by Carol Tator
Presented at Racism in the Media, a conference
sponsored by the Toronto Community Reference
Group on Ethno-Racial and Aboriginal Access to
Metropolitan Services, Oct. 1995
Republished with permission

Background

Two decades ago, the Urban Alliance on Race Relations was founded. One of the first priorities established by its members was to identify the ways in which bias and discrimination were woven into the policies and practices of social institutions.

It was clear even in the 70s the important role and function of the media in terms of representing a crucial source of beliefs and values from which people develop an understanding of their world. The media holds up a mirror in which society can see itself reflected. However, as we now know and have documented, there are huge distortions, omissions, and erasures in that reflection.

Based on this understanding, we began to regularly meet with the senior executives, publishers, editors, producers and broadcasters. We set up a series of regular sessions with different groups of senior executives in major advertising agencies and their clients. Among the individuals who played a central role in these early advocacy initiatives were: Wilson Head, Susan Eng, Hamlin Grange, Joseph Wong, Kamala Jean Gopie, and Darmalingham. All through the 80s we continued our efforts to challenge racism in the media in all of its diverse forms and continuous mutations.

We undertook a major study of the Toronto Sun to document the ways in which racism was manifested in this newspaper. In this study, we systematically reviewed and analyzed articles, editorials and columns of the newspaper from 1978 to 1985. We found a persistent pattern of prejudice and racism evident in the Sun. The paper presented the reader with a single prejudiced world view in relation to racial and ethnic minorities. The sheer volume of racist images, stereotypes and prejudiced rhetoric led us to the conclusion that the racial bias found within the writings of editors and journalists was not an isolated event but rather a series of events continued over an extended period of time. The study concluded with the view that there can be no freedom without responsibility, and the Toronto Sun had violated the fundamental freedoms and responsibilities that society has entrusted to the press.

In another area of media, we undertook a mail-back campaign targeting the advertisements and promotions of large retailers in Toronto that failed to reflect the multiracial nature of this city and those who were their customers. The companies selected were those retailers which spent large sums of money on print advertising. Details of the campaign were disseminated to community organizations who were asked to mail back every catalogue and flyer which failed to reflect the diversity of Toronto with a note to the President or Advertising Manager explaining why. A press release was distributed announcing the campaign. A simple monitoring device was developed for each target company. A content-analysis of the advertisements of the target companies a year later showed that even such a limited advocacy initiative could make a difference. In one company which had the poorest record, we noted a significant change in their advertising a year later.

Other kinds of advocacy initiatives included participating in advisory committees established by particular media organizations. In the case of one radio station which had been involved in a highly publicized racist incident, a group of us worked for over a year with the station's senior management, examining all aspects of the organization including hiring practices and programming. We met regularly with managers and broadcasters with the CBC identifying how bias and discrimination was reflected within the daily operations of their organization.

We made submissions to various government task forces and public inquiries dealing with racism in the media and in government communications. We served on government monitoring committees. We appeared before the CRTC hearings on a number of occasions. We participated in the various efforts and initiatives related to the establishment of a Black and Dance music radio station.

Did These Efforts Make a Difference?

The answer to that question is not very encouraging. On one hand, we can document small and limited changes in some areas of the media. In advertising, there is a limited increase in the use of people of colour as models and actors, if you exclude advertising from the United States. A study in 1992 conducted by the Canadian Advertising Foundation found that 70% of Canadians thought that advertising is still "too geared towards white consumers." In the print media, there is more coverage of issues related to racism. The perspectives of people of colour are occasionally included in special features (usually submitted by freelance writers). The Toronto Star has a weekly diversity column and has published a number of surveys and polls. The Star regularly profiles special features on the subject of racism. In the electronic media, we can point to a limited number of broadcasters who are people of colour, mainly in the CBC. But the progress in these and other organizations is sporadic and often illusory.

