http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/06/world/americas/writer-of-times-op-ed-on-racism-in-cuba-loses-job.html?_r=0
In this article, a Cuban writer published an opinion about the racism that still exists today in Cuban society and discriminatory acts that occur against Afro-Cubans. In his article, there included acts of racism such as African Cubans not being able to purchase cell phones, stay in hotels, or sell houses and cars just for some examples. When this article was translated to English for the Times, the title was stated as "For Blacks in Cuba, the Revolution hasn't Began" and the author, Roberto Zurbano claims the article title was changed when he wanted the title to say "For Blacks in Cuba, the Revolutions Hasn't Ended". He claims this totally alters and gave a negative gist to his article that transformed his entire theme. It is also said that he was fired because of this translation since the system in Cuba is different. Cubans do not have the freedom of press like Americans do, so when the threat or disagreement with the way the Cuban government is expressed through a influential force like the press, it is not acceptable. The American translators and editors for the Times stand by their translation and say it is accurate.
After the translation confusion that occurred with Zurbano's article, do you think that the translated version that appeared in the New York Times was so different and problematic that he should've gotten fired, knowing that Cuba doesn't have the same freedom laws of the US? Explain
I think that the Cuban newspaper company was right to fire Zurbano. This is because he knew that he did not have the freedom of press in Cuba and that he could not publish articles that the Cuban government might not approve of. I do not believe that the New York Times incorrectly translated the title of Zurbano's article because the words "begun" and "ended" are completely different in Spanish, as they are in English, and would not be confused in a translation. This is especially true because a big newspaper like The New York Times would have a professional translator. Therefore, I do not believe that Zurbano was misinterpreted. I think that the Cuban newspaper would have gotten in trouble for the newspaper article if they did not fire Zurbano. In Cuba the government has a lot of power, more so than in the United States, and is able to punish a newspaper for publishing something that they find unfavorable. Zurbano has to know this and since he still published something controversial, he should have gotten fired
ReplyDeleteI do not think that the article was problematic when translated into English. Having lived in the United States our whole lives we are used to being able to say and publish just about anything that we want. I think that an article like this, mixed with a country like Cuba is just a bad recipe. The Cuban government does not want any negative words about what their doing, so they will go to certain measures to make sure that happens. Hearing that this man, Roberto Zurbano, is letting other countries know about Cubans unfair discrimination,Cuba fired him so it would not happen again.
ReplyDeleteI think that the translation in the article did not damage the United states opinion on Cuba in and way and if that was their only reason for firing him that was wrong. However if they fired him for the contents of the article and how they were insulting the us government they had the right to fire him. I agree with what Dan said about getting into trouble if they didn't fire him, the whole company would have been persecuted instead of just the article writer.
ReplyDeleteZurbano's intentions were not to oppose the Cuban government but reflect the activity in the country of how Blacks were being treated compared to the rest of the population in Cuba. The title of Robert Zurbano was meant to be "For Blacks in Cuba, the Revolutions Hasn't Ended" meaning Blacks are still striving for equality not that they do not have it at all in a way that is questioning the government. Therefore in my opinion I do not believe that the company should not have fired him.
ReplyDeleteTHIS DISCUSSION IS NOW CLOSED. COMMENTS AFTER THIS POINT WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR CREDIT.
ReplyDelete