This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication in San Antonio, Texas August 2005.
         If you have questions about this paper, please contact the author
directly. If you have questions about the archives, email
rakyat [ at ] eparker.org. For an explanation of the subject line, 
send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").

(Jan 2006)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
====================================================================

C-SPAN, See White:
A Critical Analysis of Washington Journal's Guests




Chinedu (Ocek) Eke, Ph.D.
2850 Campus Box
Elon University
Elon, NC 27244-2010
(work) 336-278-5790
    (cell) 336-456-5677
[log in to unmask]

Abstract

This study critically examines C-SPAN's Washington Journal for the 
month of June 2004. By having an overwhelming number of white males 
as guests on the show, C-SPAN legitimizes this group while 
marginalizing non-whites and women. Using cultivation analysis as a 
theoretical framework, this author proposes that the lack of minority 
or women experts on television relegates them to old stereotypes that 
suggest they have little or nothing to offer. This research 
challenges that notion.
C-SPAN, See White:  A Critical Analysis of Washington Journal's Guests

3


The issue of diversity has been at the center of heated debates 
across a variety of institutions ranging from university campuses to 
employment centers to the military.  The basic premise is that our 
institutions should adequately reflect the composition of society as 
a whole.  The media are no exception.  To this end, we have seen some 
improvement in television portrayal of minorities in the past decade, 
especially in the entertainment sector. However, much more needs to 
be done.  There is still a dearth of minority experts on television 
as compared to their white counterparts. This gap it must be noted is 
not because there are no qualified minority persons to speak on 
varying topics like the economy, social security, moral values, 
international relations, or the war in Iraq on mainstream media. 
Instead, this gap exits because of historical negative treatment of 
minorities in the mainstream media, and institutionalized protocols 
that are reinforced as normative practices.
Based on documented observation of guests on the Washington Journal 
(airing daily from 7 am to 10 am on C-SPAN), this paper will show 
that the television media systematically legitimize white male 
experts on issues of public concern while marginalizing other 
non-white people and voices.  A brief review of how a minority group, 
blacks, in this case, are covered in the media is relevant in order 
to fully appreciate the social consequences of being invisible as 
experts and professionals but highly visible as uneducated 
individuals and/or criminals.

Blacks in the American Media
	The accusation made by Susan Smith of Union, South Carolina, that a 
black man car-jacked, and abducted her children in 1994 was a major 
news event.  The news value of this story is not at issue because the 
incident could have had similar media coverage if the accusation was 
made against any person of another racial background.  The issue is 
that of believability and the mental association of blacks to 
crimes.  It is easier on the part of the white majority to believe 
that black males, for the most part, are capable of such a heinous 
crime, and for the mass media to reinforce such a stereotype within 
the community, as opposed to the belief by the same group that one of 
their own (certainly not the mother of the children) is capable of the act.
	To this end, Donaldson and van Dijk (1988) point out that "symbolic 
racism" exists. In this context, the authors indicate that in 
everyday talk, underlying ethnic prejudices may indirectly appear in 
"innocent" stories about a black neighbor—"the other." Although such 
stories claim to tell the facts, they indeed describe how "the other" 
did it (wrong) again, or generally imply that "they" are stupid, 
lazy, welfare-cheats, criminals, or simply lack motivation to learn. 
In addition, the storyteller may, at the same time, emphasize that he 
has nothing against "them," and they are among his "best 
friends."  Yet, the stories, spreading in the community, and often 
magnified by the mass media, contribute to the failure in 
communication and reproduction of racism in society.
	According to Donaldson and van Djik (1988) this type of 
discrimination serves several functions in society. First, it 
expresses and conveys dominant group membership and in-group 
solidarity, as well as norms and values shared by such 
in-groups.  Second, it identifies and describes "threatening" 
out-groups, against which appropriate action –discrimination – can be 
rationalized and excused.  Third, personal experiences are 
persuasively upgraded to in-group ones, and result in a redefinition 
of social reality in such a way that the real victims are categorized 
as a threat and the dominant in-group members as innocent victims of "them."
	Similarly, Scheingold (1984), points out that the repeated message 
in the entertainment and news media is that crime is perpetrated by 
predatory individuals who are "different" from the rest of "us," and 
that criminality stems from individual or group problems.  The 
implication of this observation is that blacks, who account for the 
majority of crime segments in the mass media (Scheingold, 1984), are 
viewed in such light.
Hence, there is an overall subtle attitude of "us versus them" in 
entertainment and news reporting of criminal and stereotyped behavior 
in the mass media. This attitude in reporting black issues is not 
limited to criminal behavior alone, but is reflected in other areas 
of socialization and culture.
	The organization of local news is formatted for the most part, 
toward Anglo-Saxon males (Altschull, 1994). Consequently, the press 
places emphasis on one segment of society while ignoring other 
segments, thus creating an imbalanced flow of information.  In this 
context, blacks are often excluded or when shown, are depicted in 
negative stereotypes.  Therefore, one can conclude that based on the 
historical evolution and ownership of the American press, which is 
predominantly white, black issues receive little, or no attention 
except when the issue is negative, sensational or "threatens" 
national security.
By virtue of being excluded, blacks and other ethnic minority groups 
become invisible to the rest of society, hence creating the 
impression among the majority that these groups do not fit into the 
social structure as viable participants. The 1968 Report of the 
National Advisory Board on Civil Disorders sums it up best when it states that:
The press has too long basked in a white world, looking out of it, if 
at all, with white man's eyes and a white perspective...their failure 
to convey the ills of the ghetto, the difficulties of life there, and 
the Negro's burning sense 	of grievance [was] inexcusable in 
an 	institution that has the mission to inform and educate the whole 
of our society  (Pp. 362 - 89).