Manifestations of Racism in the Media Today

1. Lack of representation
Despite these relatively nominal changes, people of colour are still largely invisible in the Canadian media. The unequal status of racial minorities in the media is reflected by their absence from on-air roles such as anchors, reporters, experts or actors. They are underrepresented at all levels of staffing operations, production and decision-making positions in communications. Their limited participation is seen as the result of both overt bias, structural barriers and cultural racism, which is woven into the collective system of beliefs, values and norms of the dominant culture.

The invisibility of people of colour in the print media, is reflected in the hiring practices of media organizations. In responses to two recent studies on the hiring and coverage of minorities, one journalist suggested the daily newspapers in Canada continue to be almost as white as the paper they are printed on.  Based on information provided by the 41 daily newspapers that responded to the Canadian Newspaper Association survey in 1995, just 67 of 2,620 of newsroom positions (2.6%) were held by non-whites.  That's five times less than the 13.2 % of the population counted as aboriginal or visible minorities in the 1991 census. In another study conducted at Ryerson Polytechnic University, which measured the content of six large newspapers and found that half the pictures of people of colour showed them as athletes or entertainers. If they are in the news otherwise, it is probably related to crime.

In studying the nature and extent of people of colour and Aboriginal peoples in national news programmes and particularly their participation on CBC's The National and CTV's National Evening News, "researchers determined the number of times individuals from these groups were interviewed in these nightly programmes. The findings of the study show that almost all stories in which people of colour appear are those in which the stories are about non-whites. There were few stories of general interest such as sports, taxes or political issues in which people of colour were included. During the four weeks in which these national news programmes were monitored, only 20 out of 725 interviews solicited the opinions of racial minorities for subjects not related specifically to stories or people from their communities.

In representations made to the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) by racial and ethnocultural minorities, this reality is pointed to as evidence of the act as one brief suggested: "We are here simply to point out that what we see on the television screens, when our sets are turned to CTV, makes us feel as if we are in a foreign land, not one in which we are participating citizens."

The invisibility, stigmatization and marginalization of people of colour by the media continues to operate and communicate one central message, that is, people of colour are not full participants in Canadian society. Woven into the dominant culture, and the culture of most media organizations, is the belief in "the rightness of whiteness" the universal norm which allows one to think, imagine and speak as if whiteness described the world. This assumption is still deeply embedded in the way in which the media represents people of colour.

Contrary to public myth, journalists, editors, broadcasters and directors of media organizations are not always neutral, impartial, objective and unbiased. The media often selects events which are atypical, presents them in a stereotypical fashion and contrasts them against a pretext of normative White behaviour. Media professionals are often guided by a need to focus on the sensational, extraordinary, and exotic which sells well in the marketplace. They are influenced by their own connections to the groups and institutions within society that have power and influence.

Many institutions have ready access to the media. As a consequence a significant proportion of news coverage deals with information which emanates from government agencies, politicians, police school boards, commissions, chambers of commerce, and labour federations. This is sharply contrasted with the lack of access that minorities have in making their viewpoints and voices heard. Media professionals, that is editors, journalists, broadcasters, producers and their institutions control access, between the elites of power and the mass audience. By controlling the qualitative aspects of the information that will become the audience's news or determining which events will dominate the "agenda" of new programs, newspaper and public discussion, or selecting which "expert" opinion will be utilized, the media assumes the function of gatekeeper or agenda-setter.

Canadian newspapers and magazines, television and radio stations (with the exception of public agencies such as the CBC) are generally owned by corporate interests and are structured in such a way as to produce sustain support for the economic interests of business and government elites. While espousing democratic values of fairness, equality and freedom of expression, the media reinforces and reproduces racist ideology.

One example of the influence of the power elite to shape the media's discourse is the debate over Employment Equity. Most media organizations have chosen to reflect the position of the corporate elite and have tried to influence popular opinion by misrepresenting employment equity as a risk to the operation of a free marketplace, a violation of the merit principle and a threat to White males.

2. Marginalization and stereotypical portrayal of people of colour
One of the most common and persistent examples of racism in the media is the frequency with which people of colour and immigrants are singled out and identified in teens of "having problems" (that require a disproportionate amount of political attention or public resources to solve), or "creating problems." They make demands on society that threaten the political, social, or moral order.

