Loading ...Archive for journalism
Matthews: I Forgot Obama was Black
Posted by: | CommentsMSNBC commentator Chris Matthews was attempting to be effusive in his praise of President Obama’s State of the Union Speech a few nights ago when he declared that Obama was “truly post-racial” because he “forgot that Obama was black” during the speech. Here’s a clip of Matthews’ comments (2:11):
Matthews has gone on to defend his statement, and in an interview with The Grio, Matthews said, “I thought I was saying something wonderful and positive about America.” Ta-Nehisi Coates at The Atlantic, cleverly points out the corollary, when he writes that “I just remembered Chris Matthews is white.” And, of course, that’s the point. Matthews’ perverse version of ‘colorblindness’ – in which forgetting blackness and assuming whiteness are the standards – is one in which white privilege still prevails.
More on Haiti: Will Racism Hinder Relief?
Posted by: | CommentsThere’s a lot of good news about relief efforts to Haiti. As just one example, Haiti-born musician Wyclef Jean’s online and mass media efforts to help his home country have raised $400,000 in the first day. Yet, at the same time, there is a strong current of racism directed toward Haitians that may hinder relief to this devastated Island nation.
In a conversation with Dr. Goddess on Twitter yesterday, she brought my attention to the casual racism of this individual (if her profile is to be believed, a young, white female who loves both beer and Jesus in equal measure):
But surely, I can hear the objections now, this is just the misguided rant of an uneducated person. This young woman is surely an outlier, the exception, rather than the rule. Perhaps. About the same time, I heard the reports of Rev. Pat Robertson explaining what had happened in Haiti:
“…something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. They were under the heel of the French, Napoleon III, or whatever, and they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said we will serve you if you get us free from the French. True story. So the devil said okay it’s a deal, so the Hatians revolted and got themselves free. But ever since then they have been cursed by one thing after another. Desperately poor, the island of Hispanola is one side, on the one side is Haiti, on the other side is the Dominican Republic. The Dominican Republic is prosperous, healthy, full of resorts et cetera, Haiti is in desperate poverty. They need to have, and we need to pray for them, and out of this tragedy I’m optimistic something good may come, but right now we’re helping the suffering people and the suffering is unimaginable.”
So, rather than a proud history of resisting colonial oppression, Haitians are – in Robertson’s mind – aligned with the devil. This seems rather stark racism, in my view, but certainly coat-and-tie racism. While it’s easy to dismiss Robertson as a crank, his Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) has a global television audience. CBN was at one time the largest supplier of 24-hour cable programming in the world, claiming to reach 66 foreign countries through 150 local stations, 2,500 satellite cable systems, and even through the U.S. Armed Forces Radio and Television Network. Although the influence and reach of the network has declined in recent years, it would be a mistake to underestimate Robertson’s influence on his audience. The Haitian Ambassador, Raymond Joseph, offered an eloquent rebuttal to Robertson’s nonsense on Maddow’s show last night, saying:
“I would like the whole world to know — America especially — that the independence of Haiti, when the slave rose up against the French and defeated the French army — powerful army — the U.S. was able to gain the Louisiana territory for $15 million. That’s 3 cents an acre. That’s 13 states west of the Mississippi that the Haitian slave revolt in Haiti provided. Also the revolt of the rebels in Haiti allowed Latin America to be free. So, what pact the Haitian made with the devil has helped the United States become what it is.”
Unfortunately, Maddow and the rest of MSNBC do not hold much of the audience share compared to conservative outlets, such as Fox. So, while this thumping by the Haitian Ambassador is getting lots of play by liberal and left-leaning bloggers, it’s not making much of a dent in the conservative reverberation chamber.
And, that brings me to the largest (ahem) conservative pundit of them all, Rush Limbaugh, sometimes referred to as the de facto chair of the Republican party. Limbaugh seems to be the hands-down leader so far in efforts to use racism to hinder relief efforts to Haiti. His recent remarks on the earthquake:
“In the Haiti earthquake, ladies and gentleman, in the words of Rahm Emanuel, ‘we have another crisis simply too good to waste,’” the conservative talk show host remarked. “This will play right into Obama’s hands, humanitarian, compassionate.”
“They’ll use this to burnish their, shall we say, credibility with the black community, in the light-skinned and black-skinned community in this country,” Limbaugh added. “It’s made to order for them. That’s why he could not wait to get out there. Could not wait to get out there.”