	The commission, for example, criticized the creators of Andy and 
Amos, a 1951 CBS black comedy series when it pointed out that the 
show creators, Freeman Gosden and Charles Correll,
trained black actors in the nuances of the stereotype with which 
whites would be comfortable.  Apparently to avoid interaction between 
blacks and whites, Amos and Andy lived in an all-black world in which 
all the judges, policemen, shop owners, and city clerks were black. 
(Kerner Commission, p. 380)

The notion of "us versus them" was thus reinforced, and in this 
context "them"  (blacks) therefore can not be called upon as media 
experts to discuss issues that affects "us"  (whites).
    	Although the Kerner Commission made these observations in 1968, 
the question that ought to be raised is, has the coverage philosophy 
of the American media changed towards blacks or minorities in this 
new century?  Fundamentally, the answer is no, even Tom Brokaw who 
recently retired from NBC News echoes the observation made by this 
Commission when he said to Maureen Dowd (2005) of the New York Times, 
"I honestly thought, eight or nine years ago that when we left 
[Brokaw referring to himself, Peter Jennings and Dan Rather] that 
would be the end of white male anchor time. I think we're still stuck 
in a society that looks at white males as authority figures" (p. 1). 
Obviously, this did not happen, and according to Dowd (2005) "The 
networks don't even give lip service to looking for women and blacks 
for anchor jobs – they just put pretty boy clones in the pipeline" 
(p.1).  This current example supports findings from scholarly 
inquiries into the subject that have suggested that a subtle 
anti-black imagery persists (Entman, 1992; Brand and Greenberg, 1992; 
Hall-Jameison, 1992).
	For instance, Entman (1994) examined how blacks are represented on 
network television news. He makes a distinction between how local and 
national television covers issues relating to blacks.  In this 
context, Entman observes that local TV in covering crime stories, 
depict blacks as more dangerous than whites accused of the same 
crime, and in political stories, local news makes blacks appear more 
demanding of special government favoritism than 
whites.  Paradoxically, the employment of highly visible black 
anchors and reporters on local TV present white audiences with images 
of black success, messages suggesting that racial discrimination no 
longer impedes African-Americans, hence raising questions as to why 
crime and demands on the political system persist (McConahay, 1986).
	The  categories of Entman's analysis are: Blacks as Source or Victim 
of Trouble, Human Interest and Expertise, Crime News, Verbal 
Representations of Blacks, and Black Leaders.  In the first category, 
60% of stories centered on non-positive news about blacks, which 
included such unpleasant and usually crime related facts as the 
decrease in black college enrollment, the high rate of drug-related 
murders in Washington, DC, and the higher death rate of rates of 
black men in Harlem (higher than in Bangladesh).
	In the second category of analysis which deals Human Interest and 
Expertise, Entman indicates that there are two ways in which networks 
can portray blacks as making positive contributions to society (short 
of overtly preaching good will and brotherhood).  First, the "Human 
Interest" category shows blacks in roles that do not relate to their 
race.  The revelations of such stories are that blacks ("they") can 
in some cases be like whites ("us").  Second, using blacks as experts 
in stories indicate a positive message that blacks are knowledgeable 
with newsworthy and have insightful things to say; and by this very 
act of being consulted, these blacks show themselves to have positive 
social utility.
	In the third unit of analysis, Crime News, Entman points out that 
the main significant difference in the portrayal of blacks and white 
is that 77% of network news (17 of 22) in which a black was accused 
concerned a violent or drug crime, versus 42% of crime stories for 
whites (19 of 45).
	In short, the overwhelming majority of black crime stories concerned 
violence or drugs, while these threatening forms of criminal activity 
comprised a minority of stories for alleged white criminals.  The 
author points out that the disparity could reflect a real racial 
difference in the focus of criminal activity, but some aspects of 
reality are not quantifiable and are thus, subject to opinions and 
lengthy debates.
	However, evidence exists to suggest that blacks are more likely to 
be arrested than whites committing similar crimes, in which case the 
media might be accurately representing blacks' higher arrest rate but 
exaggerating the comparative rate of committing violent or drug 
crimes (Entman, 1994).  This is not to deny that poor blacks, 
especially males, engage in unlawful activity at a very high rate 
(Chicago Tribune, 23 Sept. 1990).
However, according to Entman (1994), blacks are subject to a very 
