Laughing At Each Other, Together

Literature Review
The issue of racism is so universally known today, yet it persists to remain inmodern society. Today, whether a person is intrinsically racist or not, almost everybody
strives their best to not appear racist; and due to the tricky racist discourse used, it isalmost impossible to identify anyone as being racist. Augoustinos & Every (2007),
argues that in the modern world today, race discourse-strategies often practiced, work toplace the speaker`s argument as positive, rational and justified, even if the argument
ultimately leads to the marginalization of minority groups. In addition to `positive self
and negative other`-presentation, Augoustinos & Every explains that modern race
discourse methods include the denial of prejudice, basing arguments on external reasonsrather than one`s own psychology, removal of explicit racial signs in discourse, andusage of egalitarian ideals for non-egalitarian purposes (p.125).
The concept of `positive self and negative other`-presentation is supported by
van Dijk (2002). van Dijk, equivalently argues that although there are many subtle
forms and styles of racist discourse, the principle structure of general racist discourse is
the `structure of positive self-representation and negative other-presentation`. van Dijk

1

(2002) points out that racism is essentially learned via discourse. Discourse, in its broad
sense, which includes features likes non-verbal expressions, speech acts etc. (see van
Dijk 2002, p.147) functions as a tool to convey ideologies, share thoughts as well as
express opinions. Racist discourse meanwhile focuses upon the conveyance of ethnic
prejudice and ideologies. van Dijk explains that racist discourse is frequently observedin elite texts, which mainly consists of government- and mainstream media-sourced
material. Racist discourse in elite texts are structured in the style where the dominantgroup`s achievements are emphasized while the minority racial-group`s achievements
are deemphasized. The reverse strategy, which is the de-emphasis of the dominantgroup`s weaknesses and the emphasis of the minority group`s weaknesses and faults,
are also frequently utilized in elite texts (p.154). This is to say that racist discourse seen
in elite texts occur due to the `control and organization of information` by authorities(Murata 2007).
In response to the issue racism and racist discourse, Hijri (2009) argues thatrace-based comedy offers a platform to tackle the issue of racism; and the individuals
who stand at the front as representatives of race-based comedy are none other than standup-comedians. Notable figures of race-based stand up-comedy are people such as LouisCK, Richard Pryor, Chris Rock and Dave Chapelle. Race-based comedy is any type of2

comedy where its content or material is centered upon topics related to an individual`sor a community`s racial, ethnic or cultural background. Although comedy`s principle
goal is to induce laughter to those who observe it, this does not imply that the comedy
itself has no power to produce a social impact. Hijri (2009) argues that standup-comedians, who mainly bases his material upon racial and ethnic differences, bringcommon racial assumptions out in the open for social redefinition and reconstruction;and hence challenging the common social stereotype ideologies.
Weaver (2010) however, argues partially against Hijri. Weaver points out that
although stand-up comedians have the potential to challenge stereotypes via theperformances, it is not an effective platform to tackle the issue of racism as standup-comedy `performances have a paradoxical seriousness that runs throughout them,`(p.44) which is the polysemic nature of race-based jokes. Race-based joke`spolysemicity or polysemic nature is the possibility of a joke to be interpreted in multiple
ways, positively as well as negatively. A joke which its content focuses on a particularethnic group may be interpreted differently according to the type of audience andmethod of delivery of the joke. A joke which was delivered by a comedian in the hopesof subverting a racial stereotype may unfortunately be interpreted by the audience in adifferent fashion. Instead of the subversion of a racial stereotype, there is the possibility

3that the comedian may have just strengthened the stereotype. Weaver argues that effects
of discourse of stand-up-comedy acts are too unpredictable, and most of the time,race-based comedy is double-edged in its outcome.
Weaver`s (2010) argument, however, is based on findings from black,
African-American and Afro-Carribean comedians only. Russell Peters, however, is a
Canadian stand-up-comedian of Indian origins. Peters who does ethnic-based humor has
grown to become an international phenomenon in the past 8 years. Beginning from year
2004, Peters has managed to receive a lot of positive attention from a large number ofaudiences. The unique thing about Peters is that, he not only has a high level of
popularity among people that share the same racial background as him, but is extremely
popular among people of different racial and cultural background across the globe. The
main reason for Peters` tremendous success as a race-based stand-up-comedian is
because he is able to deliver his jokes far and across a multicultural and multiethnic
audience. From this discourse analysis of one of Russell Peters` stand-up-act, I illustrate
the methods and strategies used by Peters, which allows him to tap into an ethnicallydiverse audience; and how his style of performance has its own unique way of tacklingissues of racism.

