|
The Fighting Whites Phenomenon:
Toward an Understanding of the Media's Coverage
By Lynn Klyde-Silverstein
Assistant Professor
Department of Journalism and Mass Communications
Campus Box 114
University of Northern Colorado
Greeley, CO 80639
(970) 351-2432
[log in to unmask]
Submitted to the Minorities and Communication Division
AEJMC Convention 2003
The Fighting Whites Phenomenon:
Toward an Understanding of the Media's Coverage
Abstract
The Fighting Whites, an intramural basketball team at the University of
Northern Colorado, inspired a media frenzy during March 2002. Their name
and mascot, a caricature of a Caucasian man, was an attempt to shed light
on what many people considered a racist mascot in a nearby high school.
Through interviews, this paper seeks to understand the media coverage
afforded the team.
The Fighting Whites Phenomenon: Toward an Understanding of the Media's
Coverage
The Fighting Whites, an intramural basketball team at the University of
Northern Colorado, inspired a media frenzy during March 2002. Their name
and mascot, a caricature of a Caucasian man, was an attempt to shed light
on what many people considered a racist mascot at a nearby high school. The
team made national and international headlines and eventually donated
$100,000 to the university's scholarship fund. This paper seeks to
understand the media coverage afforded the team. To do this, the author
conducted interviews with key players, including journalists, team members,
and those involved in the struggle to eliminate Native American mascots.
Literature Review
Native American Mascots
Several researchers have concluded that the use of Native Americans as
mascots misuses religious symbols, stereotypes all Native tribes by erasing
their differences, and misrepresents the United States' past by casting
Natives as aggressive warriors (Davis, 1993; King & Springwood, 2000).
Berkhofer (1978) writes that whites were able to classify all Natives into
a stereotype because they had the power to do so. King and Springwood use
this type of reasoning in their discussion of the Florida State University
Seminole mascot. Florida State University adopted the Seminole as its
mascot long before the first Native Americans graduated from the school in
the 1990s (King & Springwood, 2000). Non-native fans who dress up in paint
and feathers to "play Indian" display their power over Native Americans and
keep stereotypes alive (King & Springwood, 2000). Charlene Teeters, the
former University of Illinois graduate student who began protesting the
school's Chief Illiniwek mascot in 1992, sees the mascot as a symbol of
control by white leaders (Rosenstein, 1997).
Cyd Crue of the National Coalition on Racism in Sports and the Media cited
the seeming hypocrisy of allowing anti-Native American displays while
punishing when used against other groups. He uses the example of the
Stanford University band, which was disciplined when members dressed up as
nuns for a halftime show at the University of Notre Dame, a catholic
institution. As Crue says: "When we see people dressed up in black-face
now, it's no longer acceptable. Why is it acceptable to dress up in
red-face? This is nothing more than a red-face minstrel show. This does not
honor Native Americans. It honors the White people. It's 'We won and we
conquered this continent and we can use your image as we see fit'" (Hawes,
2001.)
Davis (1993) examined protests and conferences that took place during
Major League Baseball's World Series and the National Football League's
Super Bowl, both held in Minnesota's Twin Cities in the early 1990s.
According to local police, 500 people protested at the 1991 World Series
pitting the Atlanta Braves against the Minnesota Twins, and 3,000 protested
at the 1992 Super Bowl, which featured the Washington Redskins versus the
Buffalo Bills. The protest at the Super Bowl, Davis says, was the largest
Native American protest since the takeover of Wounded Knee in 1973.
Davis also describes a backlash against activists who seek an end to the
use of mascots. "This backlash is fueled by a pro-colonialist,
ethnocentric, Western bias, where America is defined as a melting pot, but
a melting pot where everyone must conform to Western and Christian culture
because this culture is considered superior" (Davis, 1993, p. 19).
The Media's Coverage of Native Americans
In her examination of the media's coverage of Native Americans during the
20th century, Weston (1996) says two images of Native Americans have
survived since the 17th century: the good Indian and the bad Indian. The
"good Indian," or noble savage, is friendly, handsome, dignified and close
to nature, while the "bad Indian" embodies those traits that Europeans
feared most: nakedness, promiscuousness, and brutality (Weston). Until the
1960s, she writes, Native Americans were depicted in the media as
stereotypically "good" or "bad" Indians, never as complex individuals.
