What's New Mr. Magoo?

by Jim Jirak

 

       By now, everyone has an opinion, undoubtedly, about the most recent propaganda unveiled in a pretty well covered press release by The National Federation of the Blind with regard to a resolution, dealing with the ever popular Mr. Magoo, which was adopted at their annual national convention held this summer in New Orleans. 

       In case you haven't heard, or if you chose to consider past practices of the organization that claims to be "the voice of the blind movement" and chose to ignore it, let me bring you up to speed and what policy our organization chose to take at the national convention in Houston, Texas this past July. 

       On July 3, 1997, an article appeared in the "World Herald" proclaiming that at the annual convention of The National Federation of the Blind in New Orleans, a resolution was adopted by over 3,000 blind members calling on Walt Disney to cease production of its scheduled Christmas release of Mr. Magoo.  According to the article, the membership strongly abhorred and took personal offense to the portrayal of a near sighted old man stumbling and fumbling around like an incompetent blind person.  The article further stated that all blind citizens were personally offended by this just as the blacks took offense to "Little Black Sambo."  The same article, mercifully, quoted the chairman of Disney as saying Near sightedness and blindness are two completely unrelated issues and that the production would continue.  And while their resolution did not call for picketing Disney, it did, however, call for NFB to take  whatever steps necessary to halt the production of the movie. 

              At the American Council of the Blind convention in Houston, two resolutions were brought forth dealing with this same issue.  Resolution 97-23 called for everyone to lighten up and take things with a sense of humor.  Resolution 97-35 called for ACB to refer all questions with regard to this matter to its special interest affiliate The Council of Citizens with Low Vision International, (CCLVI,) thus letting them speak to this matter on behalf of ACB. 

       Both resolutions, believe it or not, failed.  While the majority of the convention was opposed to letting CCLVI speak on behalf of ACB, and justifiably so, I am somewhat surprised, and deeply saddened,  this organization chose to sit on the fence and take no stand, thus, in affect, allowing the Federation to continue to be the voice of the blind movement.

       It is imperative that the general public know there is more than one organization of and for the blind and that NFB's policy decisions are not the viewpoint of all blind persons.  The opinion of the convention assembled in Houston, Texas was that ACB has more important things to worry about than Mr. Magoo and NFB. 

       The convention was, with out a doubt, clearly in the wrong by not adopting resolution 97-23 and releasing it to the general public and various media outlets.  How else is ACB to get its opinion heard if we take no action and let NFB "do the talking for all blind persons?"

       Yes, we, as an organization have important issues to discuss such as transportation, re-authorization of the rehab act, access to technology, social security linkage and the like.  This issue is just as important as any issue brought before the membership.

       Mr. Magoo is humerous and should not be taken offense to.  The situations portrayed in the fictional cartoon most likely will never happen in real life.  Come on, folks; lighten up! 

       Perhaps, next time an issue equal to this arises, the national organization will consider all ramifications before it defeats a similar amendment and decides NFB's viewpoint is what the public will hear.  What would Jim Backus think if he were still living?  

 

Until next time, think before you speak and take care out there.

 

Articles

Home