DEAL WITH THE SCANDAL 1

It is a fact that the Washington Redskins changed their names. As fast as September. Several names are considered:

Red Tails (referring to the first group of black pilots, there is a George Lucas movie),

Redhawks

Warriors

Names alluding to the capital of the United States:

Senators,

Federals

Generals

They change their names because the sponsoring companies (as big as PepsiCo or Bank of America) want to avoid the bad reputation of supporting racism.

For activist groups, the word “red skin” is racist. As for others, it is racist to say black or Jewish or Mexican. Or the Aztec word, or Spanish?

How do you know if any expression is racist? If anyone complains that it is. If someone is offended by the word.

This is dangerous. Organizations must learn to deal with, refute, and protect themselves from these allegations. The Redskins case teaches us that no one is safe from being accused by someone who is offended by the name, colors, or designs they use at their company. The demand to change the name can be replaced by the demand to eliminate the franchise, claiming the same thing: being racist.

The activists, who have managed to force the name change, rely on a survey: they interviewed 1,021 North American Indians, half of whom declare that, for their sensitivity, the name Redskins is racist.

That survey is the argument of the study “The psychological effect of pets using Native American names: a review of empirical material”, from June this year 2020.

The study aims to demonstrate that using Native American names, and using them as pets on sports teams, causes psychological distress among Native Americans, such as low self-esteem, decreased achievement, and less involvement with their community.

What can companies do? Surveys are a good mechanism. They serve both ways.

In any case, companies must be aware of these issues, of these attitudes. We will continue to publish on this topic. There are still many edges to these problems.