Furthermore, she writes, their lives were never portrayed in the proper
context, which helped perpetuate stereotypes. For most of the early decades
of the 20th century, Native Americans were talked about.
The 1960s and '70s were a turning point in the coverage of Native American
issues as Native Americans began to tell stories about their lives in major
publications (Weston, 1996; Rosenstein, 1997). The media's images of the
1960s and '70s, however, were merely updated stereotypes (Weston, 1996;
Koster, 1976). Koster (1976) says coverage of 1970s incidents like Wounded
Knee and Pine Ridge only reinforced stereotypes. Koster blames this
stereotypical coverage on ignorance and laziness. Journalists, he says,
don't know much about the issues and don't take the time to learn (Koster,
1976). Weston (1996) writes that the conventions of journalism help
reinforce stereotypes. These conventions include story selection,
organization, headlines, and lack of context.
While the images of native Americans in the news multiplied in the 1980s
and '90s, the old stereotypes continued. More Native Americans talked back
to the press during this time, however, and they made their views heard
(Weston, 1996). Weston describes an even bigger shift in the coverage
between 1989 and 1992. The press' portrayal of the protest against the
University of Illinois' mascot showed Native American activists as oddballs
who were spoken for by non-Native students (Weston). Weston adds that the
arguments of the other side received more detailed coverage. Most of the
coverage, she says, described Native Americans as mascots, not as people
(Weston.) A change occurred in the coverage of professional teams' use of
mascots in 1991 and 1992. Native Americans were now portrayed as legitimate
leaders who spoke for themselves. This helped make the protestors' cause
legitimate (Weston).
In her examination of protests at the Super Bowl and World Series, Davis
interviewed Native American activists about the media's coverage of the
mascot issue. Natives who protest the use of mascots are often asked why
they don't focus on more important issues, like poverty and health. Davis
writes that the Native activists she talked with answered that the issues
are connected. There is another reason, though. "It was noted that when the
activists work on those other issues they do not receive such good media
coverage" (Davis, 1993, p. 14).
Some media outlets have taken a more active approach to the issue, refusing
to publish racist nicknames or logos. Lincoln (Neb.) Journal Star editor
Kathleen Rutledge said the decision to drop stereotypical images and
nicknames was made "out of respect for Native people. Plain and simple"
(Rutledge, 2003). She added that the Native American Journalists
Association asked media outlets to eliminate the use of Native American
mascots and logos (Rutledge, 2003). Other newspapers that have adopted
policies that limit or eliminate the use of Native nicknames and logos
include the The Portland Oregonian, Minneapolis Star Tribune, St. Cloud
(Minn.) Times, Portland (Maine) Press Herald and Kansas City Star
(Rutledge, 2003).
Coleman (1992) writes that Native Americans must fight to rid society of
racist mascots, just like African-Americans worked to eliminate
"pickaninnies." She adds that Native Americans must define their own
important issues, instead of allowing the press to do it for them (Coleman,
1992). As Rutledge (2003) writes, "Many sports mascots were adopted at a
time in this country when Native people had no voice. Now they have a
voice." That voice includes people like the Fighting Whites.
History of the Fighting Whites
The story of the Fighting Whites begins in Eaton, Colo., a small town
about six miles north of Greeley, which is the home of the University of
Northern Colorado. In 2000, a group of activists led by UNC doctoral
student Dan Ninham, a member of the Oneida tribe, began pressing Eaton High
School to drop its mascot, which many consider racist. The mascot features
a caricature of a Native American with a misshapen nose, an eagle feather
and a loincloth. (see figure 1) Ninham and Francie Murry, an associate
professor at UNC, started a group called Coloradoans Against Ethnic
Stereotyping in Colorado Schools. The group presented its case to the Eaton
School Board, which decided not to drop the mascot and refused subsequent
invitations to meet with the activists.
The Fighting Whites came into existence when a group of students and staff
members at the University of Northern Colorado signed up to play intramural
basketball under the name Native Pride. Scott VanLoo, director of the
university's Cesar Chavez cultural center, came up with the name Fighting
Whites. VanLoo, who is of Lebanese and Dutch descent, said he was
frustrated by the fact that the Eaton School Board had dismissed the
activists' pleas so easily. As VanLoo remembered:
It seemed like they were doin' everything by the book. They were following
all the protocol and rules, if you will, of the district. They had first,
they had gone to the principal. They didn't get anywhere there. They went
to the superintendent. They didn't get anywhere there. They went to the
school board. And after a while, they finally got like five minutes of
presentation time at the school board meeting. They went before an
all-white male school board, did their presentation, and they kept getting
this kind of "thanks but no thanks."