high rate of discrimination, unemployment, ineffective schooling, 
single-parent upbringing, and other experiences that tend not to be 
reported within the narrative of crime.  To this end, McQuail (1994) 
states that "we have to account not just of relative frequency [of 
black crime news] but of links and relationships in the text, and 
take note of what is missing or taken for granted" [ like the factors 
that lead black males to commit crimes, as identified by Entman 
above] (p. 276).
	The last two categories of analysis in Entman's study deal with the 
Verbal Representation of Blacks, and Black Leaders.  In these 
contexts, the theme of black stories is that blacks are either 
positive contributors to the American society, or blacks as human 
beings whose racial identity is incidental. On black leaders, Entman 
suggests that network news places high priorities on dramatic 
controversy focusing on black leaders who are likely to be in 
trouble, as in the case of Marion Barry, or Clarence 
Thomas.  Similarly, black leaders are portrayed in network news as 
critics of government policies, and protesters against discrimination.
	The Entman study is useful in that it covers the basic categories of 
blacks as a social group, and illustrates how this relates to network 
news coverage on television.  The mainly negative, and underreporting 
of blacks in local or national media systems can be attributed to 
complex social forces such as political realities, lower 
socioeconomic status, ingrained negative expectations of black 
behavior by the larger segment of the population, and stereotypes.
	These factors fit into one of McQuail's (1994) categories:   primary 
news values – negative.  The nature of newsworthiness favors the 
activities of the elite in society as Altschull (1995) have 
observed.  Few blacks and other minorities belong to this elite 
category in the American social experience, and thus, the majority of 
the minority population is not covered in news reports except when 
the news is negative or sensationalized. This may explain why, in 
part, individuals from this segment of society are seldom called to 
be experts on news shows.

Minorities and Women as Non-experts on TV News
Television has become one of the primary means by which people get 
their entertainment and news.  This medium has also been described as 
"the cultural arm of the established industrial order (which) serves 
primarily to maintain, stabilize, and reinforce rather than alter, 
threaten or weaken conventional beliefs and behaviours" (Gross, 1977, 
p. 180).  Looking at the major mainstream television networks on 
Sunday morning, the critical viewer can not help but observe that the 
hosts of the programs on ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX and their guests are 
predominantly white and male.  This observation has been validated by 
Hollar (2005) in a 2004 study about guests on the three major news 
networks (ABC, CBS, NBC), and two major cable news networks (CNN, 
FOX). According to the results of this study, of the guest appearing 
on ABC, 92 percent are white, 8 percent are people of color, 86 
percent are male, 14 percent are female, 73 percent are Republican, 
27 percent are Democrat; for CBS NEWS, 92 percent are white, 8 
percent are people of color, 86 percent are male, 14 percent are 
female, 76 percent are Republican, 24 percent are Democrat; for NBC 
NEWS, 92 percent are white, 8 percent are people of color, 82 percent 
are male, 18 percent are female, 75 percent are Republican, 25 
percent are Democrat; for CNN, 93 percent are white, 7 percent are 
people of color, 86 Percent are male, 14 percent are female, 57 
percent are Republicans, 43 percent are Democrat; and for FOX NEWS, 
89 percent are white, 11 percent are people of color, 93 percent are 
male, 7 percent are female, 83 percent are Republicans, and 17 
percent are Democrats.
 From the above figures, it is clear that sources for news broadcasts 
and those called in to serve as experts by the mainstream media 
clearly lean toward white, right, and male.  This decidedly 
homogenous group leaves little room for a "market place of ideas" 
which is instrumental to the functioning of a vibrant democracy 
because important ethnic voices are not heard – be they voices of 
dissent or support.
	Theoretically, the impact or effect of this kind of skew on society 
as a whole can be seen in different sectors. One of the earliest 
effects of the news media to be detected and discussed was its 
"status conferral" function (Lazarsfeld & Merton, 1948/1960). To this 
end, Kennamer (1994), points out that
If an issue, person, or group attracts media attention, that issue, 
person, or group must be important.  But the media are also able to 
define the status as they confer it.  Therefore the news media are 
able to confer status and legitimacy (or its opposite) on people, 
issues, and groups through normal gate keeping processes, the 
judgments of which are driven by culturally dominant assumptions. (p. 9)

