Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo, other than personal use, must be obtained from BARRIOZONA,
Call 480-983-1445 or e-mail admin@barriozona.com with your request
Phoenix, Arizona.- Soon after the massive immigrants’ demonstrations that took place in many U.S. cities during the
month of March of 2006, Gillian Flaccus, an Associated Press writer wrote a story that was widely published in many print
and electronic media outlets. Flaccus, AP’s diversity and religion reporter for Southern California, was far from revealing a
new trend. However, for most of mainstream America, he exposed the mobilizing power behind the unprecedented and
multitudinous marches of Latinos –particularly undocumented immigrants.
In his article, Flaccus establishes that “for English-speaking America, the mass protests in Los Angeles and other U.S.
cities over the past few days have been surprising for their size and seeming spontaneity. But they were organized,
promoted, or publicized for weeks by Spanish-language radio hosts and TV anchors as a demonstration of Hispanic pride
and power.”
Flaccus’ observation was not only far from being inaccurate; it captured the open and wide support that historically has
been the main characteristic of Spanish-language media in the United States, as well as its advocacy role for the Mexican-
American and Latino population. Perhaps the Associated Press writer was not entirely aware of this traditional function of
Spanish-language media, but was definitely correct in crediting what has been, and is in essence, a powerful force
behind the current push for immigration reform.
Even though these actions and the media's role in promoting them may appear new to many, the relationship between
Spanish-language media and the Latino population’s struggle for civil rights has a long history of interaction and
involvement. Therefore, the pro-immigrant rallies can be considered the most recent link in a chain of events that spans
for more than 100 years.
Historian Christine Marin cautions new generations to “not assume that the current call for immigration reform is a new
phenomenon in the Southwest. Since the early 1900s…Mexican immigrants made great attempts to fight for their labor,
political, economic and human rights and have made great sacrifices to achieve the American Dream of education,
success and home ownership.”
Dr. Marin, a Curator and Archivist of the Chicano/a Research Collection at Arizona State University, believes that what
some observers consider an emerging social movement, is a recent expression of that continued struggle for rights: “The
marches and rallies you see occurring in the Southwest and elsewhere are manifestations of a civil rights movement, a
socio-economic movement, a political movement, and a human rights movement.”
One of these attempts Dr. Marin refers to, the creation in 1894 of the “Alianza Hispano Americana,” sheds light in
understanding how and why Spanish-language media become an instrument of advocacy in the pursuit of social justice.
According to another historian, Dr. Manuel G. Gonzales, the Alianza Hispano Americana “functioned as a mutual aid and
benefit society…Primarily, however, the Alianza was a defense organization.” Dr. Gonzales, professor of history at Diablo
Valley College in California, establishes that the Alianza was created as a response to the fact that “people of Mexican
descent in Tucson were beginning to suffer the same prejudice and discrimination as the Mexican Americans in other
parts of the Southwest.”
Relevant to the objective of this essay, and fundamental to understand the role of Spanish-language media in the context
of social causes, is the work of an “Alianza Hispano Americana’s” key member, and its first president, Carlos I. Velasco.
Not coincidentally, Velasco was by then the publisher and editor of “El Fronterizo,” a Spanish-language newspaper he had
founded twelve years earlier.
“El Fronterizo” was a four-page weekly published for a period of thirty-seven years, dealing particularly with politics,
industry, and commerce, but in the Velasco’s words, it was essentially a vehicle of advocacy in the Mexicans’ search for
civil rights. In the second issue of this historic newspaper, Velasco clarified his editorial position when he wrote that “the
Fronterizo will establish itself as a zealous defender of the interests of the Mexican people in both countries, expressing
their point of view and directing their initiative along the path leading to their moral perfection and material progress.”
Dr. Gonzales also asserts that “Velasco employed his newspaper to combat negative stereotypes of his people,” thus
defining the main characteristic of “El Fronterizo,” and of American Spanish-language press as well, as a strategic tool for
the “defense of the Mexican population from Anglo abuse.” Velasco’s publication was not an isolated approach but rather
a consistent trend of Mexican and Mexican American journalism.
