Do you find this racist?

I was responding to Old Goat's post, that's why.

"I had a friend who worked for a quite number of years in schools around London with large numbers of West Indian & other minority group students in attendance. Not much that she said made me feel very encouraged about their opportunities in education & in life."

I would be surprised if she singled out any group being treated or educated differently from any other group. In my experience, all kids are treated exactly the same at school and if it was as bad as your friend made out, then it would suggest that all the pupils were getting a raw deal, irrespective of colour or creed.
In some areas, it has been noted that young white lads are showing signs of underperforming at schools, and the suggestions are that they have been largely overlooked of late, and there is also a possibility that their home environment doesn't help, as it would appear that white families (low to middle earners) don't encourage or push them enough with homework etc.

The highest performers and achievers? Kids from an Indian or Chinese background, as their families seem to take education very seriously.

It seems to me that home life and social "culture" play just as big a part in a young person's life (if not more!) than their schooling.
At this present time, Cities around the UK are experiencing the "gang" culture, with shootings, stabbings and beatings cropping up regularly in the news. It seems to be the vogue that quite a few young, predominantly black city youths, spend their time emulating Piff Doddy or some other saddo with bling and gun related stuff, and spend a pleasant evening scaring the shite out of the general public while battling the gang down the road.

Yes, indeed.
But it sounds like government schools (as much of the public service) are expected to run on the smell of an oily rag these days.
Getting more & more that way here, that's for sure.
Definitely harder for students from disadvantaged backgrounds in my experience (having worked in such schools for yonks) , anyway.

I'd like to say much more, Old Goat, but can't right now.
But good schooling can & does have a huge influence on students' future (post-school ) options.
Especially for those students whose parents aren't formally uneducated themselves (often through no fault of their own, like mine) or hold little store in the value of education themselves, like the parents of quite a number of students I've taught over recent years.

But I'll have to stop here now.
Gotta go.

Well she made it seem that way. Before I read the statement she said, it all seemed innocent. So she was just overreacting.

Yeah, I suppose I could see it as reflecting on the broader West Indian community in the UK, if I were hallucinating or on some new kind of horse tranquilizer or something.


Except that, in this case, your concerns are entirely misplaced -- as are Ms. Campbell's.


But that wasn't the ad.


I agree. But then that wasn't my point. It's not that Oprah wouldn't be subjected to that kind of treatment, it's that, even if she were, it wouldn't bother me. That's because the ad isn't about equating blackness with chocolate, it's equating a chocolate bar with a person who is perceived to be a diva.

I think there are two different issues here:

1.) Was Cadbury referring to Naomi Campbell's race with the ad?

Yeah, I think they were.

2.) Is that a big deal?

Not necessarily. It's one of those things that are more fraught when coming from outside the community than from within the community. A black man calling someplace "chocolate city" is different from a white man calling the same place "chocolate city." It just is.

I think Naomi is probably overreacting, but I think it's silly to go too far the other direction too and claim that Naomi's race was completely incidental to the ad.

But it was incidental.

As I figure it, Cadbury's ad team wanted to find someone who:

(1) is perceived by a large portion of the public as a "diva;" and
(2) has a recognizable first name, so that the client wouldn't need to pay any fees to the person for using her full name.

For instance, Jennifer Lopez apparently fits the first criterion, but "Jennifer" is far too common a name to be associated in the public's mind with just Jennifer Lopez. Likewise with Christina Aguilera. On the other hand, when I think of a diva, I think of Jessye Norman, who has a unique first name, but who rates a confused "hunh?" from the vast majority of the public (and she's also black, so I guess that makes me a racist or something -- although, in my defense, I have never equated Jessye Norman with chocolate).

For better or worse, then, Naomi Campbell fit the two criteria that I think the ad team was looking for. I sincerely doubt that they even thought about any kind of connection between chocolate and Ms. Campbell's race, although they should have given serious consideration to her diva-tude -- I mean, what were they thinking, that she wouldn't act like a diva when she saw the ad?

What do we do when we have white chocolate?

I think that's disingenuous.

I think they were looking for someone who was:

1.) Black (= chocolate)
2.) Perceived as a diva
3.) Has a recognizable first name.
4.) (Related to #3) Is British.

Again, I don't think it's necessarily a big deal. But yeah, I think the chocolate bar = chocolate skin thing was intentional.

We just call out the Milky Bar Kid.

"The milky bar kid is strong and tough
And only the best is good enough
The Milky bar kid only eats what's right
That's milky bar, so creamy light
NESTLES MILKY BAR!"

I don't mind being wrong, but disingenuous? That's just mean.

OK, I think I might bow out of this discussion now.
I've said pretty much all I've wanted to say & would probably only be repeating myself in further posts.
I think I'll just have to acknowledge that I see things differently to most of the rest of you.
Thank you for an interesting discussion.