Media & Race

 In Martin Gilens' work "Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy," the focus is on the racialization of poverty and its portrayal in the media during pivotal periods in American history. Gilens traces the association of poverty with black Americans back to the 1960s, highlighting how preexisting stereotypes of laziness regarding black Americans became deeply ingrained in the public consciousness. As welfare programs expanded and demographic shifts occurred, media coverage increasingly depicted poverty through the lens of race, perpetuating negative stereotypes and biases. 

Gilens argues that the media played a significant role in shaping public perception of poverty, with specific examples and visual elements being more influential than aggregate statistics. He emphasizes the disproportionate representation of poor blacks in media coverage, which contributed to the association of poverty with blackness. Gilens points out the possibly malicious use of framing on stories of poverty about white Americans and black Americans. Despite liberal journalistic intent, national news coverage of poverty often framed poor blacks in a negative light compared to poor whites, portraying them as more blameworthy for their conditions. Stories of poor white Americans often influenced feelings of sympathy and urgency to aid in helping better their conditions. While stories of poor black Americans were the opposite. Framing poor blacks as responsible for their conditions, influencing negative responses to their stories. If there was opposition to welfare legislation and a desire to remove it images of blameworthy poor black Americans would be used to further assist in painting welfare programs in a negative light.  

Omar Wasow's research on "Agenda Seeding" further explores the influence of media in shaping public opinion and political discourse, particularly in the context of civil rights protests during the 1960s. Wasow highlights how political minorities utilized disruptive protest tactics to capture the attention of political majorities, influencing the framing of demands by news outlets. Nonviolent protests, in particular, were found to increase democratic vote share and shape elite discourse on civil rights issues.

Wasow's concept of "Movement-initiated staging or frame construction" sheds light on how activists strategically crafted narratives to influence media coverage and public perception. By selecting figures, recruiting specific protesters, and crafting rhetorical appeals, activists sought to shape the narrative surrounding their movements and challenge prevailing biases and stereotypes.

Mendelberg in "The Race Card: Campaign Strategy, Implicit Messages, and the Norm of Equality," points out the use of racial appeals in political campaigns. Mendelberg presents a theory on the strategic deployment and implicit messaging of these appeals. These appeals are used to influence public opinion by taking advantage of viewers' feelings regarding racial issues. These appeals can be crafted to present a specific frame. Left-leaning campaigns may use these appeals to garner the support of affected racial groups on legislation or voting for a candidate. Likewise, right-leaning campaigns may use racial appeals to oppose things like affirmative action or other DEI. Mendelberg's work sheds light on how race intersects with political messaging, offering valuable insights into the dynamics of modern political discourse.

Together, Gilens, Wasow, and Mendelberg's work underscores the powerful role of the media in shaping public opinion and political outcomes, particularly in matters related to race and poverty. ]One question arises out of these findings: How do we begin to untangle race from politics to the extent that it is no longer effective as a tool in swaying public opinion?