This tendency is widely analyzed by Gabriel Meléndez, Professor and Chairman of the Department of American Studies at
the University of New Mexico, in his book “Spanish-Language Newspapers in New Mexico, 1834-1958.” Meléndez views
Spanish-language newspapers as cultural productions, and the work of their editors, as an organized movement against
cultural exclusion in the midst of the massive arrival of easterners to the Southwest.
The Spanish-language media traditional characteristics of advocacy and alliance have vehemently surfaced as a constant
in contemporary societies. The recent mobilization of millions of immigrants –both documented and undocumented–
have recreated again the social scenario where this relationship between a social cause and its treatment in Spanish-
language media can be seen more clearly and fervently expressed.
“There does seem to be a tradition of advocacy among Spanish language newspapers that might seem out of place in
mainstream journalism,” said O. Ricardo Pimentel, editor of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s editorial page. Pimentel, a
longtime journalist and former columnist and member of The Arizona Republic’s editorial board, affirms that more than
anything, “Spanish-language media, like news media everywhere, should serve as an ally of truth. Often truth can seem
like advocacy. It's tempting to judge Spanish-language media against the practices and traditions of mainstream media.
We shouldn't mistake knowing your community and tapping into its concerns and interests necessarily as slanted
journalism.”
Pimentel points out that “mainstream journalism often holds itself hostage to ‘balance,’ setting up a situation in which far
too many stories are of the he-said, they-said variety without telling the reader what is true.” He believes that “addressing
concerns of your audience is not necessarily serving as an ally in a social cause.”
Editors of Spanish-language newspapers around the country communicate this advocacy and alliance role consciously.
However, there may not be a complete awareness of the extent of the effects –positive and negative– that an open editorial
line of support for the undocumented immigrants’ cause may generate.
David Ramirez, Metro news editor and columnist for El Diario/La Prensa, a New York newspaper with a daily circulation of
more than 80,000 copies, considers that “part of the spirit of the media as such, is to support and to motivate every cause
or social movement that it is sustained in principles of solidarity, respect to the Human Rights, and so forth. In the
particular case of Spanish-language media and the (immigrants’) movement, I believe that it fits what I mentioned above.
Therefore, my criterion is that we have to be allies of this movement.”
Dr. Cristina L. Azocar, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Journalism at the San Francisco State University said “I’m not sure if
an ally would be a correct way to serve —or at least the word doesn’t work. To me, it serves as an informant on the social
cause –the pros and cons, the process, etc. It can definitely take a pro or con stance also in the editorial stance of the
outlet.”
Spanish-language media’s concern to express an advocacy role in the undocumented immigrant’s cause, as an
example, may be a valid approach, but evidently it has also developed a trend to present only positive information of what it
supports and only negative information of what it opposes. This technique is what seven decades ago, sociologists Alfred
and Elizabeth Lee identified as one of the seven “tricks of the trade” of propaganda. The Lee’s coined the term “card
stacking” to refer to the practice of making something sound as though there is only one conclusion that a rational person
can draw.
Regarding this propagandistic approach to journalism, Professor Azocar, who is also the Director of the Center for
Integration and Improvement of Journalism in San Francisco, California, said “I don’t believe in self-censorship and I do
believe that a social movement should have all the information possible to actually move, otherwise, what do you gain?
People are smart enough to realize that with every movement and every gain there will be areas of fall back —but this
helps us remember where we came from and what we still need to overcome and deal with. People can use the
damaging information to show that they are not ignorant and willing to consider both the benefits and negative possible
outcomes.”
Pimentel sees this as “a matter of intellectual honesty and integrity. Intellectual honesty and integrity would demand that
the story or opinion piece deal with the counter-arguments, if only to knock them down. The best editorials, for instance,
are those that target the folks who are likely to disagree. They are far more persuasive because they are built on
reasonable argument. The best stories are those that offer a variety of views, but ultimately truth as well.”
For Ramirez, “good journalism, this is to say, one that is based on ethics, should not conceal or distort facts. I ratify that in
the concrete case of the immigrants’ movement, and as an immigrant (from Ecuador) myself…it is not necessary to take
the path of suppressing truthful information.”