… So by that time, I was really frustrated. I'm not really a proponent of
sinking to one's level to engage in a dialogue. But I thought, you
know, I'm tired. I'm tired. I've been doin' diversity work not that long,
three or four years, but it just is tiring to keep having to educate people
and say the same things over, and see the same things. Especially in this
community.
VanLoo took a satirical approach, converting Eaton's Fighting Reds to the
Fighting Whites. He added a clip art image of a white man with slicked back
hair and a necktie, and the mascot was born. (see figure 2) Although he
invited several media outlets to the team's first game, VanLoo said no one
showed up. The first article ran on Wednesday, March 6, on page 2 of UNC's
student newspaper, The Mirror. Four days later, a story ran in the local
paper, the Greeley Tribune, also on page 2. During the next two weeks, the
Fighting Whites were an international phenomenon, with coverage by The New
York Times, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, The (Toledo, Ohio)
Blade, CNN, the Today Show, and National Public Radio's All Things
Considered, to name a few. Jay Leno joked about the team during his
monologue on The Tonight Show. Team members appeared on Fox's Best Damn
Sports Show Period, and Rush Limbaugh mentioned the story. Team member
Solomon Little Owl, UNC's director of Native American Student Services,
received hundreds of calls and e-mails from media outlets as far away as
Canada, Japan, England, and Australia. He said he talked to at least 50
radio stations. Outlets like NBC news, Fox Sports Net and CNN visited the
Native American Student Services center, a small house located in the
center of the campus. Little Owl remembers:
It hit the fan for that two-week span. We had … I mean we had crazy people.
Reporters, news, radio. They were comin' in, comin' out, goin'. We just had
people coming in just to see what it was like. Like a zoo…. People just
come in, sit, have coffee and just observe. Some people would come in and
they were photographers, so they would take pictures.
So many people wanted to purchase shirts featuring the Fighting Whites
logo that the team set up a non-profit company and began selling
merchandise online. The company was so successful that in January 2003, the
team presented a check for $100,000 to the University of Northern Colorado.
The money will help fund minority scholarships at the school.
Methodology
This paper uses unstructured interviews to understand how key players
interpreted the media's coverage of the Fighting Whites. Unstructured
interviews, which are commonly used in qualitative research, provide more
depth than structured or group interviews (Fontana & Frey, 1994).
Unstructured interviews are more like conversations, allowing for follow-up
questions and clarification.
Seven people were interviewed. The journalists included Alicia Gallegos,
who broke the story in the campus newspaper, The Mirror; Julio Ochoa, who
covered the story for the town newspaper, the Greeley Tribune; and Chris
Cobler, editor of the Greeley Tribune. Before the story about the Fighting
Whites broke, the Tribune's sports section published an award-winning
series on the Eaton mascot controversy and other mascot issues around the
nation. Ochoa was not involved in that series. Also interviewed was Ken
McConnellogue, then the university's media relations director and now
interim vice president for university affairs. McConnellogue has been with
the university for 10 years, before which he worked as a reporter at the
Tribune. Two members of the Fighting Whites were interviewed: Solomon
Little Owl, the university's director of Native American Student Services,
and Scott VanLoo, the director of the school's Hispanic culture center. One
representative of the Coalition to End Racist Stereotyping in Colorado
Schools was interviewed. Beth Franklin is a professor at the University of
Northern Colorado. The author conducted all the interviews during February
and March of 2003, nearly a year after the Fighting Whites story broke.
Cobler's interview was the only one done by e-mail. The others, which
lasted from 30 to 75 minutes, were conducted in person and tape recorded,
then transcribed by the author.
Interviewing people who were involved in the issue in different ways
allowed for a better understanding of the phenomena at play. This use of
triangulation, or multiple methods of data collection, makes the findings
more thorough (Denzin, 1970). Triangulation also was achieved through a
three-step interpretation process: Interpretation occurred during the
interviews, during transcription, and during the reading of interview
transcripts. The interpretive process focused on a search for patterns
among the interviews.