4Methodology Section
To analyze the discourse strategies of the standup comedian Russell Peters, I
structured my method of data analysis based on the `general inductive approach` asillustrated by Thomas (2006). The general inductive approach is a simple
structured-style of evaluating qualitative data, which is basically constructed by threesteps – trimming and focusing of data, theme coding and conclusion drawing (p.239) –which are executed in sequence. In the case of the discourse analysis of Peters` stand-up
show, I first observed the data collected, adjusted the focus upon a smaller scope of data,
categorized the data into salient features, and finally derived conclusions from theobserved data. Different from the deductive approach of analysis, I am interpreting theraw collected data, without the aim to test out any prior assumptions or hypotheses.
Firstly, I watched through three of Peters` officially released live standup
shows – Outsourced (2006); Red, White & Brown (2008) and The Green Card Tour:Live from the O2 Arena (2011) – as well as the 46 minute long-Youtube video of one ofPeters` live performances that he did on the Canadian Television comedy series Comedy
Now! in 2004. After going through all the four videos, I selected his act that he did on
the comedy series Comedy Now! based on the reason that the video was the one thatwent viral on Youtube and functioned as the turning point of Peters` career. I was
5interested in getting to know the reason that particular stand up-routine was so
positively received by a very large number of people across the globe.
Next, I closely watched and listened to the whole video multiple times. For
each observation, I focused on the discourse strategies presented by Peters – such as
lexicon usage, rhetoric usage, topic choice and arrangement, non-verbal signals etc.
(Fukuda 2006; Murata 2007; van Djik 2002) – and took notes for further categorization
afterwards. I then overviewed the collected data to identify frequent and salient themes.
As a result, I observed that there were notable themes related with race- or
ethnicity-related lexicons; as well as race-based topic choice and its arrangement. I also
identified a frequent strategy used by Peters in presenting his jokes, which isracial-profiling. I coded the salient themes into three small groups, which eased theprocess of interpreting probable discourse meanings and their influence towards theaudiences (Thomas 2006).
To analyze the race-related lexical choice, I observed the stand-up act once
again carefully, but this time noting down the all the words that `indexed` (Dong 2009)
directly towards a particular racial or ethnic group. Words and phrases such as `Indianpeople` or `White Canadian men` which clearly points out to an individual`s or group`sracial or ethnic background are noted down. The lexicons written down are then6

grouped according to the four main and large ethnic groups that Peters addresses in his
performance, which are White, Black, Brown and Asian people. There were also words
and phrases that pointed to more than one particular ethnic and racial identity. I grouped
these lexicons in one group named `Multicultural`. One example is the word
`Hollapinos` which was created and mentioned by Peters during his act to index an
individual of which has Dutch and Filipino cultural origins. I then summed up thefrequency count of words and phrases in each main group and tabled the findings.
Finally, to analyze the findings, I compared and contrasted the frequency count oflexicons between groups.
Next, I attentively watched Peters` performance video once again, but this time,taking care to jot down the topics being addressed by Peters and the racial group(s) at
focus. The topics and racial group(s) in focus were noted down on a minutescale-timeline. I then proceeded to analyze the data by paying attention to how the racial
group(s)-focus was changing as the performance moved forward in time. In other words,
I focused upon the overall structure and flow of the act performed by Peters in terms of
the racial group(s) at focus.
To analyze the presentation method of racial-profiling often adopted by Peters
throughout his act, I first identified and watched the instances when Peters were carried7

out the racial-profiling method to express his jokes. For each part, I paid attention andrecorded all the strategies used by Peters to profile a certain ethnic group – such as his
non-verbal gestures, usage of accents etc. I too observed the audience`s response
towards Peters` racial-profiling jokes and jot down his response when the audience
reacted positively, as well as negatively. I then, compared the two cases and identified
the difference in Peters` methods of dealing with the audience`s respective responses.

