It wouldn't have mattered if it was switched. One has light skin the others don't. If they were shirtless it would've been the same. Think about it. Fact is people associate dark with danger and bad. Clothes or skin.
Guy has a red shirt, black phone, and literally holds the phone more like a gun. This just exposes the show maker's bias. It was obviously rigged to confirm a narrative.
Great video. When I watched that episode I thought it was unfair that they always wore the same clothing (black guy in red white in blue). In my opinion red is a more hostile color which would make them want to shoot that when faced with a red v blue scenario. This may be disproven but that’s just my insight.
It’s actually been proven in sports. Teams wearing red jerseys win 1-5% more than the teams wearing blue. The same stats happen in the Halo video games where the multiplayer has teams that are red vs blue. Reason being humans get siked-out by the colour red in stressful situations especially when the colour is on the individual causing the stress.
I comented this also on a other video about this topic. But this show is based on a Dutch show, where this experiment was also done. But it was done less biased. Every shotter had the same clothes and the same stands. The result was that the black person was shot more, But the difference was far less the in this experiment, but enough to conclude a racial bias.
He was wearing a red shirt as well. If they actually knew anything about psychology, they would know that red is associated with being the bad guy and green and blue as the good guy. It's that way in most games
Exactly! One of the first things I noticed when watching this was that he came out in a different way and most of the time was holding the phone like a gun. So then especially when they have just had a few rounds where one had a gun, one with a phone. At the end in that instant it's completely normal to assume one has a gun...the one holding it like a gun. ALSO he was often holding a black phone, instead of a grey one, just another little detail to make it more like a gun.
I could also explain it this way. What the black man is carrying is more ambiguous at a split second glance because the color of the skin and of the item are more similar when the person is black, and the experiment specifically asked the people to react as quickly as possible, so they would have been less likely or able to fully scan the black man before shooting.
YEAH. Just got done watching that BULLSH**. He holds the phone & stands exactly like a shooter, & the white guy stands like a doofus in a clearly non threatening stance
I think he got shot a lot not just bcs of his skin color but also of his shirt color. People often associate the color red with danger so...... *Shoot*
I was watching this as a white gut with my Colombian gf and started noticing the gay guys everywhere and feminism agenda then they started throwing in this episode and a white bias theory lol
Yes sir. I am Mexican. There is unconscious deep rooted biased from black, whites, mexicans and other races/nationalities against black (and also other races like latinos or asians.) I am racist too, Unconsciously. I really do choose to love everyone equally, but unfortunately I do have unconscious bias. If you do not believe my words. Please take this test called "RACE IAT" by Harvard. It will change your mind. I think it is important that you do more research before you make a video that could potentially misinform the collective consciousness.
No such thing as unconscious racism, only unconscious bias. To actually be racist is a choice and an effort. If you are saying you are racist it's because you choose to be racist.
I was thinking the same thing as you, so I watched again. Turns out, the black guy sometimes IS holding the silver phone and the white guy the black one, but the black guy gets shot anyways. Also sometimes they do put two people holding cell phones in the middle of the test. The asian girl gets shot more often because she's at the left, and that's how we read, from left to right. But you are missing the point, if in doubt, you shouldn't shoot period. If you are not 100% sure the person has a gun, don't shoot. But yet people chose to shoot, and most people chose to shoot a black guy. It was not a racional decision, and that's the point, we are biased not because we want to, but because it's internalised.