These dominant assumptions are ingrained in the psyche of the public 
and continuously reinforced by the mass media.  This observation is 
supported by research that has examined the long term effects of 
media exposure.  Principal among this research is the cultivation 
hypothesis by Gerbner (1973), which has been investigated and 
extensively documented by others like Signorielli and Morgan (1990), 
and Hawkins and Pingree (1983).  It holds that television, among 
other media, has acquired such a central place in daily life that it 
dominates our symbolic environment, substituting its (distorted) 
message about reality for personal experience and other means of 
knowing about the world.  In other words, television according to 
this theoretical perspective, provides many people with a consistent 
and near-total symbolic environment which supplies norms for conduct 
and beliefs about a wide range of real-life situations. It is not a 
window on or a reflection of the world but a world in itself  (McQuail, 1994).
	The cultivation theory may explain why the mainstream news networks 
have consistently showcased white males as experts on news programs 
because this practice over many years has become part of the 
normative expectation of the industry, and may have conditioned its 
audiences to expect nothing else as a result.  Add this to the 
reality that other groups as shown above have been neglected or 
portrayed in negative light.  The result is that the audiences see 
the world through the eyes of white men, but this does not reflect 
the diversity of views in a multi-cultural society.

The Research Study: C-SPAN
To escape such a narrow focus, one must seek alternative sources of 
news and commentary, and that alternative for many is C-SPAN's 
Washington Journal.
Washington Journal is a news and current events show that allows 
viewers to question elected legislators, policymakers, and 
journalists about issues of the day. It includes a review of 
newspaper and Internet stories as well as special topic segments such 
as former President Reagan's funeral.  The time spent by each guest 
depends on the topic he or she will speak about and of course, the 
time limitation imposed by the producers of the show.
At the time of this research study, Washington Journal had seven 
hosts: five men and two women.  Among the men, three were Caucasian 
or white, one was African-American or black, and one was 
Hispanic-American.  The two women were white. These hosts – principal 
among them Brian Lamb, the CEO of C-SPAN –  were generally 
non-partisan and rarely offered personal opinion. They instead 
fielded viewers' calls to guests.  At other times they had "open 
lines" when viewers were encouraged to call in about any subject they 
wished to discuss.  Typically, three phone lines were advertised 
on-screen: one for those who supported the US President or the 
incumbent ruling party, one for those who supported the opposition 
party and the other for independent or oversea callers. The call-in 
rules required that callers who spoke on-air wait 30 days before 
calling back. This gave the network a greater ability to field calls 
from a broad section of its viewing audience. This format makes 
Washington Journal unique and more engaging than similar shows on 
broadcast or cable networks. It must be pointed out that as a 
non-commercial outlet, C-SPAN does not face the pressure of 
advertisers but as with any television program, there are time limitations.
	The number and variety of calls taken and aired on Washington 
Journal truly reflect the diverse views necessary for a healthy, 
vibrant democracy.  The call-in part of the show, in many ways, is 
the true voice of America. However, the ethnicity of the guests that 
appear on the show does reflect the diversity of the numerous callers 
or society. As one who regularly follows C-SPAN's Washington Journal, 
the lack of people of color on the show raised concerns for this 
author, and prompted the careful observation and documentation of 
guests that appeared on the show in June of 2004.
	It is useful to set the context of this research study by providing 
some important facts about C-SPAN. The following information comes 
from the 2004 Pew Research Survey of News Audiences and is intended 
to provide background information about C-SPAN as well as information 
about the trends in its audience composition.
Some Interesting Facts About C-SPAN
•	Awareness of C-SPAN has grown by 12% since the 2002 survey as 
measured by percentage of participants able to assess network believability.
•	50 million Americans watch C-SPAN
•	C-SPAN is trusted across political spectrum joining CNN and 60 
Minutes to make the list of "most trusted sources" for all three 
political groups: Republicans, Democrats, and Independents.
•	Among viewers reporting their age, 54% indicated they were under 50.
•	C-SPAN viewers have wide ranging interests when measured against 
audiences of four cable news networks (CNN, CNBC, FNC, MSNBC).
•	C-SPAN viewers scored highest by far in their interest in news 
about Washington (16% higher than the nearest net); news about local 
government (7% higher than next closest).
•	C-SPAN viewers have big interest in international news: among cable 
news audiences, no viewers are more interested in news than regular 
C-SPAN viewers: 46% said they follow international affairs "very 
closely" – 9% higher than viewers of CNN and MSNBC (37%) and 15% 
higher than FNC watchers.
•	C-SPAN Audience is more knowledgeable about current events. Regular 
C-SPAN viewers scored 7% higher than the national average (37 vs. 30) 
when tested on knowledge of current events and tested higher than the 
audiences of the four cable news networks.
The above results from the Pew research clearly support the author's 
proposition that C-SPAN is a major source of information and news for 
a large segment of the population.  The network according to its 
operators, reached about 88.4 million household as of June 2004 when 
this study was conducted.  This number if accurate, makes the Pew 
estimate rather conservative but highlights the importance of the 
network in the political and social discourse of the country, even 
more so than the traditional or mainstream broadcast and cable networks.