As a supplement to the interviews, the author also read articles about the
team online, in print and in scrapbooks kept by team members. One team
member provided a folder full of e-mails he received about the team. He
also provided phone message slips recording calls received during the media
onslaught. These were helpful in understanding the impact that the media
had on the team. This paper is not, however, an analysis of the media's
coverage.
As is common in qualitative research, I have made no attempt to be totally
objective in my researching or writing (Fine, 1994; Maxwell, 1996). As
Fleischman (1998) says, ethnographers must bring themselves into the text.
According to Sultana (1995), researchers err when they attempt to remove
themselves from their investigations. "It is because the researcher edits
himself/herself out of the text that we often get so little information on
such details as the researcher's expectations and presuppositions, or the
surprises that were encountered in the field" (Sultana, pp. 116-117).
Therefore, I feel it is important to explain my background and my opinion
on the subject of mascots like the one used by the Eaton Reds. I am a white
woman whose relatives came to the United States from Eastern Europe. For
most of my life, I took nicknames like Redskins and Indians for granted. In
my eight years as sports journalist, I never thought of not running certain
logos or team names. It never occurred to me. It was not until graduate
school, when I began studying feminist theory and looking at sexism and
racism in language, that I started to take the issue of mascots seriously.
I followed the story of the Fighting Whites closely, and when a symposium
was held on the subject at my university, I successfully proposed that my
department help sponsor the event. At the symposium, I served as moderator
for a panel on the media's coverage of the issue. I included a section on
mascots in a class on sports journalism during the summer of 2002. I now
support efforts to eliminate racist or derogatory mascots and nicknames
from sports teams. I hope this information helps readers formulate their
own interpretations of this paper.
Being involved in the phenomenon under study can have its advantages. My
familiarity with the mascot issue, and with the local print media, helped
me gain a rapport with the people I interviewed. It is important to
establish rapport with participants in order to see the issue from their
perspective (Fontana & Frey, 1994). Before conducting the interviews, I had
worked with all of the participants except the Greeley Tribune reporter and
the director of the Hispanic cultural center. I did, however, have a good
relationship with the Tribune's editor and had sent several students to
work at the paper.
In order to give more voice to those interviewed, I have presented their
words in an indented, single-spaced format usually reserved for longer
quotes. Because so much of qualitative work is interpretive, however, I
wanted to make the participants' voices stand out.
Findings
Three patterns emerged from the interviews. The first involved the general
public's reaction to the media's coverage of the Fighting Whites. The
second involved the way the media covered the team. The third involved the
effects the media's coverage had on the mascot issue itself.
The Public's Reaction
There were generally three reactions to the media's coverage of the
Fighting Whites. Some people, from all ethnicities, saw the satire in the
idea and embraced the cause, buying merchandise and sending congratulations
via telephone or e-mail. Others, including some Native Americans, reacted
negatively and called it a waste of time. Many sent e-mails urging the team
to stop focusing on mascots and begin focusing on more important issues.
Many of these e-mails were several pages long. A third group, made up
primarily of whites, embraced the team as a symbol of white pride.
McConnellogue, the university's spokesperson during the media frenzy,
explained:
I think white people responded in two ways, you know. Some thought it was a
serious thing and it was kind of a "it's about time that we have a white
guy for a mascot." Some got the humor in it. I would say most got the humor
in it. Some were angry about it.
As for why some people just didn't get it, McConnellogue offered this:
I just put it down to bein' crackers. I don't know what else to say. I
think that there are people out there who feel that, you know, being
Caucasian now, you're under attack. However silly that is.
Some of the reactions were more scary than silly, as VanLoo remembered:
Solomon, he got the majority of those coming in on his e-mail. It was
funny, too. [laughs] I think one time, he called me up. He goes, "Hey, I
just got this e-mail from this guy in South Texas who wants to invite us
down there and take us on his boat. Spend some time on the beach." And I
was like "Solomon, we're not goin' to South Texas [laughs] on an e-mail
invitation to go spend any time with anybody. I mean, that's a setup to get
murdered or something, I don't know." We only got a few. We did get a few
e-mails back from people who bought shirts and they said "We thought this
was some white power thing or white pride thing. Now I hear that this damn
T-shirt's goin' towards…" So we got a little bit of that.