Findings
Diffusion by Diversity
Deriving from the vocabulary used by Peters in his act to describe and aperson`s racial or ethnic background, Peters throughout his act addresses four maingroups, which are Asian, Brown, Black and White people. Although in a section of his
act Peters points out that Brown people actually fall under the Asian categorization, in
the rest of his show, Peters suggests to the audience over and over again that people
from the Brown category mainly as people of Indian ethnicity. Among these 4 maingroups, lexicons which indexes (Dong 2009) towards the White community were mostfrequent. The second most frequent race-indexing lexicon group is the Black group,8which came at a frequency of 48 times. The Brown-lexicon group lost to the Black
group by only 1 frequency count, which is at a total frequency count of 47. The Asiangroup followed after; and finally the Multicultural group which only turned up to beaddressed by Peters 14 times only.

Group

Lexicon count

%

ASIAN

29

15.03

BROWN

47

24.35

BLACK

48

24.87

WHITE

55

28.5

MULTICULTURE

14

7.25

Total

193

100

Table 1 Lexicon Count According to Main Groups

To my surprise, the frequency of words used to address the white and black
community topped the words used to address Peters` own racial group. The trend within
race-based comedy is that stand-up comedians utilize their own race or culture asmaterial for a majority their jokes (Weaver 2010). For example, Black comedians such9

as Richard Pryor and Chris Rock structure their whole stand-up act based on issues
centered upon their own ethnic group. In Rock`s stand-up shows, Rock takes advantage
of his social identity as an African American individual to create jokes that is centered
upon issues familiar to Black communities. Race based-jokes told by Rock would not
be received well and may even be deemed blatantly racist if it were to be told by
comedians of different ethnicity (Park; Gabbadon & Chernin 2006).
In the case of Peters, however, the Indian community was not addressed mostfrequently, which makes Peters act unique within the platform of race-based comedy.
Peters instead, addresses a broad range of ethnic groups in his act. Looking closely at
the words used to point to the White group, I discover that Peters addresses a diverse
group of people such as the White people in England, Italy and Canada etc. The sameobservation can also be said for the Black group. In addition to addressing the
aforementioned 4 main groups, a diverse group of people from different racial andethnic communities are also found to be addressed by Peters in his act In other words,
Peters practically `attacks` anyone from any ethnic background in his jokes. As a resultof his making jokes about a diverse group of people, Peters diffuses the sense of racismin his jokes. Peters` attacking of anybody and everybody in his act suggests to his
audience that nobody is safe from being stereotyped and being made fun of, which

10consequently validates his race-based jokes, even if it is not about his own ethnic group.
Different from the case of Pryor and Rock, through this method of diffusing the sense of
racism in his jokes – by addressing a diverse group of people – Peters puts himself in aunique position that enabled him to make fun of any racial group. This unique positionis lightly established at the start of his show when Peters introduces his act by saying `Itis nice to see all different kinds of people…`. Although brief and simple, the phrase
which points out to the idea of plurality holds a strong `symbolic value` (Backhaus2007) which aids to create an atmosphere that welcomes the ideology ofmulticulturalism, and hence helps to place Peters in the unique position to be able toaddress any culture or race in his act. This position gradually strengthens as Peters
continuously proceeds to tell jokes about all different kinds of people.

Racial Profile-Toning
A part of Peters` jokes that he delivers during his performance on stage is the
profiling of racial groups. Peters often expresses the salient characteristics of aparticular racial group in his jokes simply by stating the characteristics or by the usageof non-verbal gestures and accents. Judging from the audience`s response, a favorite
racial profiling made by Peters is of his own ethnic community, which is the Indian11

community. In his act, Peters expertly changes his speech accent to mimic a typicalIndian guy, who has a thick Indian accent when speaking English. In addition to that, toemphasize that he is now playing the part of a typical Indian guy, Peters occasionallyshakes his head to the sides, mimicking a general stereotype of an Indian person. Peters`audience almost always gives a hugely positive response to the racial-profiling Peters
does towards his own personal racial group. The same positive response was also
observed when Peters did a racial profiling of Chinese, Jamaican and White Canadianpeople.
There are, however, instances where racial profiling-jokes told by Peters were
not received positively by the majority of the audiences. In instances where jokes were
not received well, I observed that a large section of the audience either remained quietor reluctantly let go of nervous laughter. In response to the audience`s negative reaction,Peters immediately attempts to tone down the joke told. Peters tones down his joke byrationalizing and naturalizing the context of the joke. For example, in the 14th minute ofhis stand up-act, Peters commented about the black people among the audience;`Good to see Black people in the audience too. That`s nice…because it`sbright. I` just kidding, I`m just kidding. (Laughter) What suddenly you all12

sensitive black people now? What`s up with that?``…I grew up around Black people. You don`t scare me.`

