| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Mastin, T, S Campo and M S Frazer

Page history last edited by PBworks 15 years, 11 months ago
Mastin, T., Campo, S., & Frazer, M. (2005, July). In Black and White: Coverage of U.S. Slave Reparations by the Mainstream and Black Press. Howard Journal of Communications, 16(3), 201-223. Retrieved March 10, 2008. (Document ID: 10.1080/10646170500207956).
 
This article is written by Teresa Mastin, Shelly Campo and M. Somjen Fraze. Their article details their study, which examines and compares differences in how the issue of reparations being awarded to descendants of U.S. slaves was covered in mainstream and Black newspapers. The core of the study is to find out whether the Black or mainstream press has addressed slavery reparations in regard to its potential effects on race relations between U.S. Blacks and Whites.
 
Content analysis was the method used in this study, which examines eight newspapers--four Blacks and four mainstream--for a 20-year period, from 1982 to 2002. The four mainstream newspapers chosen were the Chicago Sun Times, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times and The Washington Post. The African American papers were The Chicago Defender, The Los Angeles Sentinel, The New York Amsterdam News, and The Washington, Afro-American. The sample consisted of 539 slavery reparations articles. The slavery reparations articles were coded based on whether they discussed the issue of the potential effects on race relations either positively or negatively. 
 
The results of the study indicate that the coverage of Black press of slave reparations was different from that of the mainstream press during the 20-year period examined in the study. Although many of the Black publications were weeklies, they still covered the issue more often and in greater details than the daily mainstream press. The Black press was found to serve in an advocacy role, taking on the responsibility of challenging racial injustices. The study also found that about 80% of the  slave reparations articles were printed in the Black press, and that a large portion of the articles published were pro-slavery reparations. Of the Black press, The Chicago Defender provided the most slavery reparations coverage. Many of the mainstream press articles compared slavery reparations with other reparations such as those paid to the Holocaust survivors and American Indians.  
The study found that both the mainstream and Black press rarely addressed the issue of slavery reparations in regard to its potential effects on race relations between U.S. Blacks and Whites. It also found that whereas the mainstream press compared to the Black press more often addressed the issue in a legal context, both press groups most often addressed the issue in a legislative context.            
             
The article also addresses the media’s tendency to only provide two sides of an issue instead of providing a middle ground, which is where most of the public stands on many issues. Whereas the Black press focuses exclusively on supporting the African American view on slavery reparations, the mainstream press provides views on the extreme sides, either the far right or the far left. The authors argue that this limited coverage made it more difficult for readers to take an informed stance. 
 
Further research is needed to analyze the effect press coverage on the issue of reparations has on readers. The researchers suggest that slavery reparations coverage in other Black print and electronic media should be examined in order to determine their role in framing the issue and setting the news agenda. They also believe that a study on popular culture’s influence on public opinion of this issue would give even more insight in understanding this difference. The media have a responsibility of informing the public with all sides of an issue instead of framing them to make the audience sway toward a certain viewpoint. Objectivity needs to be more of a priority to allow audiences to make informed decisions. (Reviewed by Priscilia and edited by Sahar El Zahed)

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.