In fact, as Allen McDuffee points out at his blog, Governmentality, it’s right-wing organizations like the Heritage Foundation, that are eyeing the Haitian earthquake opportunistically.
Limbaugh also suggested falsely that the U.S. has “already donated” to Haiti through U.S. income. Limbaugh, like Robertson, would be easy enough to dismiss were it not for the large audience his show commands and the rather remarkable political power he wields.
And, then there is the liberal racism of mainstream television shows that obsessively report about white, Western victims of the earthquake while spending comparatively less time on the majority of indigenous, Haitian residents, as if whiteness is the sine qua non for personhood and empathy.
Whether or not racism – from the crass Twitter comments, to the racist propaganda of Robertson and Limbaugh, to the white hegemony of television talk shows - will hinder relief efforts to Haiti, only time will tell. My hope is that this crisis will, in the words of Ferentz Lafargue, prompt us to think not only “about Haiti’s plight today, but to whatever extent possible two years and two decades from today” (h/t @dumilewis, @DavePurcell).
Lou Dobbs Leaves CNN
Posted by: | CommentsToday, Lou Dobbs said that he is leaving CNN, effective immediately. This represents a real victory for anti-racist activists, such as BastaDobbs and Presente.org, who have worked to get him removed from CNN, which we’ve discussed here and here. Here is the story from the New York Times:
Lou Dobbs, the longtime CNN anchor whose anti-immigration views have made him a TV lightning rod, said Wednesday that he is leaving the cable news channel effective immediately.
Sitting before an image of an American flag on his television set, he said “some leaders in media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond the role here at CNN and to engage in constructive problem solving as well as to contribute positively to the great understanding of the issues of our day.”
“I’m considering a number of options and directions,” Mr. Dobbs added. A transcript of his remarks is available here.
Jonathan Klein, the president of CNN/U.S. said in a statement that “Lou has now decided to carry the banner of advocacy journalism elsewhere.”
“All of us will miss his appetite for big ideas, the megawatt smile and larger than life presence he brought to our newsroom,” Mr. Klein said.
Wednesday’s program will be Mr. Dobbs’ last on CNN. His contract was not set to expire until the end of 2011. He told viewers that CNN had agreed to release him from his contract early.
CNN indicated that it would name a replacement for Mr. Dobbs on Thursday morning.
Mr. Dobbs informed his staff members of his intentions in a meeting Wednesday afternoon, catching some of the staffers off-guard.
Well known for his political positions, Mr. Dobbs is an outlier at CNN, which has sought to position itself as a middle ground of sorts in the fractious cable news arena. The CNN employees said Wednesday that they did not know if Mr. Dobbs was moving to another network.
Of course, the possibility of the Dobbs moving to another network – such as Fox, which I mentioned recently is the highest rated news network – raises the ominous possibility that he is simply moving on to a bigger audience.
CNN Feeling Pressure as Drop Dobbs Campaign Gains Momentum
Posted by: | CommentsOver the past few weeks, CNN has begun to feel the pressure to drop their anti-immigrant news reader and talking head Lou Dobbs. The effort to get Dobbs off the airwaves has garnered widespread attention, particularly through two websites, DropDobbs.com and BastaDobbs.com. As Jessie noted here a couple of weeks ago, BastaDobbs.com is a website that demands that “CNN deal with its Dobbs problem once and for all.”
In response to these calls for his resignation, Lou Dobbs has asserted his right to free speech as protecting his view that illegal immigrants have no right to be in the US. Let’s look at the discussion – does Lou Dobbs cross the line of what’s considered protected speech?
First of all, it is important to clarify that Lou Dobbs Tonight is not exactly a question of “free” speech. Lou Dobbs, and CNN, make a lot of money from advertisers. Mr. Dobbs is getting paid by CNN to express his views. In that light, CNN needs to take into account how what Dobbs says affects its viewers. Without viewers, there would be no advertising revenue, and no CNN. Also, there are plenty of things Dobbs is not allowed to say on CNN, such as “Swiffer dusters are bad for the environment,” or “Planters peanuts are picked by exploited workers.” Making these statements would cause those two advertisers to pull their commercials from CNN. In that light, should Dobbs be allowed to say: “The invasion of illegal aliens is threatening the health of many Americans”? Especially, should he be allowed to say this when it is unsubstantiated?
