While browsing through the latest collection of posts from my fellow bloggers, I chanced upon one by Tonny. The blog referred to the article published by Macleans named “Too Asian.” Within a few minutes, years of collected respect for the magazine was lost and Macleans was reduced to the same level as money-grabbing tabloids. The same article can be found at http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/11/10/too-asian/.
The article makes several jabs at the current university system and concludes quite definitively that a racist divide exists in our schools. The article arbitrarily labels several university such as U of T, UBC, and Waterloo. The article quotes two girls who claims to have chosen a different university from U of T because it was too “Asian.” The authors went as far as to imply that Asians do not have as much fun as Caucasians and therefore lack many of the skills to “do anything in [extracurricular] clubs” because they are too “academically focused.”
The article sparked many heated questions from me. First, why Asians? I mean there is certainly a great deal of disparity in the world and I believe that is very much part of the Canadian way of life. We offer basic coverage of social welfare but hard work and free will gets you to where you are. Just as more Caucasians are in politics, more women are in the arts and more Jewish individuals are in the medical sciences, there are more Asians in some business and science majors. Why were Asians chosen instead of any of those groups? The second would be, is the research valid? Sure, there are definitely some Asians that are as described: those that sacrifice fun for academic excellence. However, is it right to generalize on an entire race? Third, what’s the goal of the article? These inherent differences in race are not news and certainly existent. Nevertheless, why was the article published with so many stereotypical remarks?
The answer to those questions formed a rather negative view of Macleans. From my viewpoint, the article was nothing more than racially prejudiced information designed to attract more readers and targeted at a vulnerable minority. Little of its actual information has real merit. Furthermore, the information pieced together are only from relatively unknown sources instead of actually reliable people. When figures of authorities, such as the presidents of the respective universities, refute the statements of the article, the authors simply conclude that they “are in denial.” The merits of the article are scarce and its real function was to bring controversy and publicity.
Don’t get me wrong. There are certainly racial differences in belief and values. Nevertheless, Canada is not a country where we will judge a person based on race. It is not a place where an Asian person is inherent a “joy-killer” or lacking in non-academic skills. Canada is not a country where a White student should be selected over an equally or even more qualified Asian student into university admissions. Canada is certainly not a place where such ignorant and stereotypical comments should be published in such a renowned magazine article. As much as we respect the freedom of the press, the press does have a responsibility to the public as well and in publishing this article, Macleans has clearly neglected that responsibility.
I agree with a few points in your article and I do believe that Canadian universities should stay meritocratic. However, calling Maclean's a "money-grabbing tabloid" without substantial backing is a bit rash don't you think? Maclean's isn't some magazine typed up in the back of someone's truck and they wouldn't dare to publish something as racy as this without some form of evidence.
I understand that stereotypes and generalizations are hard to swallow for a lot of people and may provoke strong emotions, but at the end of the day we have to leave our emotions at home and take a look at things as they really are. In the article by Maclean's, it was stated that Asians are all workaholics is nothing more than a myth. The universities aren't arbitrarily named; when we take a look at say, British Columbia, where about 21.5% of its people identify themselves to be of Chinese, Korean, or Japanese descent (very high for Canada); over 43% of the undergraduate population of UBC is of that same descent in a recent census. One can't look at real statistics such as that and not go, hmm. Furthermore this situation has already been played out in America, and look where that lead to; discrimination against Asian students.
I'm not saying that this is a huge issue right now. If anything, even I find the title of the article to be a bit over-the-edge. But quite frankly, I am glad that in a free society we can have this sort of provocative, free press to bring to our attention issues of interest. And if we don't keep an eye on them, who knows what could happen tomorrow?
Just my jar of cents.
I will still have to disagree.
The article was retracted by Macleans in print. They themselves realized the articles were too racially biased to be published. While I appreciate the gesture to apologize, but, as you said, Macleans is not some low budget magazine typed in the back of a truck. Errors of this kind are not acceptable.
I mean read the article again. Now this time, instead of reading the racist comments in quotes as opinions of other people, read as though the ideas were asserted by the magazine. Can you honestly say any of those claims have any merit to them? "[Asian kids] participate in clubs so their parents can put that in their resumes but did not have the skills to actually participate meaningfully?" I am quite sure whatever evidence is available does not support those claims.
As much as I value a free press, there are limits. I don't think a free press should be a place where people can place their racist opinions to the public. Nor can I accept a magazine as prestigious as Macleans to endorse those views in a featured article.