Immediately after mentioning the joke about being able to see Black people
among the audience, Peters clearly stated twice that he was `just kidding` around andthen gave out a short nervous laughter. Noticing that his joke was not received well by
the audience in comparison to his previous jokes, Peters proceeded to naturalize his joke
by directly challenging the audience, with focus upon the Black audience, about their
response towards the joke. By saying ` What suddenly you all sensitive black people
now, what`s up with that?`, Peters argues against the audience that their decision of notlaughing at the joke, and hence implying that the joke is socially inappropriate andracist in nature, is actually biased. Peters points out that as the audience were alreadylaughing at jokes related with other racial and ethnic groups, it is biased and notjustified that they do not laugh at jokes related with a particular ethnic group, which inthis case is the Black community.
Peters further naturalizes and rationalizes his joke by stating that he had grown
up within a Black community, and that he is `not scared` of Black people. By
identifying himself as someone who has lived and grew up with Black people, Peters13carefully tries to convince his audience that he is in the privileged position to tell suchjokes. As an individual who has had personal interaction and experience with Black
people, Peters convinces his audience to validate the joke, that before would otherwise
be labeled as a racist remark.
Peters` effort to rationalize his otherwise sensitive joke did not go fruitless as
the majority of the audience burst to laughter when he mimicked a Black audience
member who responded sensitively to the joke aforementioned. The change of theaudience`s response from being negative to positive, shows that Peters succeeded intoning down his sensitive joke, and also in convincing his audience to change theirperception about the joke.
In the case where the joke is positively received by the audience, even if thecontent of the joke is based on a negative stereotype of a particular racial group, Peters
allows the joke to move forward as it is validated by the audience`s overall positive
response. As an example, during his act, after explaining his admiration of Jamaican
people when he was young, Peters orally lists down the things that are representative ofa typical Jamaican individual;`When I was a kid, I wanted to be Jamaican so bad, I started dressing like14

a Jamaican, I started wearing a little yellow, red, green belt, I started
talking like a Jamaican. I started listening to reggae music. I started
having kids I did not know about. I did everything I possibly could…

The punch line of the joke is the last characteristic said by Peters, which is`having kids I did not know about`. In contrast to the first few characteristics listed byPeters, the last characteristic suggested by Peters as a joke has a negative connotation toit. From this joke, Peters is actually suggesting to the audience of the stereotype ofJamaicans being irresponsible when it comes to taking care of their own children.
Although content wise, the joke is demeaning in nature, this joke is positively taken by
the audience with a heap of laughter. As Peters did do anything to withdraw or deny hisstatement about Jamaican people, and proceeded unto the next joke, Peters had actuallycontributed to the strengthening of that stereotype about Jamaican people. In otherwords, whatever the content of the joke may be, Peters decides to, or sees the need totone his racial-profiling jokes only if the audience responded negatively to the joke. If
the audience responded positively to the joke made, Peters would proceed with thefollowing act even if he did contribute to the negative profiling of a particular ethnic
group.

15

Negative me, Natural you
One apparent feature of Peters stand up-act`s structure is that Peters juxtaposes
topics about the Indian community with jokes about other racial groups. Throughout theshow, I observed that at least one joke related to the Indian community will precede or
succeed jokes which are focused upon non-Indian racial groups. For example, before
performing a scenario to describe how a Chinese person will always try his best to
maximize his profit when dealing business, Peters introduces the concept of how Indianpeople are simply `the cheapest people in the world`. Peters nicely tied the two concepts,
which is that `Indian people cannot live without a bargain, and Chinese people cannever give you a bargain`, by acting out a scenario about an Indian man trying tonegotiate the price of a bag sold by a Chinese businessman.
Another example to illustrate the changing of racial group focus-method
adopted by Peters is the topic about accents which was brought up from the 27th minuteof the act. Peters first introduced the topic about accents by speaking about how Indianpeople are aware of how they sound like, and how Indian men, like Peters himself, areaware of the advantages and disadvantages of the Indian accent. After finishing the joke16