One of the most compelling arguments made by people such as Roberto Lovato of Presente.org and Amy Goodman of Democracy Now about Lou Dobbs’ problematic show is that Mr. Dobbs spreads lies about Latinos, immigrants, and undocumented immigrants. This claim is justified.
In 2008, the Media Matters Action Network published a report on the representation of undocumented immigration on cable news networks, appropriately titled: Fear and Loathing in Prime Time: Immigration Myths and Cable News. This report revealed that three shows: The O’Reilly Factor, Lou Dobbs Tonight, and Glenn Beck consistently propagate myths about undocumented immigrants. These myths include the alleged criminality of undocumented immigrants, the falsehood that undocumented immigrants don’t pay taxes, and the myth that Mexicans plan to carry out a reconquista of the United States. Lou Dobbs seems to be obsessed with the topic of illegal immigration. In 2007, 70 percent of his shows involved a discussion of illegal immigration. In the three shows combined, there were 402 shows in 2007 where illegal immigration is discussed, an average of more than one per day.
Perhaps most controversial is Dobbs’ sensationalist discussion of crime. Dobbs frequently misrepresents the criminality of undocumented people. For example, on October 5, 2006, Lou Dobbs said “just about a third of the prison population in this country is estimated to be illegal aliens.” This is a gross misrepresentation of the reality – less than six percent of prisoners are foreign-born, and only some of those are undocumented immigrants, the remaining being naturalized citizens, permanent legal residents and other visa holders.
All of these myths are easily countered with research. Extensive research by Rubén Rumbaut and his colleagues has demonstrated that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than the native born: the incarceration rate of the native born was four times the rate of the foreign born in 2006. More than half of undocumented workers pay payroll taxes, and everyone pays property and sales taxes (PDF). The idea of a reconquista is perhaps the domain of a marginalized few, but certainly not the sentiment of most Mexican-Americans.
The constant repetition of hate-filled rhetoric dehumanizes undocumented migrants and renders them appropriate targets for law enforcement activities. One way this can be seen is in polls Lou Dobbs conducts on his show. On his March 5, 2007, show, Dobbs reported that “Ninety-eight percent of you [viewers] voted that illegal immigration, failed border security, and sanctuary laws are contributing to the rise in gang violence in this country.” By consistently presenting undocumented migrants as criminals and dehumanizing them by referring to them as “illegals,” these popular media pundits create animosity toward undocumented migrants in the US.
Creating ill will towards undocumented migrants by spreading lies is certainly something worth complaining about. This not only affects undocumented migrants; it also affects their family members, people who live in communities with undocumented migrants, people who are in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, and people who are not undocumented, but who may be mistaken for an undocumented migrant.
I have to agree – ¡Basta Dobbs! Click here to add your name to a petition to get Dobbs off the air.
Tanya Golash-Boza is an Assistant Professor of Sociology and American Studies at the University of Kansas. Currently, she is in Guatemala, and blogs about her research at: http://tanyagolashboza.blogspot.com
Time to say “Basta” to CNN’s Lou Dobbs
Posted by: | CommentsSeptember 15 – October 15 marks “Hispanic Heritage Month” here in the U.S. According to the U.S. Census, there were 46.9 million people estimated Hispanic population of the United States as of July 1, 2008, making people of Hispanic origin the nation’s largest ethnic or race minority. Hispanics constituted 15 percent of the nation’s total population. In addition, there are approximately 4 million residents of Puerto Rico. (More population facts here.)
Given the large and growing population of Hispanic people in the U.S., there is also a growing awareness of anti-Latino racism. One very prominent and especially vitriolic source of anti-Latino sentiment is Lou Dobbs, an anchor and talking-head on CNN. Writing at Alternet, Robert Novato (founding member of Presente.org), says this:
Dobbs’ extremism can be seen and heard on most week nights and consists of three pillars: obsession with immigrants and Latinos; promotion of systematic myths about immigrants and Latinos; and, most dangerously, providing a platform for leaders of some of the most radical and violent anti-Latino groups in the United States.
More than anyone in national network news, Dobbs has declared war against those he calls “invaders” and “aliens.” According to the media watchdog group Media Matters, for example, from January 1 through July 23 of this year, Dobbs included segments on immigration in 77 out of 140 broadcast hours. With so much airtime dedicated to slandering Latinos, Dobbs has ample opportunity to spread misinformation. For example, he has blamed Latino immigrants for an alleged leprosy epidemic that was widely debunked, and has asserted Latinos’ criminality with the wild exaggeration that “illegal aliens” take up a third of the cells in our prisons and jails. Dobbs also has plenty of time to host extremist guests like FAIR, the Minutemen, and controversial Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who he called “a model for the whole country.”