The white pride reaction forced the Fighting Whites to react in their own
way. They added a statement on their official website explaining who they
were and that the money was going to fund scholarships for minority students.
Coverage: 'Fluff' vs. Depth.
Several of those interviewed commented that the media focused too much
attention on the trivial aspects of the story and ignored the issue of
mascots.
One trivial aspect that got a lot of attention was the team's name.
Although the team's T-shirts said "Go Fighting Whites," local reporters
erroneously referred to them as the "Fighting Whities," and the mistake
spread. Student reporter Alicia Gallegos took the blame:
I think that was completely my fault. I thought I could have sworn, I even
still swear till this day that when Scott VanLoo was telling me about the
team, he said that they were the Fighting Whities. I could've swore that
that's what he said. I talked to Solomon, and I'm pretty sure he must've
repeated that back to me. So I'm not sure. I guess, I guess that's how it
started. Like it was just miscommunication. And I know that was in the
first story, that it was Whities. And maybe that's another reason why it
caused such publicity because that was like more of a derogatory term than
Whites. So maybe that even, you know, sparked it a little more. And then we
ran a correction that they were called the Whites. And I don't think
anybody read it. They wanted to call them the Whities. [laughs] … It would
not, you know, stop. Even though they probably knew it was wrong.
A week after the story broke, the Greeley Tribune ran an informational box
intended to end the confusion (Ochoa, 2002, 13 March). Other news outlets,
however, continued to refer to the team as the Whities. The team eventually
added a line of merchandise to its catalog featuring the name "Fightin'
Whities." (See figure 3)
Tribune editor Chris Cobler said the media focused too much attention on
the name.
Author: Was the national/international coverage warranted?
Cobler: The issue is worthy of national attention. The intramural team
probably is not.
Author: Were there negatives and positives to the media's coverage?
Cobler: The positives would be the media examined an issue of
national importance. The main negative is the Fightin' Whites were easy to
dismiss
as a publicity stunt. People focused on trivial issues surrounding the team
name and not as much as they should have on the central point.
All the coverage led a Denver radio station, KRFX, to create an
alternative, rather risqué mascot, the Eaton Beavers. The station printed
T-shirts, which were given out in Eaton and Denver. The Tribune included
the station's stunt in a story that was accompanied by a student wearing an
"Eaton Beavers" shirt (Ochoa, 2002, 14 March). VanLoo refereed to this type
of coverage as "fluff" media. He likened it to mentions of the team on Rush
Limbaugh and the Tonight Show. He prefers longer articles and interviews on
public radio, which allow for a more in-depth discussion of the problems.
One reporter who didn't just cover the sensational side of the story, he
said, worked for The Denver Post. He was impressed with Coleman Cornelius'
stories, and the amount of research she did before writing:
And she talked to the professors, and she started really understanding the
research behind it. And she wrote this superb article that included the
history of the area and included the nations that were here that did get,
um, relocated and were murdered and slaughtered and were in conflict with
the Union Colonists in this area. And she also focused on the Lamar area
and talked about the Sand Creek massacre and then tied that into how
they're still called the Savages. And then she tied in how the Ute and the
Pawnee were here in the area, what they went through with the Union
Colonists and how that, you know, lends itself to right here in this area
with Eaton and with Loveland. So it was a very well-written article. And a
lot of the other media focused just on the novelty of the concept. And you
got a lot of people that were writing very opinionated articles that really
hadn't talked to too many of us.
Franklin said that the level of sensationalism varied with the type of
medium. She said that although television can get the message out to more
people, newspapers offer more of an in-depth examination of the issues. She
also worries that her students don't read newspapers:
But see, what I see is the majority of my students don't read the
newspaper. So, you know, how does that really help? Because you can have
arguments in the newspaper. …
And also, there's authority to a newspaper. And like, you know, I don't
know who it was who would write the editorials against the mascots in The
Denver Post. I mean, to me they're reasoned arguments and it's about
educated people, you know, taking a position. Um, in the TV, I don't know.
And I do watch, you know, Channel 9 and Channel 7. And Channel 7 came to a
tremendous amount of stuff. They sent people to all the board meetings, but
I don't know what effect that had exactly. So I don't know about that. …
They just throw it out. But then I don't know if that changes anybody.
