Posted on 05/11/2003 2:31:51 AM PDT by chance33_98
MAXIM-UM 'REGRET'? Protesters Don't Buy 'Apology'
By Brian Willoughby | Senior Writer, Tolerance.org
April 25, 2003 -- A 15-line 'apology' in the April issue of Maxim magazine has done little to quell protests about the magazine's three-page depiction in January of Mahatma Gandhi as a punching bag for a so-called "Kick-Ass Workout."
"This 'apology' almost makes me angrier than the article," said Michelle Naef, administrator of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence in Memphis, Tenn.
Naef criticized Maxim editors for "not taking any responsibility for their actions."
Indeed, the apology, while using the word "sorry," smacks of the same kind of irreverent, sophomoric tone found throughout the magazine:
Thanks to a very organized letter-writing campaign, we received tons of mail protesting this article. To set the record straight: We sincerely regret that anyone misinterpreted the article as being somehow anti-Gandhi. We were going for irony here. We chose Gandhi as the target of our punishing workout not because he's Indian or 'of color,' and not because we're against peace, but because he's the least likely target for aggression imaginable. It's like putting Bill Clinton in charge of a morality commission, say, or making Ted Kennedy your designated driver. Sorry for any confusion.
IndiaCause, an activist Web site addressing issues related to South Asia and India, calls the apology a "broken promise" because it does not match words sent earlier to that group.
"We were expecting them to publish the letter without any change," said Mahendra Joshi of IndiaCause. "(T)hey did not even mention the word 'apology,' which was the primary condition for us to close the (protest) campaign."
“The tone of the apology is really a mean-spirited tone,” echoed Michael Matsuda of the Orange County Asian Pacific Islander Community Alliance in Garden Grove, Calif. “It’s a very insincere effort on their part.”
The so-called apology, found on Page 40 of the magazine, followed a single letter of complaint, under the headline "Punch Drunk," taking Maxim to task for the article.
That letter-writer, Dr. Vinod Mishra of India, cited some of the same complaints thousands of others targeted in their protests against Maxim:
"(T)he series of images — depicting a 'muscle man' abusing Mahatma Gandhi promotes hate crimes against humanity," wrote Mishra. "How can you encourage such aggression against nonviolent people when our world needs peace and harmony?"
While the magazine wouldn't say how many letters were received — just the "tons" reference in the so-called apology — IndiaCause estimates that at least 7,000 protest letters or emails were sent to Maxim through its website.
'Snotty little responses' The tone of the Gandhi-bashing article in January was classic, poor-taste Maxim.
One panel featured an illustration of Gandhi huddling in a closet. The accompanying text urges "wimps" to "cry like a kid enjoying his first rectal thermometer."
The bulk of the article featured 21 different scenes of a large man hitting, kicking, choking and throwing Gandhi, who is named in the text. The article urges readers to "teach those pacifists a lesson about aggression"
Other Maxim-isms make it tough for protesters to buy the so-called apology.
Consider the response to a letter from a reader on a different topic in the April issue, in which Maxim's editorial staff wrote, in part:
"Coming up with snotty little responses to inane letters each month, now that's hard labor, fit for neither man nor beast."
Such sarcasm, echoed in the apology, leaves Naef and others seriously doubtful about Maxim's sincerity.
"I feel as if I've been condescended to," Naef said.
Arun Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi and founder of the institute, put it this way: "I don't think that's an apology at all."
Naef said Maxim's apology attempts to justify the magazine's actions, attributing complaints to confusion or misinterpretation on the part of the reader.
"There is no excuse," Naef said. "They need to actually apologize for thinking that the promotion of hate and prejudice is appropriate."
Earlier attempt at apology In response to the enormous and vocal protest in late January, Maxim issued an unpublished apology, which the magazine sent to some of the protesting groups.
Maxim promised IndiaCause the same apology would run in the May issue, the soonest it could be inserted into the production schedule, a magazine spokesman said at the time.
Drew Kerr, speaking this week for Maxim through the magazine's public relations agency, said Maxim chose to run the apology sooner, in April, rather than the planned May issue.
"We felt addressing this issue sooner would be welcomed by all concerned as opposed to delaying it," Kerr told Tolerance.org.
Both apologies, however, were met with skepticism and anger.
"I think their apology is not sufficient and lacks respect with full heart," wrote one protester on IndiaCause.
"Great insult has been committed," wrote another, believing Maxim's apology was an attempt "to fool us."
This isn't the first time Maxim bashed Gandhi. The magazine published a "Stupid Fun" article in November 2000 sporting the headline, "Oh, Calcutta: Three Reasons to Hate Gandhi!" That article called Gandhi a "lousy husband," a "rotten father" and a "poor role model."
Maxim magazine was named Adweek's "Hottest Magazine of the Year" in 2002, as well as Advertising Age's "Magazine of the Year." In addition to pictorials of scantily clad women, the magazine features an assortment of so-called humor articles and coverage of movies, TV, cars and gadgets.
Maxim sells 1 million newsstand copies each month and has 1.4 million subscribers. Total revenues for 2001, the most recent year listed on the site, were $152 million, up 32.6% from the previous year.
And while the magazine's popularity is skyrocketing and its humor is predictably bottom-of-the-barrel, protesters say the Gandhi depiction crossed a line, even for Maxim.
"There was no confusion, to use their word, on my part," Naef said. "The article was clearly inappropriate and ill conceived. It was not funny and it was not an example of irony. It sent a clear message to the reader, 'Anyone who believes in peace is weak and should be attacked.'"
>> DO SOMETHING Use Maxim's online feedback form to let magazine editors know how you feel about its treatment of Gandhi and its subsequent apology.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
How long before someone complains about the scantily clad women in Maxim and how immoral that is?"Hold muh beer 'n watch this!" PING....
If you want on or off this list, please let me know!
I will! I'm sick and tired of all the scantily clad women in Maxim! If the Lord had intended for them to be wearing clothes, they'd have been born that way!
You have. Get the hint, go away and have a nice hot cup of STFU, Naiffy Boy.
Rather than being a message that the weak should be attacked, it is a rather sensible warning that the weak and unprepared will be attacked.
Peace comes from strength.
Well, I for one, will require a lot more proof before I believe that maxim has pictures of scantily clad women. Let's say two or three dozen large pictures. C'mon now!
Well, I for one, will require a lot more proof before I believe that maxim has pictures of scantily clad women. Let's say two or three dozen large pictures. C'mon now!
WTF does 'of color' have to do with anything? Guess its just another great opportunity to play the race card and bash whites. I thought white was a color but I guess not.
They've BEEN complaining about the scantily-clad women in Maxim and how immoral that is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.