Dobbs’ incessant attacks on Latinos and immigrants have earned him a following among nativists and those who share his extreme views.
For the most part, Dobbs has skated by on the tacit approval of CNN which has banked on the fact that many of the Latinos who bear the brunt of his systematic media assaults–Spanish-speaking immigrants–were unaware of the bile that Dobbs regularly spews. Interestingly, CNN does not translate Dobbs for broadcast on its CNN en Espanol network.
All of that has led Novato and his organization to with other Latino organizations throughout the United States demanding that CNN get rid of Dobbs. In the coming weeks, CNN President Jon Klein will be inundated by a growing national chorus of calls from www.bastadobbs.com and others demanding his network to stop promoting Dobbs’ brand of “news.” It should be interesting to watch if and how CNN responds to this call to live up to their tagline of “the most trusted name in news.” This movement to dump Dobbs marks a critical shift in the direction of Latino activism in the United States.
912 Protesters Fueled by Racism, Hatred of Obama
Posted by: | CommentsOn Saturday (9/12), thousands of protesters gathered in Washington to express their disdain for President Obama and his policies – particularly health care reform. The crowd was populated by white political conservatives — – organized by a loose-knit coalition of anti-tax, small-government proponents, and widely promoted by sympathetic voices in the blogosphere and on TV and talk radio. The protest was scheduled for 9/12 – the day after the anniversary of the terrorist attacks – as way to mark a point in time when Democrats and Republicans supposedly “shared a sense of purpose and unity and all Americans were patriotic.”
What few, if any, of the mainstream reports included in their coverage of the event was any discussion of the racial composition of the 912 crowd which was overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, white. According to The Washington Independent (the only news source I could find that was talking about this issue), the crowd was “99 percent white.” The reporter noted, “in my four-plus hours at the event, I’d only seen three African-American demonstrators.” When the reporter asked Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), one of the organizers of the event, about the lack of racial diversity in the crowd, DeMint blamed the event’s timing and the media coverage.
“If anyone does a fair analysis of the crowd, it’s a cross-section of the population. It’s probably just the time and organization and the media that promoted it,” DeMint said.
Now, just because it’s an exclusively white-folks event doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s fueled by racism, but it does give one pause. I certainly think it’s possible to oppose the policies of the Obama administration and not have those views fueled by racism. Yet, you can tell a good deal about a protest from the images and iconography that protesters choose to convey their message. And the signs people created and carried provide another kind of other evidence that the rhetorical and visual strategies of the protesters drew on a deeply embedded white racial frame.
While at least one news report (CNN) characterized the signs carried at the rally as “particularly distasteful” (e.g., “Bury Obamacare with Kennedy”), none in the mainstream media have called out the protesters for the overtly racist signs many of them carried. Here’s just one example (via Alternet):
The crudely drawn ‘monkey’ image in the middle of this sign suggests the deeply racist imagery of Obama that appeared during the campaign and has continued throughout his presidency. There are some more of these racist signs posted here. This is the same kind of racist hatred that is fueling the 400 percent increase in death threats to Obama that I mentioned here yesterday.
Although it’s possible that mainstream news outlets are not reporting on the racism at these protests out of some sort of concern for stoking the flames of racism, it seems more likely to me that those deciding on what is – and is not – newsworthy are steeped in a white racial frame that hinders them from accurately perceiving the many ways that the 912 protest is rooted in racism and white supremacy. The combination of this racism and the intense hatred of Obama makes for a dangerous combination.
The Racism in “The Great White Hope”
Posted by: | CommentsKeith Olbermann and Rep. Maxine Waters do a nice job of calling out the use of the phrase “great white hope” as steeped in racism. Here’s a clip on the long side (6:10) but worth watching all the way through if you missed the live broadcast:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
I really appreciate Olbermann saying “as a white guy” the recent political events make him uncomfortable. And, then poses the question to Rep. Waters, “are we going backwards or forwards?” It’s about the frankest discussion of racism on mainstream media that I’ve ever heard.
