. So it has a negative connotation,” Solotki said.

                                                          ALONG WITH GREENHOUSES

DRESS CODES ARE RULING CLASS HEGEMONY
Americans have increasingly embraced Black Lives Matter. Will employers let them do so at work?
Starbucks now allows employees to show support for Black Lives Matter PROVIDING STAFF WITH READY MADE T-SHIRTS, BUTTONS ETC. — but some companies say it violates their dress codes

Published: June 17, 2020 By Meera Jagannathan

Surveys show a dramatic increase in Americans’ support for the Black Lives Matter movement over time. JUSTIN SULLIVAN/GETTY IMAGES

As support for the Black Lives Matter movement grows, companies with a public commitment to racial justice are grappling with how to address the matter internally — and some employees are speaking out.

Starbucks SBUX, -0.18% on Friday reversed an earlier decision to prohibit workers from wearing Black Lives Matter apparel on the job, announcing that the company would be designing a new T-shirt for employees emblazoned with a dozen-plus protest signs, including “Black Lives Matter” and “No justice, no peace.”

“Until these arrive, we’ve heard you want to show your support, so just be you,” company executives wrote in a blog post. “Wear your BLM pin or t-shirt. We are so proud of your passionate support of our common humanity.” The employee-led Starbucks Black Partner Network and allies created the shirt “to recognize the historic significance of this time,” they added. “Together, we’re saying: Black Lives Matter and it’s going to take ALL of us, working together, to affect change.”

Y-Vonne Hutchinson, the CEO and founder of the diversity and inclusion consulting firm ReadySet, told MarketWatch it was “great news” that Starbucks had listened to its employees and customers — but added that she thought “this stumble demonstrates the need for deeper change within Starbucks.”

“It does signal a fundamental lack of understanding around the Black Lives Matter movement, the issues of systemic racism, and Starbucks’ role as a popular brand and employer,” she said. “I hope they learn from this situation and use it as a catalyst to begin that process of transformation.”

Employment lawyer Paula Brantner, the principal and president of PB Work Solutions, said Starbucks’ move was “very responsive to both the moment and what their partners want their company to stand for.” “The statement is consistent with the Starbucks brand and what I understand of their culture, which shows that companies should be prepared to listen to what their employees want and not just impose the views of corporate management or restrictive rules that will cause employees to chafe or speak out publicly in opposition,” she said.

The policy change came after backlash to a BuzzFeed News report about an internal company memo that advised Black Lives Matter clothing and accessories did not adhere to Starbucks’ dress code policy — and explained that “agitators who misconstrue the fundamental principles of Black Lives Matter movement” might “intentionally repurpose them to amplify divisiveness.” The company’s dress code prohibits any button or pin that “interferes with safety or threatens to harm customer relations or otherwise unreasonably interferes with Starbucks public image,” as well as pins or buttons “that advocate a political, religious or personal issue,” the memo said.

Some Starbucks workers who spoke with BuzzFeed called the company’s initial decision “surprising and disappointing” — particularly given Starbucks’ public support for racial-equity causes — and said it made their voices feel “muted,” pointing out that the company had allowed accessories and shirts that celebrate LGBTQ rights. The ban spawned a #BoycottStarbucks hashtag that went viral.

A Starbucks spokesperson told MarketWatch on Thursday that the company was “committed to doing our part in ending systemic racism.”
Companies can have dress codes, but they can’t be discriminatory

There’s no federal law, and there are only a handful of state laws, “that potentially protect an employee’s right to speak out at work about an important social issue,” Brantner said. And while companies are allowed to have dress codes, they’re not allowed to enforce them in racially discriminatory ways, she added. “Of course, that would be against the law if a black employee was fired for wearing [a Black Lives Matter shirt] but a non-black employee was not terminated for wearing something similar,” such as an “All Lives Matter” shirt, she said.

The nonprofit employee-rights organization Workplace Fairness, which Brantner previously advised and led, notes that “dress code policies must target all employees, not just you.” “While employers have a fair amount of latitude in enforcing dress code provisions, if you feel that your privacy rights have been violated by your employer or believe the enforcement of the dress code is discriminatory, contact your state department of labor, or a private attorney for more information,” the organization says.