It is in this context that The Globe and Mail feels compelled to write dozens of editorials, articles and special features on the perils and threat employment equity poses to Canadian society. It is not just the regularity of these critiques, but the misrepresentation and distortion of the issues and lack of respect for the facts. Another recent example of this kind of misrepresentation was the Race Through Writing Conference held in June of last year in Vancouver. This relatively small conference sponsored by the Writers Union of Canada was in the news for six months. The negative reaction was due to the fact that most of the sessions were closed to white writers. The conference was developed to provide a critical space and forum for writers of colour and First Nations writers to come together and share experiences and concerns that were directly related to their cultural and racial identities One of the goals of this initiative was to develop a network of support among minority writers and to identify strategies for dealing with specific barriers that marginalize and exclude them from mainstream cultural institutions and the dominant culture. They hoped that the three day event would provide them with an opportunity to explore their own experiences as people of colour in relation to their writing, as well as issues around the lack of access to funding, publishing and distribution networks. For weeks before, during and after the conference, the national media was filled with almost daily news coverage, editorials, columns and special features, radio and television commentaries and most of which were extremely critical of this initiative. The conference was described as an "an act of racism," "an erosion of Canadian values," "a threat to Canadian culture and identity," "a cancer", "a manifestation of apartheid," and "the worst example of political correctness and censorship".

An example of the media negatively stereotyping people of colour is seen in the way the Sikh and Muslim communities are covered by the mass media. Press coverage of issues of concern to this community are sensationalized and these groups are commonly depicted as militants, terrorists, and disposed to violence. Articles conjure up images of conflict, civil unrest, violent confrontation, terrorism and destruction of property. In turn, the repetition of these images and stereotypes reinforce prejudice against not only against Sikhs and Muslims, but South Asians as well. The Iraq war provided the media with ample opportunity to feed on these kinds of negative images.

The portrayal of crime in the mass media plays a significant role in shaping public definitions of the 'crime problem'. The media explanations of crime are overlaid by racist ideologies that serve to "knit together...the enigma of crime and its causation".

A particularly striking example of the media's role in fostering the 'racialization of crime' was a three part series published by the Globe and Mail on Jamaican crime. The first article in this series appeared in July of 1992 and was entitled "Island crime wave spills over: Criminal subculture exported to Canada" and begins with a description of life in a Kingston slum.

The article notes that although it is now unpopular to discuss Black crime in Toronto, it is quite clear that "this criminal subculture has been exported" and is evident on the streets of Toronto and, to a lesser extent, Montreal. Named and unnamed Toronto police sources are quoted as saying that Black crime is no myth, it is reality "which manifests itself in arrest records" and is proof that "a volatile group of young Jamaican males has altered Toronto's criminal landscape... in an explosion of guns and crack cocaine". In the meantime, local Jamaican police sources maintain that this is strictly a Canadian problem and caused by "riff-raff" who migrate. And local Jamaican experts are quoted as saying that crack cocaine is the result of the hopelessness of life among the poor and the breakdown of the family. It ends by offering another 'expert' opinion that Jamaicans are aggressive and violence prone. This argument is pursued in the second article in which a number of Jamaican authorities and institutions are blamed for this violent culture. It begins by describing the "police heavy-handedness in one of the world's most violent cultures." Examples of "wholesale corruption and complicity in the drug trade" follow. And finally, in the third article, a 'divide and rule' reasoning is pursued as disputes between Trinidadians and Jamaicans are revealed and a Trinidadian woman is quoted. Pressed, she says: "I don't know why Jamaicans are different. They just are." While this article focuses on Jamaican youth in Toronto, even some born here, it nevertheless provides further explanations of the breakdowns in Jamaican society including traditional political rivalries between its two major political parties and the "erosion of church authority". To further add to the confusion, the writer reveals that the relationship between traditional explanations and criminal youth in Toronto is unclear, especially as more experts are cited to show that the majority of criminals are now Toronto-born. Returning to the theme of Jamaican crime, however, the article cites American police officials as solemnly maintaining that "Toronto is a major centre, no doubt about it."