Rachel Maddow: Correcting the Record on Pat’s Racist Rant
Posted by: | CommentsRachel Maddow took a few minutes at the end of last night’s show to correct the record on Pat Buchanan’s racist rant about ‘white men built this nation.’ In case you missed it, here’s what she said (6:58):
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
I think she did a pretty good job on this. She gets bonus points from me for the line about affirmative action being necessary “so that we as a country don’t end up sealing in place forever a white supremacist society, created by and defined by segregation and Jim Crow.” What do you think about her rebuttal?
Pat Buchanan Does it Again: Defending White Male Privilege
Posted by: | CommentsIn this video from MSNBC (on the long side, 16:08, but worth it), Pat Buchanan ardently defends white male privilege (h/t @kellieparker). And, Rachel Maddow offers a substantial challenge to him:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
I’ve written about Pat Buchanan here before, both here (online) and in my first book, White Lies (Routledge: 1997). In that book, part of what I did was lay out the ways that extremist white supremacist discourse in movement publications was similar to mainstream political discourse about race, and I mentioned then-presidential-candidate Pat Buchanan as one of those examples. I also investigated the ways that gender and race intersected in both extremist and mainstream discourse. In the video clip above, Buchanan goes on about the “white men who built this nation” and I have to say that what came immediately to mind for me was an image from a white supremacist publication (such as Tom Metzger’s “White Aryan Resistance,” or “WAR”) that I included in that book (on pages 34-35). Here’s a bit of the passage:
“The image is of a white man, with airplances and bridges in the background, and the accompanying text reads, ‘White Men Built This Nation, White Men Are This Nation!” (emphasis in the original). the images conveys several messages. It signals a link between race, ‘whiteness’ and masculinity, specifically ‘white men,’ such that white men are the central, indeed the only actors visible. …[The illustration] presumably refers to those materially involved in ‘building’ an infrastructure, those who literally ‘built’ the bridges, airplanes, and skyscrapers featured in the background. Meanwhile the image simultaneously obliterates the labor of racial and ethnic minorities, both men and women, whose labor did, in fact, build this country.”
Once again, there is little if any distinction between the argument that Pat Buchanan is making on MSNBC and the one that extremist white supremacist publications are making. Both are interested in defending white male privilege while ignoring the talents, hard work, and accomplishments of people of color whose labor has made this country wealth, yet who are, much too often, excluded from reaping the benefits of that labor.
Fox News’ Racism
Posted by: | CommentsFox News’ Brian Kilmeade revealed a glimpse into the depths of his own racism on the air recently. During a discussion of a study based on research done in Finland and Sweden which showed people who stay married are less likely to suffer from Alzheimer’s, this exchange happened (short, less than 1 minute):
In this clip, Kilmeade questions the results of the study saying, “We are — we keep marrying other species and other ethnics and other …” The co-host tried to distract Kilmeade, but he goes on to add, “See, the problem is the Swedes have pure genes. Because they marry other Swedes …. Finns marry other Finns, so they have a pure society.”
The argument Kilmeade is making, and to their credit that his co-workers at Fox News seem appalled to hear, is one that’s rooted in the discredited racial pseudo-science of eugenics.
Eugenics, which reached ascendancy in the U.S. and Europe in the 1930s, advocated social progress through encouraging those deemed “fit” to reproduce to have children and discouraging, even coercing through forced sterilization, those thought to be “unfit.” One of the intellectual factories producing knowledge steeped in eugenics was at Cold Spring Harbor Lab on Long Island, just outside New York. While claims about “fitness” and “unfitness” were sometimes tied to inherited disease, just as often these designations were linked to poverty and race. Thus, people who are poor or not considered white are designated “unfit.” Indeed, in the extreme version of eugenics, some people were considered “less than human” or of “another species.” This kind of thinking is part of what fueled the Third Reich’s calculated extermination of six million Jews. Following the defeat of the Nazis and the liberation of the camps, the theory of eugenics fell into disfavor.
In his book, Backdoor to Eugenics (NY: Routledge, 2nd Ed., 2003), sociologist Troy Duster explores the ways that current practices, such as prenatal detection of birth defects, gene therapies, growth hormones, are once again introducing “genetic answers” to what are fundamentally social questions. In Kilmeade’s ill-informed discussion of research about the length of marriage, he is stepping into a long tradition of eugenics as the scientific basis for racism and antisemitism. Fox News rarely disappoints as a source for broadcasting such retrograde thinking.