Methods

 From June 1, 2004 through June 27, 2004, each guest on C-SPAN's 
Washington Journal was recorded (see Table 1 below for the complete 
list). The author watched every show and used first-hand observation 
and documentation of each guest that appeared on the show. In 
addition, guests were cross-checked with C-SPAN's web site to verify 
accuracy. The race, gender, general topic of discussion, and the 
organization to which the guests were affiliated were recorded.  This 
methodology is useful in that it provides a detailed record of the 
practice of and trend in guest selection on Washington 
Journal.  Unlike other studies that have looked at guest composition 
in network news and other news programs, the actual list that was 
recorded in this study is fully presented here so that these 
individuals are not treated merely as statistical numbers but rather 
are names and faces that one can remember.

Findings
  The total number of guests recorded for the month of June 2004 was 
64 and is shown in Table 1 below. Of these, 49 were white males, six 
were white females; three were black males and none were black 
females; one was a Hispanic male, none were Hispanic females; two 
were Asian males, none were Asian females; two were Arab males, one 
was an Arab female.  Combined along ethnic lines, there were 55 
whites, three blacks, one Hispanic, two Asian, and three Arabs. An 
examination of majority (whites) to minorities (non-whites) yielded 
55 white experts to 9 non-white experts for a ratio of 6.1 to 1.
Table 1: C-SPAN Guests for June 2004
Date June 2004

Name & Affiliation

Topic

Race

Gender
1
Christopher Hutchins
Vanity Fair
Politics
White
Male
2
Peter Singer
Princeton University
The pres. of good/evil
White
Male
2
Deal Hudson
Crises Magazine (Ed./Pub.)
Articles in Crises
White
Male
3
Rep. Frank Wolf (R)
US House of Representatives
Appropriations sub-committee/Justice
White
Male
3
Wes Boyd
Moveon.org (President)
Politics
White
Male
3
J. Blades
Moveon.org (co-founder)
Politics
White
Male
4
David Chu
US Department of Defense Undersecretary
Iraq war
White
Male
4
E.J. Dionne
Washington Post (columnist)
Stand up, fight back
White
Male
4
Jeff Potter
Frontier Airlines (Pres./CEO)
Airline industry
White
Male
4
Jeffrey Smith
John Kerry for President Foreign Policy Adviser
Politics
White
Male
5
Pamela Constable
Washington Post (foreign correspondent)
Afghan war
White
Female
5
John Tkacik
Heritage Foundation
Politics
White
Male
6
Jun Tao Wang
Independent
Democracy in China
Asian
Male
6
Stuart Epperson
Salem Communication Corp. (Chairman)
US media
White
Male
7
Bill Kristol
Weekly Standard (editor)
Ronald Reagan
White
Male

