Talk:Whitewashing (communications)

Untitled

I was under the impression that the use of the term 'whitewash' comes from the Matthew 23:27 - "Alas for you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for you are just like whitewashed sepulchres, the outside of which pleases the eye, though inside they are full of dead men's bones and of all that is unclean."

This could be synonymous with euphemism in some cases.--HisSpaceResearch 08:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Me too! I'm still sure it is true. (ESV: Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead peoples bones and pall uncleanness) 'First use' here in section 'etymology' - note that those people who used the term, knew their bible, and referenced without indicating source, because they knew everybody knows. And is it really true that first use was in USA? American bias again, I'm afraid. Or maybe not. Research needed.BirgittaMTh (talk) 04:47, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Stalin adjusted the photographs with Lenin

Is it a Whitewash? He removed his opponents from the pictures and more general, even killing them - it's rather the Whitewash.Xx236 09:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Some serious accusations. Where is your evidence that he was responsible?

-G — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.14.163 (talk) 19:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Replacing Asian characters with Whites?

I've recently been hearing this word referring to things like this. Esn (talk) 22:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, "whitewashing" seems to have some currency for that; other examples that come to mind are the cover art thing with Liar (novel) and the movie of Starship Troopers rendering a major, early non-white science fiction protagonist, Juan "Johnny" Rico, as a square-jawed white guy, John "Johnny" Rico. This article is the closest one Wikipedia has to that, but it's still not really addressing the same thing. As best I can tell, somebody needs to write Whitewash (media racism) or something. —chaos5023 (talk) 16:30, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Prague Spring

I just added the bit about 'The White Book' as an example of whitewashing, but realised I wasn't sure how to put references down the bottom. If anyone wants to do this, they're

'On Events in Czechoslovakia: Facts, Documents, Press Reports and Eye-Witness Accounts (Moscow: Press Group of Soviet Journalists, 1968)' which is the book known as 'The White Book' and Robert Littell (ed.) whose introduction to 'The Czech Black Book' (London: Pall Mall Press, 1969) pp. viii-ix. might be of interest to anyone wishing to know a little more

also if anyone can be bothered, perhaps the paragraph could be reworded - it sounds a little clumsy to me but i'm too tired to change it. Storleone (talk) 16:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Healthwashing

The term "Healthwashing" refers to situations like listing methods of cooking which produce carcinogens under titles like healthy recipes. 71.100.5.109 (talk) 16:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Fictional Usage Section A little too specific?

Certainly Animal Farm dealt with Whitewashing, but not any more so than most dystopian stories. It seems like this entry sort of makes it seem like whitewashing is a rare phenomena in media, which is anything but true. It also places a little too much emphasis on the involvement of the Soviet Union. I would suggest omitting the section entirely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.109.128 (talk) 06:10, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Pinkwashing

Describing Pinkwashing as a form of 'Israeli hasbara propaganda' is clearly a violation of WP:NPOV. Frankly, this term is not related to Whitewash at all IMO, but if someone wants to argue that it deserves to stay here, the description of this logical fallacy must be NPOV (ie descriptive and not an accusation or claim), attributed properly, and placed in an appropriate context. Thanks. Kinetochore (talk) 05:35, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Heavy US bias

There seems to be empty threats made at traditional enemies of US officials. And yet we have no modern examples of whitewashing US (or Israeli) crimes and warcrimes. Not out right propaganda (which there is many of) but casual whitewashing.

-G — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.14.163 (talk) 19:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Would you mind adding some? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies_My_Teacher_Told_Me is a decent source of some US based historical whitewashing to go with Japan's Nanking massacre. 22:14, 26 June 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.21.162.76 (talk)

Newbie question on citing sources (RESOLVED)

Hi, I'm a newbie. I noticed this page had a "citation needed" for the whitewashing quote at the beginning, so I googled it and I think I found a citation. I just don't know how to list it.

The quote in question is the first-ever-used Whitewashing quote: "'if you do not whitewash President Adams speedily, the Democrats, like swarms of flies, will bespatter him all over, and make you both as speckled as a dirty wall, and as black as the devil.'"

I found it on the page "Censorship", in the New World Encyclopedia (http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Censorship), which lists it, verbatim, with a reference: "Aurora, (Philadelphia, July 21, 1800)."

Do I list the web page that I got it from (i.e., the New World Encyclopedia) or the original source (the Aurora)?

And on a matter of factual accuracy, since I don't want to circulate something that can't be proven... where did THEY get it? How do you fact-check something over 200 years old unless you happen to have the newspaper on hand? Just wondering about that last bit.

Meteor sandwich yum (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind. The discussion page isn't the place to ask a question, anyway; that's what the 'help me' template or the Help Desk is for :P meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 03:35, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Apartheit

In the South African state some enterprises behaved in a whitewahing manner. Also enterprises from other countries that were trading with them althout the UNO spoke an embargo over some parts of South Africa. --178.197.230.175 (talk) 22:12, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Whitewashing in media

@Khellmers21: This article is about censorship. The material you are adding is about a completely different topic, casting white actors in non-white roles in media, and does not belong in this article. We already have an article about that topic, Whitewashing in film. Please read that article and decide if you have anything to add there. CodeTalker (talk) 20:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