The marginalization and stigmatization of people of colour in the media is reflected in the demarcation of "them" and "us". The subtext of this kind of public discourse is that Whites are represented and defended as tolerant, law-abiding people who respect authority (i.e., police) and who cherish liberal values such as freedom of speech and enterprise. On the other hand, we have people of colour and immigrants who are portrayed as aggressive, unlawful, disrespectful of democratic laws and values, demanding of special treatment.

In recent years, while people of colour are seen more frequently in television programming, particularly on those programs which appear on the U.S. networks there are some discernible and disturbing patterns of marginalization of racial minorities. Where Black people are central to a television show they tend to be portrayed (even more one-dimensionally than is TV's norm) as "victim, villain, buffoon or cuddly, folksy types". Historically, the predominant images of Black people portrayed on both American television networks and the Hollywood film industry have been those of criminals, rioters, thieves, drug addicts, pimps and prostitutes. Under the guise of "fair comment" and free expression, open-line radio and television talk shows provide an opportunity for hosts, listeners, and viewers to publicly disseminate racist beliefs. In response to the beliefs and assumptions established by the host, callers feel their racial biases are supported and legitimized.

3. The vilification of people of color by the media
Another manifestation of racism in the media that seems to be growing is the singling out and vilification of individuals of colour who dare to challenge racist practices within dominant cultural institutions. There are numerous examples of this phenomenon including Arnold Minors, a Black who is a member of the Metro Toronto Police Services Board and an anti-racism consultant. Minors suggested that the reason many Black witnesses to a crime refuse to help police officers in their investigation is that some groups perceive the police as though they were an occupying army. This issue served as a catalyst for weeks of front page headlines and coverage.

In a similar way, the Coalition Against Show Boat and more specifically its co-chair Professor Jeff Henry were subject not only to negative criticism, but were also portrayed as "radicals," "troublemakers," and people seeking their own self-aggrandizement. The protesters against Miss Saigon were treated by the media with the same disdain, dismissal and hostility. Their concerns were commonly misrepresented. By deflecting attention away from the protesters central concerns with misrepresentation and stereotyping, and framing the discussion solely in terms of artistic license and creative freedom, the concerns of the protesters were ignored or rejected as a call for censorship. In the protest against the Royal Ontario Museum's Exhibit "Into the Heart of Africa," the media again was highly critical and journalists frequently characterized the protesters as radicals, bullies, blackmailers, terrorists, and revisionists.

A further example of scrutiny by the media is that of Susan Eng, Chairperson of the Metro Toronto Police Services Board. Before and during her six year term, she was placed under the media microscope, and every action she took became the centre of controversy stirred by the media's voracious appetite for sensationalism.

Change and Resistance

The issue of how to ensure greater access, participation and equity in the mass communications industries continues to challenge advocates of a racism-free media The responsibility for change belongs to both individuals working in the advertising, print and electronic media industries, and media organizations as corporate bodies. Advertisers, editors, journalists and broadcasters undoubtedly have opinions and biases of their own; their attitudes, perceptions and values are influenced by numerous social and cultural factors. However, professional standards should prevent these attitudes from leading them into an expression of those prejudices in their workplace.

As in other sectors of Canadian society, there exists within the media a significant resistance to altering the power of the dominant culture. Attempts by people of colour to protest and resist racist images and discourse in the media are frequently challenged by the media. Resistance is seen by the corporate elite as the suppression of freedom of expression and is equated with censorship. However, in this discussion, what is frequently ignored is the important connection between the championing of freedom of expression and the freedom of the marketplace to operate without constraint. Freedom of expression is closely linked to freedom of enterprise. How neutral can media organizations be in their analysis of an issue when, for example, they are receiving hundreds of thousands of advertising dollars from the producers of Show Boat and Miss Saigon?