7
Eric Enger
American Enterprise Institute
Economy
White
Male
7
Lee Price
Economic Policy Institute
Economy
White
Male
8
Rep. Kline (R)
US House of Representatives
Politics
White
Male
8
Richard Baker
US Senate Historian
History
White
Male
8
Peter Hannaford
Independent
Reagan Biographer
White
Male
8
Jorge Ramos
Telemundo
Latino politics
Hispanic
Male
9
Michael Deaver
Former White House Staff
Reagan
White
Male
9
Ken Adelman
Defense Policy Board
Reagan/politics
White
Male
9
Dana Rohrabacher (R)
US House of Representatives
Politics
White
Male
9
Elton Gallegly (R)
US House of Representatives
Politics
White
Male
9
John Edward Porter
Commission on Weak States
International politics
White
Male
9
Stuart Eizenstat
Commission on Weak States
International politics
White
Male
9
John Snow
US Treasury Secretary
Economy
White
Male
10
Tarrace Gainer
US Capitol Police Chief
Capitol security
White
Male
10
Richard Norton Smith
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Reagan
White
Male
10
Christopher Cox (R)
US House of Representatives
Reagan
White
Male
10
Pat Schroeder (D)
Former US House of Representatives
Reagan
White
Female

10
Mario Cuomo (D)
Former NY State Governor
Reagan
White
Male
11
Grover Norquist
Ronald Reagan Legacy Project
Reagan
White
Male
12
Mahmud Ali Osman
Iraqi Interim Government
Iraqi politics
Arab
Male
12
Aaron Kraus
University of Maryland
Politics
White
Male
12
Bill Fletcher, Jr.
TransAfrica
Aid to Africa
Black
Male
12
Bonnie Hogue Duffy
Alzheimer Research Funding
Health
White
Female
13
Michael Hirsh
Newsweek (senior editor)
Politics
White
Male
13
Bouthaina Shaaban
Syrian Government
Syrian/US relations
Arab
Female
13
Ghassan Atiyyah
Iraq Foundation for Development and Democracy
Politics
Arab
Male
14
Rick Weiss
Washington Post (medical/science reporter)
Health
White
Male
14
Henry Champ
CBC (senior correspondent)
Politics/news
White
Male
14
Edward Clark
University of Washington
Stem cell research
White
Male
15
Abdulla Abdula
Afghan Government Foreign Minister
Politics
Asian
Male
15
Douglas Holtz Eakin
US House of Representatives, Budget Office
Budget
White
Male
16
Stephanie Cohen
New Atlantis (assoc. editor)
Politics/news
White
Female
16
Debbie Stabenow (D)
US Senate
Politics
White
Female
16
Tim Adams
Bush-Cheney '04 Policy Director
Politics
White
Male

17
Michael Ignatieff
Independent/author
Book: The Lesser Evil
White
Male
18
Al Felzenberg
9-11 Commission, Deputy for the Commission
Politics/9-11
White
Male
18
Ron Chernow
Independent/author
Book: Alexander Hamilton
White
Male
22
Peter Bergen
Mother Jones (contributor)
Iraq/terrorism
White
Male
22
Normal Kelley
Independent/author
Book: Head Negro in Charge Syndrome
Black
Male
23
Joe Wilson (R)
US House of Representatives
Politics
White
Male
23
Robert Gallucci
Georgetown University
US foreign policy
White
Male
23
Ed Allridge
NASA
Space exploration
White
Male
24
James Falllows
Atlantic Monthly
Politics/news
White
Male
24
Jeremy Rabkin
Independent/author
Book: The Case for Sovereignty
White
Male
24
Susan Ferrechio
Congressional Quarterly
Politics/news
White
Female
25
Ann Applebaum
Washington Post (columnist)
Book: Gulag: A History
White
Female
26
Salih Booker
Africa Action Exec. Director
US/Africa relations
Black
Male
26
Art Taylor
BBB, Wise Giving Alliance President
Economics
Black
Male
27
Karl Zinsmeister
American Enterprise (editor)

Iraq war
White
Male
27
General George Luwan
US Army
US military issues
White
Male



   [--- Pict  Graphic Goes Here  ---]


Figure 1: Washington Journal guests by race for June 2004


   [--- Pict  Graphic Goes Here  ---]


