“She has street cred, she has a ghetto a– and she has a golden throat. Rihanna, the good girl gone bad, is the ultimate ni—ab—ch and displays that gladly, and for her that means: what’s on can come off. If that means she’ll be on stage half naked, then so be it. But Dutch winters aren’t like Jamaican ones, so pick a clothing style in which your daughter can resist minus ten. No to the big sunglasses and the porn heels, and yes to the tiger print, pink shizzle and everything that glitters. Now let’s hope she won’t beat anybody up at daycare,” read an English translation of the article.
After reading the article, Rihanna took to Twitter to express her outrage and criticized the magazine for promoting racism and segregation.
“I hope u can read English, because your magazine is a poor representation of the evolution of human rights! I find you disrespectful, and rather desperate!!” tweeted Rihanna.
“You ran out of legit, civilized information to print!” continued the star. “There are 1000’s of Dutch girls who would love to be recognized for their contributions to your country, you could have given them an article. Instead, u paid to print one degrading an entire race! That’s your contribution to this world! To encourage segregation, to mislead the future leaders to act in the past! You put two words together, with the intent of abasement, that made no sense …“N—- B—-” ?! …Well with all respect, on behalf of my race, here are my two words for you … F— YOU!!!”
Afterwards, Jackie Editor-in-Chief Eva Hoeke released a statement on Facebook, apologizing for the article.
“Dear readers,
First: thanks for all your responses. We are of course very fed up over this and especially very
shocked. However, I’m glad that we’re engaging in a dialogue on this page — not everybody does
that. Thanks for this. Other than that I can be brief about this: this should have never happened.
Period. While the author meant no harm — the title of the article was intended as a joke — it was a bad joke, to say the least. And that slipped through my, the editor-in-chief’s, fingers. Stupid, painful and sucks for all concerned. The author has been addressed on it, and now I can only ensure that these terms will no longer end up in the magazine. Furthermore I hope that you all believe there was absolutely no racist motive behind the choice of words. It was stupid, it was naive to think that this was an acceptable form of slang — you hear it all the time on TV and radio, then your idea of what is normal apparently shifts — but it was especially misguided: there was no malice behind it. We make our magazine with love, energy and enthusiasm, and it can sometimes happen that someone is out of line. And then you can only do one thing: apologize. And hope that others wish to accept it.
From the bottom of my heart I say it again: we never intended to offend anyone. And I mean that.
Regards,
Eva Hoeke”
However, Hoeke’s apology wasn’t enough to rectify the situation and shortly afterwards, she announced that she was resigning from her position.
“I regret that I have taken a stand too quickly regarding an article in Jackie — which moreover had no racial motive at its basis. Through the course of events, me and the publisher have concluded that because my credibility is now affected, it is better for all parties if I quit my function as editor-in-chief effective immediately,” she wrote.
“After putting my heart and soul into for Jackie for eight years, I realize that these errors — although not intended maliciously — are enough reason for leaving. I should have counted to ten before taking un-nuanced stands through social media channels.”
How Hoeke thought that the article was void of any racism and OK to print as a joke is beyond us, but we must say, considering her ignorance as well as that of the article’s creator, we think it’s only fair that Hoeke resigned. Hopefully, other publications will think thrice before printing material as derogatory and divisive as Jackie’s. Check out four other celebrity racial conflicts below. –nicholas robinson