centered on the Indian accent, Peters follows up with another joke, which is still relatedwith accents, but centered upon a totally different racial group – White Canadians.
Peters explains from his personal point of view about how he notices that White
Canadians are not aware of the accent that they actually have; and then continues to`reveal` that White Canadians sound a bit like `donkeys` when they begin to use swear
or curse words.
It is also valuable to note that most of the race-based jokes made by Peters areof self-deprecating in nature, which is common among comedians. Self-deprecating
humor is a derived application of the rhetorical concept `pathos` (Cook 2009), which ispracticed to help the audience identify with the comedian`s position. Throughout thestand-up-act, Peters, like many stand up-comedians, countlessly pokes fun at the thecommunity that he is ethnically affiliated to, the Indian community, by pointing out the
funny perspectives of the Indian community especially in the context of a multiculturalcountry such as Canada.
The only point that separates Peters from a common stand up-comedian is thatPeters too makes depreciating jokes about other cultures and races. The interesting thing
here is that his jokes, whether it be about his own culturally linked-community or aboutother racial groups, are most of the time positively responded by the audience. This is17due to the fact that Peters juxtaposes jokes about the Indian culture with jokes aboutother cultures. By initially making self-depreciating jokes about the Indian community,
Peters indirectly manages to convince the audience to accommodate tolerance towards
his depreciating jokes about other cultures. By this method, Peters delivers a very strong
rhetorical message to his audience that `if I can learn to laugh at my own race, why
cannot we all learn to laugh at our own racial groups? `.
This method utilized by Peters in his act is a direct opposite of the common
structure observed in many racist discourses. As Augoustinos & Every (2007) and van
Djik (2002) argue, racist discourse is usually structured in the way to create a positive
image of self, to validate the discrimination of other. In contrast, Peters, in his act,
creates a negative image of self, to promote the naturalization of other. It is to say thatPeters continuously depreciates his own community`s image, to reach out to his
audience and convince them to take a more open stance when looking back at their own
racial communities. Although Peters makes the Indian community`s customs, practices
and image vulnerable for criticism by the general public via his act, by sharing with thecrowd that there is something humorous about his own cultural group promotes
cross-cultural understanding, and hence the naturalization of stereotypes within themulticultural and multiracial society.

18Implication
Hijri (2009) points out that there is a deep craving among members across
many racial and ethnic groups to have their own cultural communities exposed in its`totality`(p.582), and to be able to laugh at their own selves. Stand up-comedian such as
Russell Peters functions as an adept mediator to fulfill this craving. By addressing
practically anyone and everyone from a diverse array of racial and cultural backgroundin one single act, Peters creates an environment that accommodates much room forcross-cultural tolerance and interracial understanding. In exchange for positioning thehis own community in a very vulnerable spot for criticism, Peters invites members of
the audience to take upon a more open mindset when facing differences and similarities
across racial groups. As a result, Peters promotes the naturalization of common
stereotypes among the audience members. Peters encourages his audience to perceive
common social stereotypes as something which is natural or ordinary within a society,and not something which is socially constructed. Even in Peters` performance, his jokes
still hold their intrinsic polysemic nature, as pointed by Weaver (2010); and would still
be interpreted differently by each individual audience member. The social stereotypes
put forward in the act are not challenged by Peters, and the strengthening of negative19

social stereotypes, as a possibility, could still occur; but rather, as Hijri (2009) pointed
out: comedians such as Russell Peters are the people who are able to build platforms toallow stereotypes to be socially reconstructed. In this case, stereotypes mentioned
throughout Peters act are not socially reconstructed to lose their positive or negative
connotations. Instead, stereotypes are redefined within the society to be something thatis of normality and natural. If stereotypes are perceived by audience members to besomething normal and inherent to smaller racial groups within a society, it would beeasier for audience members to adopt and digest the idea of diversity within a society.
Ultimately, from his act, Peters stimulates the concept of plurality via the naturalizationof social stereotypes among a racially diverse audience.