Figure 2: Washington Journal guests by race and gender for June 2004
Discussion
What distinguishes C-SPAN from other networks is its primary public 
service goals. This leads one to expect more inclusion of others and 
hence a better reflection of the racial and gender composition of the 
American public – including those invited to comment and take 
questions from callers on Washington Journal.  But as shown above the 
guest selection pattern on Washington Journal is eerily similar to 
the patterns found at the major networks – a dominance in appearance 
by white male experts or commentators.  An interesting observation in 
this study is that the few minority guests that appeared on the show 
spoke or commented on specific issues that affected their racial 
group and not society as a whole.  Therefore, a black guest spoke on 
issues concerning blacks in this country or in Africa, a Hispanic 
guest spoke about issues of special importance to Hispanics, etc.  It 
is also evident that women of color and Native Americans were 
virtually invisible on Washington Journal in the period of this study.
As Cortes (2004) has pointed out, the mass media "teach" the public, 
whether intentionally or unintentionally, about minorities and other 
ethnic groups.  This mass media curriculum has a particularly 
powerful impact on people who have little or no direct contact with 
members of the groups being treated.  Additionally, Danielian (1994) 
points out that a group's ability to affect public opinion is 
positively linked to the public's perception of the group's 
legitimacy. This public perception is affected by the media.  Hence, 
the media have become powerful agents in shaping our perception of 
who ethnic minorities are.  It becomes important indeed that to 
change the negative perception as a result of repeated stereotypes 
about minorities, the mass media ought to accurately and 
proportionally show this segment of society in news and newsmagazine 
reports by tapping them as experts on a variety of social issues.
Washington Journal on C-SPAN promises the greatest potential to 
achieve this because of its format and the stated goals of the 
network – primarily to serve the American public and among others, 
and "to provide elected and appointed officials and others who would 
influence public policy a direct conduit to the audience without 
filtering or otherwise distorting their points of view" (C-SPAN.org). 
While this sounds good in principle, we must not deny the fact that 
the more white and male guests that appear on Washington Journal, the 
more this section of the population is perceived by C-SPAN's 
audiences over time as the only group intelligent enough to 
contribute or affect public policy.
Part of the difficulty in achieving the desired image of minorities 
in the media is that a very small group of minorities are employed in 
the media industry.  For example, according to the American Society 
of Newspaper Editors (ASNE), minority workers comprised of 12.9 
percent of the total newspaper work force in 2004.  Cortes (2004) 
also points out that "currently, only about 40 percent of the nations 
1,600 daily newspapers employ any minorities in editorial staff 
positions" (p. 2). Similar patterns can be found in other branches of 
the media like television and magazines.  For example, the Radio 
Television News Directors Association (RTNDA) in a 2004 report, 
indicate that minorities still make up less than 22 percent of the 
broadcast television news workforce and less than 13 percent of TV 
news directors.  Also according to ASNE, women made up only 37 
percent of the staff at newspapers across the country, of these, 
women of color represented a paltry six percent.
To change the overall under-representation of minorities and women 
and thus accord then the legitimacy they truly deserve, a more 
aggressive effort is required on the part of media managers in the 
recruitment and retention of minorities and women in their work 
place. However, there seems to be a lack of consistent response or 
sensitivity on the part of the media, in regards to minorities and 
women in the workforce as referred to by NBC's Tom Brokaw earlier. 
However, increased presence of minorities and women in the industry 
will certainly provide the opportunities and increase the 
possibilities of them being called to be experts, anchors, or 
contribute to content, and thus begin the correction of long held 
negative stereotypes about them in the media.
As the old adage goes, seeing is believing, and minorities and women 
realize, supported by research, that the media influence not only how 
others view them, but even how they view themselves. Overall, media 
decision makers must seek a better balance in their portrayal of 
minorities and women. In this regard, they must strive to find 
minority and women experts for commentary and viewpoints that may or 
may not be shared and expressed by the dominant group. This indeed is 
healthy for a true democracy, and Washington Journal is uniquely 
positioned to contribute to the attainment of this goal.
	




References

Altschull, H. J. (1995). Agents of power: the media and public 
opinion. NY. Longman.

Cortes, C. (2004).  A Long Way to Go: Minorities and the Media. 
Center for Media Literacy. 38. pp. 1-3.

C-SPAN. Org: (2004). Facts About C-SPAN.

Danielian, L. (1994). 'Interest Groups in the News' in Kennamer, J. 
D. (ed.) Public opinion, the press, and public policy. Westport, CT. Preager.

Donaldson-Smitherman, G. and van Dijk, T. (1988). Discourse and 
discrimination. Detroit. Wayne State University Press.

Dowd, M. (2004). It's Still a Man's World on the Idiot Box. (Op-Ed) 
The New York Times. December 2, 2004.

Editorial. 29% of Black men are in jail. Chicago. Chicago Tribune. 23 
Sept. 1990.

Entman, R. M. (1992). Blacks in the news: television, modern racism, 
and cultural change. Journalism Quarterly, 69. pp.341-361.