@Khellmers21: you need to stop reinserting this material and start communicating. The text you are adding has nothing to do with the subject of this article, and does not belong here. Pinging other recent editors of this article: @Buidhe: @CLCStudent: @John wiki: @Ched: CodeTalker (talk) 21:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. Also will add that those edits would have been reversed regardless of content, written like personal essays, not adequately cited and littered with NPOV issues - while I personally agree with the point of view being imparted, the language very clearly shows that it has been written by someone with strong personal views on the matter. I understand it’s an emotive issue but if we don’t write neutrally then only people who agree with that viewpoint would actually consider it. Communicate!! John wiki: If you have a problem, don't mess with my puppy... 21:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

• I appreciate the ping, but I haven't really contributed to the article proper. I did add the {{short description}}, but I tend to avoid editing articles like this. While I do have a personal point of view on the topic, it's not something I'd attempt to share. In looking at the history, all I would add is that some editors are approaching WP:3RR and should exercise caution at this point. — Ched (talk) 00:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

The bias of this word needs to be addressed

The bias of the word “whitewashing” needs to be addressed. ‪The use of “white” as a synonym for “bad” is a microaggression. Somewhere the bias inherent in this phrase needs to be acknowledged and a more suitable word suggested.

Disagree. The term itself doesn't actually have anything to do with race, if the etymology section of this exact article is to be trusted. I see the same problem being discussed with the term "blacklist" (a word that apparently comes from a grieving son's dramatic prose), which I heard people have been trying to replace due to being "inherently racist", but never saw anything sticking (or proof that either term is actually based on race). At best this issue is a false alarm, and at worst the word's origin has been whitewashed itself. cogsan (talk) 18:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

"The use of “white” as a synonym for “bad”" Given that white as a color has a traditional association with death and ghosts, this is unlikely to change. Dimadick (talk) 09:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Not that that has any actual relation to whitewashing, besides maybe that thing Stalin liked doing.

The term itself just uses white as a synonym for "totally clean you guys, don't look any further haha".

Can understand why people would try to connect the dots, though. cogsan (talk) 11:32, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 12 September 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. It was clear that editors favored moving the article, and of the available choices, Whitewashing (communications) appears to have the most support. (propaganda) also had support and may be a valid choice in the future, per WP:NOTCURRENTTITLE a future RM may be opened to help solidify this, however this discussion seems to favor the more generic (communications) dab, which covers both propaganda and censorship. (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 16:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

---

Whitewashing (censorship) → Whitewashing (propaganda) – It's not a censorship practice, which is a direct suppression of material, usually by force or threat of force by some entity with power such as a government. It's a propaganda or public relations practice, and that is what the article talks about. Whitewashing is pretty closely related to spin (propaganda) really. "Whitewashing (coverup)" would be reasonable too maybe, and sugarcoat, launder, excuse, and other terms could be in play too; there's no one perfect term, but it says here that "Whitewashing (propaganda)" is the best term. Herostratus (talk) 04:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Favonian (talk) 15:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

• An interesting proposal, however, what evidence is there to suggest Whitewashing does not include the practice of censorship or suppression of material? The history of Whitewashing seems to include the practice of omission in it's implementation.

Omitting or downplaying historical events, figures, or issues related to systemic racism, inequality and violence, are seen by some sources as examples of Whitewashing.

That is not to say propaganda is incorrect or undue, far from it. Point being that it would help to examine sources on the subject more closely.

Cheers. DN (talk) 06:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I would agree that Whitewashing may include a combination of propaganda and censorship. DN (talk) 08:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

• I would prefer and support Whitewashing (communications), as I think that is a more suitable and all-embracing category that can encompass all of what is being discussed above, whether it is sources of censorship, propaganda, or other elements – all pertain to the communication or non-communication of information. Another alternative is (public relations), but it's a bit narrower and not my first preference. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hmmm, yeah. Whitewashing (communications) is a good idea. I am willing to change the proposal to Whitewashing (communications)... whichever seems most popular. Herostratus (talk) 03:23, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea. Currently there seems to be three other iterations...

• Whitewashing (beauty)
• Whitewashing in art
• Whitewashing in film

I suspect that art and film might fall more easily into the propaganda category. Including censorship, all three might seem to fall into the (communications) category, but censorship is sort of the opposite of communication. Thoughts? DN (talk) 04:19, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I would say art and film fall under "media", rather than communications – a distinction that emerges in the discipline name of "media and communications" – and I would suggest that censorship is best viewed as a communications policy enacted by organisations, governments or oneself (in the case of self-censorship). Though my impression in any case is that most whitewashing involves talking over the top of negative information rather than censoring it specifically. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:25, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Mostly, yes, as long as we aren't dismissing any references to the perceived relationship between Whitewashing and censorship, I don't have any objection. I do agree that a majority of RS on Whitewashing refers to propaganda/media, but there still remains relative coverage of references to acts of omission, prohibition, bans, censorship etc... as a form of Whitewashing according to certain notable organizations, historians and educators. DN (talk) 22:23, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

References

Relisting comment: Broad agreement that the article should be renamed. Hopefully, an extra week's discussion will converge on a new title. Favonian (talk) 15:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

• Support. Propaganda or communications would fit better. IntrepidContributor (talk) 14:01, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
• Support "communications" or "public relations". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 14:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Prague Spring Source

I'm looking, but not finding any sources on the White Book being named that because it is whitewashed. Government communications are commonly referred to as white papers, so I think it may actually be an extension of that. If anyone can find a source for that claim, I'd appreciate it -- otherwise it should probably be removed. NuanceQueen (talk) 00:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)