For some readers, the effect of a pro or con posture in Spanish-media language provokes different feelings. For Jesus
Aguirre, Spanish-language newspapers “need to be truthful, and present the reality, but not reality in their own way. They
should neither focus too much in the positive nor the negative. They need to be neutral and to inform us, but also give us
more ideas.”
A naturalized U.S. citizen, Aguirre emigrated from Mexico to Chicago in the early sixties, where he resided many years
before moving to Phoenix. An avid reader of Spanish-language publications, particularly weekly newspapers, Aguirre said,
“I love the news, but I think newspapers should have more variety, and not publish so much information on the same
topic. You see it right now, with the immigrants’ movement.”
For Aguirre, a longtime State of Arizona employee, the most important mission newspapers should pursue is to present
the truth. “When I read newspapers, I don’t want to feel like I am reading the cowboy’s stories I used to read as a boy;
newspapers need to say things as they are,” he concluded.
For another reader, whose name will keep anonymous, taking a con stance may be counterproductive, specially coming
from a Latino publication. In an opinion expressed through e-mail, the reader refers to a Barriozona Magazine’s article
titled “A day without…significant effect.” The article presented information that made evident the shortcomings of what was
intended to have a dramatic and greater effect, in terms of showing the purchasing power of Latinos through an economic
boycott.
“I would have preferred…that you'd chosen not to say anything about this particular topic, because the bigots love reading
that it was a failure, especially from another Latino. It gives them a good excuse to continue to justify their warped
thinking.” this reader wrote.
The reasoning behind this reader’s wish is that while “I agree with you…the difference is that I would never publicize it for
all the anti-immigrant world to see. I was one of your readers and was merely expressing to you that reading your article
made me wish you had not written it, even if in my heart I agreed with some of the points you made.”
Aiming to further advance the immigrants’ call for immigration reform, or any other cause, the traditional position of
contemporary Spanish-language media may be accomplishing its goal, but apparently has let many readers, activists,
and other key people in the community, under the impression that means of communication presenting factual
information, which people perceive as not favorable to a cause or movement, are antagonists to the same cause or
movement.
A twofold counterproductive effect of the “card stacking” practice of journalists and editors is, first, a lack of a healthy,
unbiased self-assessment, and, second, a readership that consciously or not may be predisposed to accept only what
sociologist James M. Henslin calls a “one-sided version of reality.” In this sense, Spanish-language advocacy journalism
might be causing more damage than benefit to the people it serves.
Aligning an editorial line with a social cause or movement represents a parallelism that may be justified in terms of
defending unalienable human rights and dignity, in essence, a noble endeavor. This parallelism should not mean,
however, that Spanish-language media, and furthermore, its readership and the community in general, may not have
equal access to a diverse array of opinions, in favor or not, which are necessary to stimulate a democratic process. Most
important, it is essential to present the truth as a standard to measure successes and failures, even when the truth
pinpoints negative or unfavorable aspects. This requires a willingness to be bluntly honest, but leads to a cathartic
analysis, and to a more positive and beneficial outcome than the one achieved by omitting some aspects of the truth,
negative aspects of the truth, or the truth entirely.
Spanish-language media editors and journalists should be able to recognize that eagerness to present opposing views,
and the reality from different viewpoints and perspectives, will stimulate critical thinking in their readers, as well as widen
their opinions and attitudes toward issues or topics of which they may have a narrow or limited outlook. If readers can view
issues from different aspects and angles, their understanding will be deeper. They may confirm or modify their opinions,
but their decision to do so will be an individual conclusion, and will take their standing on a more solid foundation.
Dr. Azocar believes “people should be given information to help them decide. But facts and figures from certain
organizations are often collected in a way to prove that their cause is correct. I think the best way is to present the facts and
figures that give people the most information. If there are competing figures from other organizations than those should be
presented to.”