Ibid -(1994). Representation and reality in the portrayal of blacks 
on network television News. Journalism Quarterly, 71. pp. 509-519.

Gerbner, G. (1973). "Cultural indicators – the third voice" in G. 
Gerbner, L. Gross and W. Melody (eds), Communication technology and 
social policy, pp. 553-73. New York. Wiley.

Gross, L. P. (1977). "Television as a trojan horse," School Media 
Quarterly, 175-80.

Greenberg, B., and Brand, J. (1992). US minorities and news. Wye, 
MD. 	Aspen Institute.

Hall-Jamieson, K. (1992). Dirty politics. NY. Oxford University Press.

Hawkins, R. P. and Pingree, S. (1983). "TV's Influence on Social 
Reality," in E. Wartella et al. (eds), Mass communications review 
year book, Vol. 4, pp. 53-76. Beverly Hills, CA. Sage.

Hollar, J. (2005). Who's the expert. Yes! A Journal of Positive 
Futures, 33. p. 29.


Kennamer, J. D. (1994) Public opinion, the press, and public policy. 
Westport, CT. Preager.

Kerner Commission. (1968). Report of the national advisory 
commission. Washington, DC. US Government Printing Office.

Lazarsfeld, P. F. , and Stanton, F. (1949). Communication research 
1948-49. New York. Harper and Row.

McConahay, J. (1986). "Modern racism, ambivilence, and the modern 
racism scale" in Prejudice, discrimination, and racism: theory and 
research. Dovidio, J. and Gaetner, S. (Eds). NY. Academic Press.

McQuail, D. (1994). Mass communication theory. Beverly Hills. Sage 
Publications. pp. 78-79.

Scheingold, S. (1984). The politics of law and order: street crime 
and public policy. NY. Longman.

Signorielli, N. and Morgan, M. (eds) (1990) Cultivation analysis. New 
bury Park, CA. Sage.
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2004). Survey on C-SPAN.

Van Djik, T. A. (1991). Racism and the press. London. Routledge.









Altschull, H. J. (1995). Agents of Power: The Media and Public 
Opinion. NY. Longman.

Donaldson-Smitherman, G. and van Dijk, T. (1988). Discourse 
and  Discrimination. Detroit. Wayne State University Press.

Editorial. 29% of Black Men are in Jail. Chicago. Chicago Tribune. 23 
Sept. 	1990.

Entman, R. M. (1992). Blacks in the News: Television, Modern Racism, 
and Cultural Change. Journalism Quarterly, 69. pp.341-361.

Ibid -(1994). Representation and Reality in the Portrayal of Blacks 
on Network Television News. Journalism Quarterly, 71. pp. 509-519.

Gerbner, G. (1973). 'Cultural Indicators – the Third Voice' in G. 
Gerbner, L. Gross and W. Melody (eds), Communication Technology and 
Social Policy, pp. 553-73. New York. Wiley.

Gross, L. P. (1977). 'Television as a Trojan Horse' , School Media 
Quarterly, 175-80.

Greenberg, B., and Brand, J. (1992). US Minorities and News. Wye, 
MD. 	Aspen Institute.

Hall-Jamieson, K. (1992). Dirty Politics. NY. Oxford University Press.

Hawkins, R. P. and Pingree, S. (1983). 'TV's Influence on Social 
Reality' , in E. Wartella et al. (eds), Mass Communications Review 
Year Book, Vol. 4, pp. 53-76. Beverly Hills, CA. Sage.

Kennamer, J. D. (1994) Public Opinion, The Press, and Public Policy. 
Westport, CT. Preager.

Kerner Commission. (1968). Report of the National Advisory 
Commission. Washington, DC. US Government Printing Office.

Lazarsfeld, P. F. , and Stanton, F. (1949). Communication Research 
1948-49. New York. Harper and Row.

McConahay, J. (1986). Modern Racism, Ambivilence, and the Modern 
Racism Scale. in Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism:Theory 	and 
Research. Dovidio, John. and Gaetner, Samuel. (Eds). NY. Academic Press.

McQuail, D. (1994). Mass Communication Theory. Beverly Hills. Sage 
Publications. pp. 78-79.

Scheingold, S. (1984). The Politics of Law and Order: Street Crime 
and Public Policy. NY. Longman.

Signorielli, N. and Morgan, M. (eds) (1990) Cultivation Analysis. New 
bury Park, CA. Sage.

Van Djik, T. A. (1991). Racism and the press. London. Routledge.