Effects of Coverage
Although some of the coverage might have been lacking, according to those
interviewed, the media's coverage had some positive effects. For instance,
Little Owl and VanLoo have been nominated for an e-town award. Recipients
are recognized on the e-town radio show, a weekly program carried by public
radio stations across the nation. Another positive effect of the coverage
was that it got a few more Native American voices in the news. The most
common of those voices was Little Owl, who stated:
I haven't heard so much positive. When you know, you hear about Native
American stuff it's usually negative. What they've done bad, you know. So
within a week's time a Native American voice came. It was incredible. So to
me, I don't look at it as negative because it's positive. The world knew
about it. The world don't know anything about Native Americans. They don't
know anything about it and they had a chance to hear and see what was a
Native Americans. So I think it was great.
This was part of the plan, according to VanLoo, who wanted the focus to be
on the Native American team members. "The only plan that we did have is I
came forward and I said 'Look, it's really important to me, as someone
who's not Native, to support this. It's important to me that Native voices
get into the media.'"
All of those interviewed agreed that the team's media coverage raised
awareness about the issue of mascots. Gallegos said she had seen that
awareness grow among students:
I think a lot of people had no idea about it. I know I didn't even really
um, really even think about the importance of changing the mascots or even
realize that there was a lot of Native American folks who were angry about
it. So I think that it raised a lot of awareness. I think people. And, and
they had said, you know, right away that it, that they didn't necessarily
want to change, but they just wanted people to know about it. And I really
think it did. I mean, even my roommates heard. You know, my friends around
me, everybody's heard of the Fighting Whites. And that's what they tried to
do. So I really think it did raise awareness. You know, even if it didn't
change.
Ochoa added that at least one school – nearby Loveland — has started to
investigate changing its "Indians" mascot:
I would say it's definitely raised awareness. And it's, I guess the way
they did it came across in a new way, you know? The issue was kind of
beaten to death in a way. And no one was really looking at it. And then
they came out with that, and all of a sudden it was a new way to look at
it. People started talking about it again. I guess that raises
awareness. Other schools in Colorado started to talk abut it. Loveland
Indians – they started to talk about it, about changing, possibly.
Franklin, who coordinated the university's symposium on mascots, agreed:
And people felt differently about this. But I personally feel it was the
biggest thing to draw attention to the, you know, the use of mascots that's
come along in the last 20 years. So even though other people have been
doing all this, I felt that really captured the national, um, limelight.
And so it helped promote the issue tremendously.
VanLoo said that although much of the media's coverage focused on what he
called "fluff," the spotlight gave him a chance to educate people about the
issue. During the last year, he and Little Owl have been asked to speak to
students of all ages in several states. As VanLoo said:
That's been the most rewarding part for me is we've been contacted by
everything from elementary schools to colleges and university classes that
are using this topic and the materials to spark dialogue and discussion and
take a look at things.
Raising awareness, however, does not necessarily mean change for the
better, as McConnellogue said:
You know, I think you have to ask yourself, too, at the end of the day,
other than that raising of consciousness, what was the result? I mean, the
Eaton Reds are still the Eaton Reds. The Loveland Indians are still the
Loveland Indians. I know that this is, this is not an event, it's a
process. I think effecting change is a long, sustained, unglamorous
process. And I think when you have a short, intense, glamorous part of that
it can lead to the illusion that this is how change happens. And I don't
think that's so.
Conclusion
McConnellogue's quote brings up a key point. He seems to combine all three
patterns observed. The media's focus on events as opposed to issues often
leads to sensationalism. Focusing on the events also might lead a media
consumer to misinterpret a team's name for a symbol of white pride. The
focus on getting the word out without checking all the facts can lead to
mistakes like "Whities" instead of "Whites," which leads to more
sensationalism.
The fact that several Native American voices made it into the news relates
to Coleman's (1992) cry for Native Americans to set the agenda themselves.
Leigh Estabrook, a dean at the University of Illinois, says that myths
about Native Americans are perpetuated because mascots are the only way
many non-natives see Native Americans in the news (Rosenstein, 1997). When
people like Solomon Little Owl make the news, they begin to counteract
those perceptions. As McConnellogue said, however, it takes more than one
news event to effect real change.
The negative reaction some people had to the Fighting Whites also
reinforces the literature, which shows a backlash against Native Americans
who protest mascots. As Davis (1993) wrote, many activists feel that the
mascot issue is the only one that ever receives major media coverage.