Dr. Marin states that the role of journalists “is to provide an interpretation and point of view and let…readers decide
whether to agree or disagree with (their) interpretation and they can choose to present another point of view or perspective
of that event. The work of historians and journalists are usually subject to criticism and evaluation and reinterpretation
anyway. The responsibility of the historian is to present a fair and objective interpretation of an event that may become
historical over time. Readers of the works of historians and journalists can choose whether or not to read one’s writings.
Journalists make their statements in their editorials or columns. And historians document their sources and offer new
and different interpretations. Readers can always look up the historian’s sources and re-interpret the work.”
Pimentel thinks “fairness, accuracy and balance are worthy goals but they are tools in the furtherance of dispensing truth,
giving readers and viewers what they need to make good decisions.”
Elucidating about the importance of presenting different points of view, and the historical resonance current events might
eventually reach, Dr. Marin explains that “historians interpret events and, in the course of their work, cite the sources used
in the interpretation of those events. For example, if I am going to write an article about the recent immigration
demonstration, I will read the works of those who have written on the event, and cite them in my work. But as a historian, it
is my responsibility to be fair and objective in my assessment of the works of others, present my own interpretation of
those events, and present various points of view and opinions and always cite my sources, regardless of whether I agree
with them or not. I am merely adding to the existing literature on the topic—adding another point of view or interpretation for
the next historian or scholar to digest and consider. I’m not concerned whether my article advances or doesn’t advance
the cause or the so-called “movement”. However, if the “movement” is paying me to advance their point of view, then my
article will be sympathetic to the cause or movement. Another example: corporations might not always maintain good
relationships with their customers, nor have a good image with the public. To change that, corporations will hire a
historian to write their company’s history, and the historian will present that company’s history to the public in a positive
manner. It’s done all the time. It’s called propaganda history.”
Dr. Marin’s analysis brings up yet another aspect of Spanish-language advocacy journalism. Many of these newspapers
are distributed free of cost for readers, and depend entirely on the financial support of paid advertising. Most of these
newspapers are not able to afford but a weekly or monthly distribution. Since they are provided to the readers at no cost,
they can be sustained only through the revenue generated by advertisers. If advertisers cease to buy space, these
newspapers will cease to be published.
This can be also true for newspapers that have a daily and paid circulation, but still depend to some extent in advertising.
But when a publication’s “funding” –be a newspaper or a magazine– comes from advertisers, advertisers are their virtual
publishers, since they make possible the production and distribution costs. Therefore, these “publishers” may influence
an editorial line, dictate the content and the layers of truth allowed, and of course, to press for including or omitting facts or
information that may be counterproductive to their philosophy, interests, or products. This has caused the line dividing
advertising from news and information to become very blurred and in some cases even inexistent.
Without a doubt, contemporary Spanish-language media’s mission will continue serving as a vehicle of advocacy for a
growing Spanish-speaking population. Within the context of the current immigration debate, the enduring struggle of
thousands of human beings in search of a better life, or any future and likely social cause, editors and journalists of
Spanish-language or English-language Latino-oriented publications, should strive to shape a more egalitarian
readership, based on the same ideals that sustain the democratic ideals of the United States.
Publications not written in English that serve a specific ethnic group, have the responsibility to advocate for those less
privileged sectors of the population that wouldn’t have otherwise a voice and a tribune to be heard. These types of
publications have a noble and challenging cause. Therefore, they should use employ the same standard to present both
their failures and their accomplishments. Not to be afraid to face the truth, even when the truth points out to their necessity
to learn and improve. And use the same ruler they use to measure others to measure themselves.
Copyright © 2010 Hispanic Institute of Social Issues
Grassroots Journalism
www.barriozona.com
|
Barriozona Magazine and a group of authoritative experts analyze the historical and contemporary role of
Spanish-media language in the United States, the pros and cons of advocacy journalism, the ideals that
journalists should strive for, as well as the historic relevance that current social events may reach in the
future.
By Eduardo Barraza
BARRIOZONA
May 12, 2006
Advocay and Defense: Spanish-Language
Media in the United States
"Spanish-language print media act as a basic survival guide for immigrants in a hostile world…"
Ed Morales - freelance journalist
|