_"...if in doubt, you shouldn't shoot period. If you are not 100% sure the person has a gun, don't shoot."_ That's ridiculous, if you suspect your life might be in danger it's always better to shoot first. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. As far as implicit bias is concerned here is no scientific evidence that implicit bias exists, it's a pseudoscience. Harvard states on it's test "these Universities, as well as the individual researchers who have contributed to this site, make no claim for the validity of these suggested interpretations.". Repeated tests often give the same person different results. *From the Spectator:* spectator.org/implicit-bias-training-useless-pseudoscience-scam-nypd/ _"'The IAT isn’t even predicting the IAT two weeks later,' Hart Blanton, a social psychologist critical of implicit bias, told the Chronicle of Higher Education. 'How can a test predict behavior if it can’t even predict itself?'_ _That lack of consistency has caused many to question the scientific validity of the test. Multiple studies published in highly regarded journals have found that the IAT does not meet the quality-control standards expected of psychological instruments. This has further caused many to question whether such a test, which labels people as racist, should be distributed by Harvard and marketed as legitimate._ _Indeed, the test seems to be more effective at testing people’s ability to sort pictures of people and words than discovering unknown prejudices."_ *Either way - to the extent that we take the pseudoscience of implicit bias as true for the sake of the argument - the problem doesn't seem to lie with whites.* *1. Mean In-Group Bias by Race/Ethnicity:* tablet-mag-images.b-cdn.net/production/883104fdaad1810c8dbbb2a6df5a4b6ed7d5036f-2560x1138.jpg?w=1200&q=70&auto=format&dpr=1 - In this study, blacks show the highest in-group bias while whites show the lowest in-group bias. *2. Mean In-Group Bias Score Among Whites:* tablet-mag-images.b-cdn.net/production/6a5544a488d6b38f055c7a60c70e113eb64ab748-2840x1262.jpg?w=1200&q=70&auto=format&dpr=1 - White liberals are the only ones to stray from the norm and not only not demonstrate in-group preference but even demonstrate out-group preference, i.e. self-hate. *3. And it would appear this is a result of social media disinformation:* tablet-mag-images.b-cdn.net/production/9b73c17b044a1091e131dfb7e68ea7f187cbc6ad-1600x582.png?w=1200&q=70&auto=format&dpr=1 - In other words; if in-group preference exists it is perfectly normal and natural, white liberals are insane and weird. *And this self-loathing white liberal insanity has some amusing results:* www.inquirer.com/columnists/yale-study-white-liberals-black-conversation-solomon-jones-20181204.html www.psychologicalscience.org/news/white-liberals-dumb-themselves-down-when-they-speak-to-black-people-a-new-study-contends.html _"If you’re a white liberal writing to Emily, you might use words like 'melancholy' or 'euphoric' to describe the mood of the book, whereas you might trade these terms out for the simpler 'sad' or 'happy' if you’re corresponding with Lakisha._ _But if you’re a white conservative, your diction won’t depend on the presumed race of your interlocutor."_ tl;dr - You're wrong and ignorant, you should educate yourself.
Sowas von schlecht.... Wieviel mal hatte der im roten shirt die waffe? Wie viele mal die anderen. Rot signalisiert gefahr, in dieser Zeit, kann man nicht auf die hautfarbe schauen. Die hätten shirt wechseln können, rot hätte auch dann die schlechteren Karten. Und jemand sowas machen zu lassen, der nicht ausgebildet und trainiert ist, ist schon armsälig. Das schadet manchen extrem, auch wenn es keine echte Waffe gewesen ist. Das mädchen am Ende tut mir echt leid. Ich schaue mir die Folgen an, aber die tests sind nicht immer ok.
Actually I bet you don't know that in the USA we are TAUGHT from a very young age as the world maps are made to draw a young impressionable eyes/minds to focus on majority White controled countries..which is why Greenland looks larger than South America..but at the bottom of those SAME maps the Legend says "South America is actually 9 TIMES LARGER than Greenland".. In addition to that..a similar test was done on the show "What Would You Do?" Where a black man, a white man and a blond woman stole different items in public..and the majority of the time the Black guy got caught every time..the White got caught half as much as the Black guy and the blond woman got away with the most ..even got a few guys to help her steal...LOL.. So your take on this is NOT all that true!!
Lmao this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. As if at a young age you associated Greenland with being ran by whites. My only question is if your theory is true then why doesn't Europe look larger than Africa on the map?
I noticed the end too. They had the black guys wear darker clothes and a hat, while the white guy wears lighter clothes and no hat. Nice try, Netflix
Yessssss
I know u can’t tell if it’s a phone it a split second it’s completely stupid
I noticed this too.
It wouldn't have mattered if it was switched. One has light skin the others don't. If they were shirtless it would've been the same. Think about it. Fact is people associate dark with danger and bad. Clothes or skin.
Guy has a red shirt, black phone, and literally holds the phone more like a gun.
This just exposes the show maker's bias. It was obviously rigged to confirm a narrative.