There might not be a legal remedy in cases that don’t show clear-cut discrimination, Brantner said. But companies are fairly susceptible in the court of public opinion to being called out for this kind of behavior, she added, “so that’s probably the way to go at the moment.”

‘This country is going through a major change’

Starbucks baristas aren’t the only public-facing employees who have struggled to express support for the Black Lives Matter movement at work. Quinton Desamours, an 18-year-old from Lehigh Acres, Fla., says he resigned from his Publix supermarket job this month after an assistant manager asked him at the beginning of his shift June 6 to remove a face mask bearing the acronym “BLM.”

The manager said that he didn’t personally have a problem with the mask, Desamours told MarketWatch, but added that he wasn’t yet sure where the company stood on the issue — a statement Desamours said he found “disturbing.” The teen said the manager also told him he was endangering himself and others who worked there, and said Desamours couldn’t go back to work with the mask on. “But that was my mask, so I decided to leave,” he said.

‘I know how people try to twist [Black Lives Matter] into a political statement, but the basis of the movement is equality.’— Quinton Desamours, a former Publix employee

While the supermarket chain does prohibit masks with “non-Publix messaging,” Desamours claims that rule wasn’t strictly enforced at his store, citing coworkers’ masks displaying a floral design and a comic strip.

He later called to resign from his employer of a month and a half. A district manager called a few days later to apologize and offer his position back, he said, saying that his resignation hadn’t gone through yet. But Desamours said he no longer wanted to work there.

“This country is going through a major change, and I didn’t want to be a part of a company that doesn’t want to be a part of the change,” he said. “I know how people try to twist [Black Lives Matter] into a political statement, but the basis of the movement is equality, and that’s how I saw it — and that’s what I told them.”

Publix did not return a MarketWatch request for comment on Desamours’ account. But in response to an inquiry about a similar incident, a message posted on Publix’s customer-service Twitter TWTR, -0.46% account Friday said: “We have ordered a substantial number of face coverings to provide to our associates as part of our mandatory facial covering policy. Given the impact demand has had on availability, we have allowed associates to wear medical/surgical masks, dust masks and cloth face coverings until their uniform face coverings arrive in the coming days. Our uniform policy does not permit non-Publix messaging.”

“Our focus remains on ensuring a welcoming work and shopping environment for all associates and customers,” the company added, linking to a page that noted Publix’s $1 million donation to National Urban League affiliates alongside CEO Todd Jones’s note to associates about racial injustice and diversity.


Quinton Desamours, 18, says he resigned from his supermarket job this month after being asked to remove a face mask bearing the acronym ‘BLM.’ COURTESY OF QUINTON DESAMOURS

In a similar incident on June 5, a Martin’s Super Market employee in Granger, Ind., said he quit his job after allegedly being told he couldn’t wear the “Black Lives Matter” mask he had worn during two of his shifts.

“Today I was informed by my store manager that there had been so many customer complaints filed against me for wearing it that the corporate office was instructing me not to wear it. Meanwhile, Martins has made no statement in solidarity of its black workers or customers,” Avery Worrell wrote in a Facebook FB, 0.45% post.

“Some may say I was violating company policy for using them as a ‘platform,’” he added, “but I believe Martin’s should speak out and actively combat racism especially because they serve a largely white consumer base and these tend to be the people who need to hear it the most.”

Martin’s did not return a MarketWatch request for comment. A spokeswoman told the South Bend Tribune that the company stood in support of racial equality, and that “respect is one of our core values, and as such, all of our associates have the responsibility to create a supportive and welcoming environment that values every individual.”

Dennis Eidson, the interim president and CEO of Martin’s parent SpartanNash, recently called on Americans to “step up and do more to eradicate racism,” and said the company would continue providing workers with opportunities to complete “dignity and respect training and unconscious bias training.”
Support for Black Lives Matter has grown in recent weeks

Surveys show a dramatic increase in Americans’ support for the Black Lives Matter movement over time. A Yahoo News/YouGov poll this month, for example, found that 57% of U.S. adults had a “very or somewhat favorable” view of the movement. In contrast, just 27% of U.S. adults in a 2016 YouGov poll said they “strongly or somewhat” approved of the movement.

The recent protests stemming from George Floyd’s killing appear to have galvanized considerable support for Black Lives Matter: A June 10 New York Times article, citing data from the survey-research firm Civiqs, reported that support for the movement had grown in the previous two weeks by almost as much as it had in the last two years.