Perhaps news outlets should begin taking a look at a variety of issues
affecting Native Americans before the controversial events take place. In
an editorial written in response the mascot question, Greeley Tribune
editor Chris Cobler (2002) wrote that newspapers are at their best when
they discuss and debate the important questions of the day. Those issues
are usually more difficult to report on than colorful events, yet they
might make the difference between "fluff" coverage and quality coverage.
Limitations
This study examined the coverage of one news event through the lens of
seven interviews. The results are not meant to be generalized, but instead
they are meant to allow readers an in-depth perspective on how those seven
people saw the event. Because the findings and conclusions are based on the
author's interpretations, another researcher might gain slightly different
insights by examining the transcripts. This, however, is the nature of
qualitative research.
Further research
This study sheds light on some intriguing questions that could be addressed
in future research. A content analysis of newspaper stories about the
Fighting Whites might lend clarity to the research. A comparison might be
made between the coverage received by the Fighting Whites and activists
like Charlene Teeters, who has been working for more than a decade on
eliminating the University of Illinois mascot. I would like to continue
studying this issue by conducting an in-depth analysis of the newspaper
coverage received by the Fighting Whites. This analysis would examine one
of the questions identified by this paper: Did the media's coverage of the
team focus more on the issue of mascots or on the novelty of the team's
name, and what does that say about news?
Figure 1: Eaton Fighting Reds mascot
Figure 2: Original Fighting Whites logos
[--- ??? Graphic Goes Here ---]
[--- ??? Graphic Goes Here ---]
Source: http://www.cafeshops.com/fightinwhite
Figure 3: Fighting Whities logo
[--- ??? Graphic Goes Here ---]
Source: http://www.cafeshops.com/fightinwhite
Bibliography
Berkhofer, R. (1978). The White Man's Indian. New York: Vintage Books.
Cobler, C. (2002, April 28). Media's power is to influence debate. Greeley
Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.greeleytrib.com
Coleman, C. (1992, October). Native Americans must set their own
agenda. Quill, 8.
Davis, L.R. (1993). Protest against the use of Native American mascots: A
challenge to traditional American identity. Journal of Sport and Social
Issues 17 (1), 9-22.
Denzin, N. K. (1970). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to
Sociological Methods. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
Fine, M. (1994). Working the hyphens: Reinventing self and other in
qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
Qualitative Research (pp. 70-82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fitzgerald, Mark (2003, February 10). Is Lee too PC? "Fighting" Mad in
Huskers Hometown. Editor & Publisher, 17.
Fleischman, S. (1998). Gender, the personal, and the voice of scholarship:
A viewpoint. Signs: A Journal of Women in Culture and Society 23, 975-1,016.
Fontana, A., & Frey, J.H. (1994). Interviewing: The Art of Science. In N.K.
Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp.
361-376). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage.
Hawes, K. (2001, April 23). Fighting over the "Chief" splits campus
community. NCAA News. Retrieved at http://www.ncaa.org/news/
King, C.R., & Springwood, C.F. (2000). Fighting Spirits: The racial
politics of sports mascots. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 24 (3), 282-304.
Koster, J. (1976, Summer). American Indians in the media. Cross Currents,
164-171.
Maxwell, J.A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ochoa, J. (2002, March 13). Fightin' Whites or Whities? Greeley Tribune.
Page A7.
Ochoa, J. (2002, March 14). Political statement turns into potential
moneymaker; radio station joins fray. Greeley Tribune. Page A1-A7.
Rosenstein, J. (Editor). (1997). In Whose Honor? American Indian Mascots in
Sports (Cassette recording). Smoking Munchkin Video.
Rosenstein, J. (2001). In whose honor? In C.R. King & C.F. Springwood
(Eds.), Team Spirits: The Native American Mascots Controversy (pp.
241-256). Lincoln, NE.: University of Nebraska Press.
Rutledge, K. (2003, January 26). Respectfully, we'll call that team
"Washington." Lincoln (Neb.) Journal Star. Retrieved from
http://www.journalstar.
Sultana, R.G. (1995). Ethnography and the politics of absence. In P.
McLaren & J.M. Giarelli (Eds.), Critical Theory and Educational Research
(pp. 113-125). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
|