Great video. When I watched that episode I thought it was unfair that they always wore the same clothing (black guy in red white in blue). In my opinion red is a more hostile color which would make them want to shoot that when faced with a red v blue scenario. This may be disproven but that’s just my insight.
Exactly that!
It’s actually been proven in sports.
Teams wearing red jerseys win 1-5% more than the teams wearing blue.
The same stats happen in the Halo video games where the multiplayer has teams that are red vs blue.
Reason being humans get siked-out by the colour red in stressful situations especially when the colour is on the individual causing the stress.
I agree that the red shirt color is disrupting the result
I comented this also on a other video about this topic. But this show is based on a Dutch show, where this experiment was also done. But it was done less biased. Every shotter had the same clothes and the same stands. The result was that the black person was shot more, But the difference was far less the in this experiment, but enough to conclude a racial bias.
Also, every person holding the gun, was wearing a red shirt.
He was wearing a red shirt as well. If they actually knew anything about psychology, they would know that red is associated with being the bad guy and green and blue as the good guy. It's that way in most games
Check 6:31 - that gives you the answer (how he holds the "gun", body posture, contrast, light). Very stupid experiment.
Exactly! One of the first things I noticed when watching this was that he came out in a different way and most of the time was holding the phone like a gun.
So then especially when they have just had a few rounds where one had a gun, one with a phone. At the end in that instant it's completely normal to assume one has a gun...the one holding it like a gun.
ALSO he was often holding a black phone, instead of a grey one, just another little detail to make it more like a gun.
Honestly some very intriguing criticism!! I'd be intrigued to see the episode replicated with better conditions which adjust for what you mentioned.
You missed a key point in the experiment: JP was someone they KNOW. So regardless of what he was wearing, why would you shoot someone you know???
@@dylanshapiro3292 but they didn't even hesitate. Most literally moved the gun from the white guy to jp
I could also explain it this way. What the black man is carrying is more ambiguous at a split second glance because the color of the skin and of the item are more similar when the person is black, and the experiment specifically asked the people to react as quickly as possible, so they would have been less likely or able to fully scan the black man before shooting.
YEAH. Just got done watching that BULLSH**. He holds the phone & stands exactly like a shooter, & the white guy stands like a doofus in a clearly non threatening stance
I think he got shot a lot not just bcs of his skin color but also of his shirt color. People often associate the color red with danger so...... *Shoot*
THANK YOU!
I was watching this as a white gut with my Colombian gf and started noticing the gay guys everywhere and feminism agenda then they started throwing in this episode and a white bias theory lol
Crazy things was me and my girl actually butted heads a about some points and argued and it showed a lot to our mindsets and beliefs .
Finally, smart people like me have realized how stupid this test is
Yes sir. I am Mexican. There is unconscious deep rooted biased from black, whites, mexicans and other races/nationalities against black (and also other races like latinos or asians.) I am racist too, Unconsciously. I really do choose to love everyone equally, but unfortunately I do have unconscious bias. If you do not believe my words. Please take this test called "RACE IAT" by Harvard. It will change your mind. I think it is important that you do more research before you make a video that could potentially misinform the collective consciousness.
No such thing as unconscious racism, only unconscious bias. To actually be racist is a choice and an effort. If you are saying you are racist it's because you choose to be racist.
Yes, black people can have internalized racism.
I was thinking the same thing as you, so I watched again. Turns out, the black guy sometimes IS holding the silver phone and the white guy the black one, but the black guy gets shot anyways. Also sometimes they do put two people holding cell phones in the middle of the test. The asian girl gets shot more often because she's at the left, and that's how we read, from left to right. But you are missing the point, if in doubt, you shouldn't shoot period. If you are not 100% sure the person has a gun, don't shoot. But yet people chose to shoot, and most people chose to shoot a black guy. It was not a racional decision, and that's the point, we are biased not because we want to, but because it's internalised.
_"...if in doubt, you shouldn't shoot period. If you are not 100% sure the person has a gun, don't shoot."_
That's ridiculous, if you suspect your life might be in danger it's always better to shoot first. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
As far as implicit bias is concerned here is no scientific evidence that implicit bias exists, it's a pseudoscience. Harvard states on it's test "these Universities, as well as the individual researchers who have contributed to this site, make no claim for the validity of these suggested interpretations.". Repeated tests often give the same person different results.