“It seems that more people in the public are endorsing and making the statement that black lives matter rather than saying, ‘I’m part of a movement or part of an organization’ or any kind of connotation that goes with that,” Quinetta Roberson, a Villanova University professor of management who specializes in diversity and inclusion, told MarketWatch.

“It’s an absolute statement — black lives matter — so I think that is what’s being said,” Roberson added. “Once it starts getting into interpretation and more relative and more evaluative, that’s where we start to see the controversy.”

‘Are businesses hiring, promoting, supporting their black employees? Are they respecting their black customers? That’s the kind of systemic change that seems to be happening, but I think it’s going to take time to see how real it is.’— Y-Vonne Hutchinson, the CEO and founder of the diversity and inclusion consulting firm ReadySet

Those three words have become “more mainstream,” Brantner said. “People are pushing back on the perception of Black Lives Matter as a radical or violent movement, and not letting its identity be smeared by those who are uncomfortable with what it represents,” she said.

Brands, meanwhile, are cognizant of “the power of social-justice messaging,” Hutchinson said. She pointed to Nike’s NKE, 0.99% soaring sales after the company backed ex-NFL player Colin Kaepernick in his protest against racial injustice and police brutality.

“Marketers and brand managers are paying attention to that, so the messaging has on the corporate side changed,” she said. “I still don’t know what that means for real corporate practices in terms of where the rubber meets the road: Are businesses hiring, promoting, supporting their black employees? Are they respecting their black customers? That’s the kind of systemic change that seems to be happening, but I think it’s going to take time to see how real it is.”

That change, she added, includes supporting employees who choose to publicly support Black Lives Matter at work.

“They’ve made their statements, they’ve contributed money or tried to put in support systems,” Roberson agreed. “But what’s the next thing? How do they start to actually change the culture or the structure of their organizations so that these things get addressed in a sustainable way?”

Companies will have to answer for when their treatment of employees is at odds with the public image they’ve cultivated, Brantner said. “When a company comes out and talks about the tragic events and how they support their black employees and they’re investing in communities … if there are incidents within the company that don’t match that, I think that’s where companies are going to be the most vulnerable right now.”
‘They just have to put some muscle behind that decision’

Hutchinson doesn’t buy arguments that policies governing employees’ Black Lives Matter attire are meant to keep workers safe. Store managers and employees should be comfortable calling the authorities or booting customers who harass their coworkers, she said.

“They’re not obligated to serve the person who doesn’t align with their values or who doesn’t treat their employees well — they just have to put some muscle behind that decision,” she said. “If you have someone who’s [wearing a Black Lives Matter pin] and who doesn’t have that kind of support, that’s when it gets dangerous.”

Hutchinson said it wasn’t on black employees — “who in many cases are bearing the brunt of this systemic, institutional racism,” and often have less power at work — to lead the charge for changing the rules. That’s a job for workers with privilege, she said, who can leverage their power as allies.

Desamours, who is headed to ASA College in Miami to play basketball in the fall, said he was in a financially stable place that made his resignation possible. But he acknowledged that many others are not in the same position.

“I know a lot of people may put up with discrimination or racism or inequality at work, but they have to stay — they need to do what they have to do to pay their bills,” he said. “I’m glad I was able to take a stand and be a voice for people who can’t always do that.”

How activist investors***  risk triggering even more automation, job losses and wealth inequality

 ESG (environmental, social and governance) investors’ blanket demands may have unintended consequences

*** THINK CARL ICHAN TRUMP'S PAL NOT RALPH  NADER

Published: June 16, 2020 By Derek Horstmeyer and Lisa Gring-Pemble

A robot cleans the floors at a supermarket. ASSOCIATED PRESS



As COVID-19 has shut down much of the U.S. economy, socially conscious investors are making a new wave of ESG (environmental, social and governance) demands. Companies are now being asked by their shareholders to both provide greater disclosure regarding their pandemic response and to improve worker safety generally.

While it is heartening to see investors place their attention and emphasis behind enhancing working conditions, if their ambitions are narrowly defined then such demands may have the unintended consequence of creating additional unemployment through increased automation.