Notes:
Minutes

Topic

Racial

group

focus
0

Introduction

Indian1

Indian homosexuals

Indian2

Indian men should not be gay

Indian3

Arranged marriage issue among Indian families

Indian4

Arranged marriage issue among Indian families

Indian5African language

African6

African language

African7

Indian slaves in South Africa

Indian, African

8

Indian slaves in South Africa

Indian, African

9

Indianathletes,
Indians`
cheapness-comparison
20

andJews` Indian, Jews

at

10

Cheapness of Indian people

Indian11

Business between Chinese and Indian people

Indian, Chinese

12

Business between Chinese and Indian people

Indian, Chinese

13

Business between Chinese and Indian people

Indian, Chinese

14

Growing up among black people

Black

15

Jamaican people are cool

Jamaican

16

Jamaican will not act like an Indian

Jamaican, Indian

17

Jamaican-Indian `punani` joke

Jamaican, Indian18

African names: !XOBile

African19

African names: !XOBile

African20

Italian`s use of hand gestures

Italian21

Indians in Italy

Italian, Indian

22

Indian and Italian hand motion-comparison

Italian, Indian

23

Chinese names

Chinese24

Chinese names

Chinese25

Chinese in Hong Kong speak good English

Chinese26

Local Chinese comedianChinese27

Funny Indian accent

Indian28

Good use of Indian accent

Indian29

Canadian White accent

White

30

Canadian White accent

White

31

Swearing White people joke

White

32

Everybody is going to be `Beige`

Multiculture

33

Everybody is going to be `Beige`

Multiculture

34

Indian-Chinese wedding

Indian, Chinese

35

Indian dad becoming a Redneck

Indian36

Immigrant parents beat their kids

Multiculture

37

Indian parents, Chinese parents

Indian, Chinese

38

Indian parents, Jamaican parents

Indian, Jamaican

39

Ryan, the angry White kid

White

40

Taking white kid`s advice, Indian parent

White, Indian

41

Taking white kid`s advice, Indian parent

White, Indian

42

Taking white kid`s advice, Indian parent

White, Indian

Table 2 Topics and Racial group(s) at focus-timeline21References
acool9688. (2006, Jan 1). Russel Peter Video [Video file]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VELXE7xvVHo
Augoustinos, Martha & Every, Danielle. (2007). The language of "race" and prejudice:
A discourse of denial, reason, and liberal-practical politics. Journal of Language
and Social Psychology, 26, 123- 141.
Backhaus, Peter. (2007). Previous approaches to the linguistic landscape: An overview.
In Linguistic landscapes: A comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo(pp. 12-52) Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Dong, J. (2009). 'Isn't it enough to be a Chinese speaker': Language ideology andmigrant identity construction in a public primary school in Beijing. Language &Communication, 29, 115-126.
Fukuda, C. (2006). Resistance against being formulated as cultural other: The case of a
Chinese student in Japan. Pragmatics, 16 (4), 429-456.
Gardner, Julie (Producer), & Higby, David (Director). (2011). Russell Peters: The Green
Card Tour – Live from The O2 Arena [Motion picture]. Canada
Hjiri, Faiza. (2009). `Somebody Going to Get Hurt Real Bad`: The Race-based Comedy
of Russell Peters. Canadian Journal of Communication, 34, 567-586.
Park, J.H.; Gabbadon N.G. & Chernin A.R. (2006). Naturalizing racial differences
through comedy: Asian, black, and white views on racial stereotypes in rush hour
2. Journal of Communication, 56, 157-177.
Pavankumarkaranam (2011 September 3). Russell Peters Show Me The Funny :Part1[Video
Title].
Retrievedfromhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGouMSqcw8o&list=PL5XzwlYPARgyDNJi
LEJoNmBgRn5SaLzoy&index=24&feature=plpp_video
Polo, Marco (Producers). (2008). Red, White and Brown [Live Album]. Canada: WarnerMusic.
Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation
data. American Journal of Evaluation, 33 (3), 237-246.
van Djik, Teun A. (2002) Discourse and Racism. David T. Goldberg & John Solomos(Eds.), A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies. (pp. 145-159). Oxford:
Blackwell, 2002
22

Weaver, S. (2010). The `other` laughs back: Humour and resistance of anti-racist
comedy. 44(1), 31-48. doi: 10.1177/0038038509351624
Williams, J.P.; Blomquist, Alan C. (Producer), (2006). Outsourced [Motion picture].
Canada: Warner Bros. Records.

23