*From the Spectator:*
spectator.org/implicit-bias-training-useless-pseudoscience-scam-nypd/
_"'The IAT isn’t even predicting the IAT two weeks later,' Hart Blanton, a social psychologist critical of implicit bias, told the Chronicle of Higher Education. 'How can a test predict behavior if it can’t even predict itself?'_
_That lack of consistency has caused many to question the scientific validity of the test. Multiple studies published in highly regarded journals have found that the IAT does not meet the quality-control standards expected of psychological instruments. This has further caused many to question whether such a test, which labels people as racist, should be distributed by Harvard and marketed as legitimate._
_Indeed, the test seems to be more effective at testing people’s ability to sort pictures of people and words than discovering unknown prejudices."_
*Either way - to the extent that we take the pseudoscience of implicit bias as true for the sake of the argument - the problem doesn't seem to lie with whites.*
*1. Mean In-Group Bias by Race/Ethnicity:*
tablet-mag-images.b-cdn.net/production/883104fdaad1810c8dbbb2a6df5a4b6ed7d5036f-2560x1138.jpg?w=1200&q=70&auto=format&dpr=1
- In this study, blacks show the highest in-group bias while whites show the lowest in-group bias.
*2. Mean In-Group Bias Score Among Whites:*
tablet-mag-images.b-cdn.net/production/6a5544a488d6b38f055c7a60c70e113eb64ab748-2840x1262.jpg?w=1200&q=70&auto=format&dpr=1
- White liberals are the only ones to stray from the norm and not only not demonstrate in-group preference but even demonstrate out-group preference, i.e. self-hate.
*3. And it would appear this is a result of social media disinformation:*
tablet-mag-images.b-cdn.net/production/9b73c17b044a1091e131dfb7e68ea7f187cbc6ad-1600x582.png?w=1200&q=70&auto=format&dpr=1
- In other words; if in-group preference exists it is perfectly normal and natural, white liberals are insane and weird.
*And this self-loathing white liberal insanity has some amusing results:*
www.inquirer.com/columnists/yale-study-white-liberals-black-conversation-solomon-jones-20181204.html
www.psychologicalscience.org/news/white-liberals-dumb-themselves-down-when-they-speak-to-black-people-a-new-study-contends.html
_"If you’re a white liberal writing to Emily, you might use words like 'melancholy' or 'euphoric' to describe the mood of the book, whereas you might trade these terms out for the simpler 'sad' or 'happy' if you’re corresponding with Lakisha._
_But if you’re a white conservative, your diction won’t depend on the presumed race of your interlocutor."_
tl;dr - You're wrong and ignorant, you should educate yourself.
Sure
Sowas von schlecht.... Wieviel mal hatte der im roten shirt die waffe? Wie viele mal die anderen. Rot signalisiert gefahr, in dieser Zeit, kann man nicht auf die hautfarbe schauen. Die hätten shirt wechseln können, rot hätte auch dann die schlechteren Karten. Und jemand sowas machen zu lassen, der nicht ausgebildet und trainiert ist, ist schon armsälig. Das schadet manchen extrem, auch wenn es keine echte Waffe gewesen ist. Das mädchen am Ende tut mir echt leid. Ich schaue mir die Folgen an, aber die tests sind nicht immer ok.
My guy sees an Asian and just says Chinese, so if I saw a white I would assume American huh.
Every Asian is Chinese bro
Actually I bet you don't know that in the USA we are TAUGHT from a very young age as the world maps are made to draw a young impressionable eyes/minds to focus on majority White controled countries..which is why Greenland looks larger than South America..but at the bottom of those SAME maps the Legend says "South America is actually 9 TIMES LARGER than Greenland"..
In addition to that..a similar test was done on the show "What Would You Do?" Where a black man, a white man and a blond woman stole different items in public..and the majority of the time the Black guy got caught every time..the White got caught half as much as the Black guy and the blond woman got away with the most ..even got a few guys to help her steal...LOL..
So your take on this is NOT all that true!!
Lmao this is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. As if at a young age you associated Greenland with being ran by whites. My only question is if your theory is true then why doesn't Europe look larger than Africa on the map?