Economists already predict that upwards of 42% of the jobs lost in the coronavirus pandemic may be gone for good. In the retail space particularly, companies are looking for any and all excuses to cut costs. In this, and other industries where the risk of automation is high, ESG investors must do more than make demands related to improving worker safety.

The drawback to the current ESG investor approach is that when they require more protection of workers’ health in isolation, CEOs may turn to the least costly option to address it. Economists often observe that in life, or business, there are no perfect solutions, only trade-offs in the face of scarcity. This yields a difficult situation for well-intentioned investors. While their desire is for companies to provide safe working conditions for employees, the reality may be increased unemployment and widening inequality. Because employee safety and health are added costs that eat into a firm’s bottom line, a CEO who is pressed on the issue of worker health may be more inclined — on the margin — to trade a human employee for one that can never get sick (i.e. a robot).



For example, while the pandemic may have forced Gap Inc. US:GPS to temporarily shutter its brick and mortar operations, it created a dramatic spike in online purchases that, given social distance guidelines, could not be met safely by humans. What to do? Gap’s response has been to speed the acquisition and implementation of robots that assemble orders in warehouses. So far the company is treating this as positive step towards ensuring employee safety as opposed to a replacement mechanism. Yet given that one robot can do the work of four people, along with the endless search for efficiency present in the industry, automated replacement seems inevitable.

Demands by investors for greater worker protections need to be tailored for the particular situation an employee faces.

Examples like this from the retail sector should give pause to the ESG crowd and illustrate why blanket calls for employee safety are not sufficiently nuanced. Demands by investors for greater worker protections need to be tailored for the particular situation an employee faces in terms of the risk of automation of their position. The same goes for those in the airline industry and any other industry where automation is a possible substitute for human labor if the price of labor increases (in this case due to safety costs).


More broadly, investors interested in a more optimal outcome for employees must be ready and willing to engage management on a much wider set of issues. These include unionization, severance, extension of health insurance, unemployment benefits. To do otherwise could result in a situation where companies automate at a quickened clip, and kick employees to the curb with no protections, resources, or means of recourse.

Lest anyone think ESG investing is little more than a passing fad, or their potential to influence overblown, pay close to the actions of BlackRock US:BLK and its Chairman Larry Fink. BlackRock has almost $7 billion in assets under management, so when Fink speaks the business community listens. Early this year, Fink penned a letter advising CEOs that his company has placed sustainability at the center of its investment approach. While this particular action was heavily motivated by climate change risks, it is clear that the firm’s thinking extends more broadly.

In closing his message, Fink stated that “companies must be deliberate and committed to embracing purpose and serving all stakeholders.” It is the same belief we hold at the George Mason University Business for a Better World Center, and the mindset we try to instill in our students. In the wake of this crisis, it is also the same value system that is motivating investors.

The most high-profile instance, though, may be Amazon.com US:AMZN and its Whole Foods Market subsidiary. While Amazon is no stranger to pressure from government officials and unions on workplace safety, some of the most stinging criticism has been from its own shareholders. Prior to its annual shareholder meeting, an activist group of Amazon shareholders, including pension fund managers, took the company to task for its apparent lax approach to managing worker health in light of COVID-19. Some even went as far as to hold their own shareholder meeting, designed specifically to air grievances around workplace safety and precautions not taken to ensure employee health. While no concrete steps have been taken in response, it’s clear the reaction from shareholders has not gone unnoticed.

In recent weeks we have seen much greater attention being paid to solutions that may aid workplace safety. Robots are cleaning surfaces using UV and scanning employees and patrons for fevers, and checkout counters are self-sterilizing. These advances are all being implemented with both employee and customer health in mind. They aim to stop the spread of the virus while reducing the risk of exposure to employees by removing them from the cleaning process — a laudable development in and of itself. Our concern is that the removal isn’t temporary, and ultimately the robot will serve as a permanent substitute for the labor of an employee.

Derek Horstmeyer is an associate professor of finance at the George Mason University School of Business. Lisa Gring-Pemble is an associate professor at the George Mason University School of Business and the founder of Business for a Better World Center at George Mason.

More:As boomers hand over the keys to the stock market, sustainability-minded younger investors let their consciences lead

Plus: These 4 groups of funders are uniquely positioned to help close the racial wealth gap