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 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 the e-mail, the reader refers to a BARRIOZONA’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.” the 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 self, unbiased 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.
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 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 the e-mail, the reader refers to a BARRIOZONA’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.” the 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 self, unbiased 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 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 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
able to recognize that eagerness to present opposing views,
and 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 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.”
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.
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.
| Contact the Author |
| S P E C I A L T H A N K S |
BARRIOZONA would like to thank the following individuals
for the valuable contibution to this essay:
Cristina L. Azocar, Ph.D.
Director
Center for Integration and Improvement of Journalism
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Journalism / San Francisco
State University
Christine Marin, Ph.D.
Curator/Archivist
Chicano/a Research Collection
Department of Archives & Special Collections
Hayden Library. Arizona State University
David Ramirez
Metro Editor
El Diario/La Prensa New York
O. Ricardo Pimentel
Editor / Editorial Page
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Milwaukee, WI
for the valuable contibution to this essay:
Cristina L. Azocar, Ph.D.
Director
Center for Integration and Improvement of Journalism
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Journalism / San Francisco
State University
Christine Marin, Ph.D.
Curator/Archivist
Chicano/a Research Collection
Department of Archives & Special Collections
Hayden Library. Arizona State University
David Ramirez
Metro Editor
El Diario/La Prensa New York
O. Ricardo Pimentel
Editor / Editorial Page
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Milwaukee, WI
| Photo by Eduardo Barraza |
| Eduardo Barraza is the founder and director of the Hispanic Institute of Social Issues, a grassroots agency that disseminates information through workshops, seminars, and publications to promote informed choices and awareness on social issues. Eduardo is the author of a Spanish book titled “Los zapatos del immigrate y otros escritos,” and is the publisher and editor of BARRIOZONA. |
| BARRIOZONA |
| Bilingual Community Expression Published by the Hispanic Institute of Social Issues |
| Photo by Eduardo Barraza |