Many see the issue of freedom of speech in the context of the lack of access that people of colour and other groups have to the communication networks. People of colour are largely excluded from participation in the public discourse. As Marlene Nourbese Philip suggests:

Freedom of speech assumes a higher priority in Canadian society than eliminating racism. Thus we see, 20 years after we began our efforts to dismantle racism in the media, there continue to be significant and systemic barriers to change. These include:

• Freedom of the press is considered so sacred a trust that the media has the right to communicate racist content in both print and the broadcast media.
• The diverse and diffuse nature of the media makes it difficult to target, access and penetrate.
• Self-regulating agencies are either non-existent or they are extremely weak. Unions, press councils, and advertising boards exercise limited power and authority over media corporations.
• Significant resources are need to effectively lobby agencies such as the CRTC. Regulations are complex and demand a level of expertise.
• There is an absence of consistent monitoring process and mechanisms.
• Advocacy across the country is erratic and generally is focused on a reactive approach to specific incident.
• There exist few substantive and practical models and strategies. Where new approaches have been initiated, there is little dissemination of information.
• The law and the justice system provide only limited redress in terms of libel and defamation.

The Role of Advocacy

The analysis of racism in the media could lead community advocates and activists to throw up their hands in despair, to feel impotent at the glacially slow pace of change. We know that the urgency felt by those suffering from discrimination (and those of us who believe that racism fundamentally challenges the existence of a stable, viable and just society) is not necessarily shared by those who have the power to eliminate it. Given the pervasive and seemingly intractable nature of racism in the media, is there any hope we can make a difference? I believe the answer is yes.

Let me cite two examples of how advocacy can make a difference; two stories, one drawn from an earlier experience at the Urban Alliance and one drawn from a story which appeared only a few days ago in the newspaper.

In the first case, in the late 80s, the Ontario Lottery Corporation produced an ad for Lottario which was extremely racist, as well as sexist. It was a cartoon, portraying a number of high-profile figures including a caricature of Louis Armstrong depicted in an offensive way, and Al Jolson in black face singing "Mammy." A ten year old boy named Michael saw the cartoon and was very upset by the way in which the only Black person he had seen on TV was portrayed. He said he never saw Black people who looked like the people he knows – he was himself Black.

The next day, with the encouragement of his mother and teacher, he called the Ontario Lottery Corporation to complain. Needless to say, at first, they were not very sympathetic to his concerns. However, Michael was persistent. Again with a little support from adults in his life, he called Jo Jo DeChinto with City TV. Jo Jo decided this was an important story and took immediate action, beginning with a call to the President of the Ontario Lottery Corporation, followed by interviews with several organizations who shared Michael's concern with the ad. The ad was pulled and Michael, inspired by his success, went on to continue monitoring and responding to other examples of racism in the media. I don't know where Michael is today, but I do know that he proved that advocacy and resistance can make a difference.

In the second example, reported in the news only a few days ago, Hostess Frito-Lay shelved an ad for Dorito Tortilla Corn Chips. The ad was based on a highly offensive slogan, "Kiss the old bag good-bye", conjuring up a very negative image of older women. After six complaints were lodged with the Canadian Advertising Foundation, the ad was pulled.

Challenging racism in the media requires painstaking effort, resilience and tenacious resistance. We need to continue to vigilantly monitor, protest, demonstrate, document and oppose every form of racism in the media. We need to raise our voices every time we read racist views expressed in the print media; everytime we hear racial bias communicated across airwaves; and everytime we see it depicted in the images on billboards and flyers. We need to demand employment equity within media organizations. We need to vigorously challenge those who attempt to silence resistance, with allegations of political correctness and censorship. We need to respond to those who speak in code words such as freedom of expression, artistic license, national identity, unity, common values, special interest groups, special privilege, quotas. Demanding fairness, equity and justice in the media and in other social systems is not deviant behaviour – it is called democracy! When our colleagues, allies and friends are attacked we need to quickly and publicly come to their defense. We need to demand equity in the hiring and selection practices of media organizations, not in twenty more years, but now! We need to develop networks and alliances between communities who are regularly subjected to racism by the media. We still need a monitoring agency that regularly oversees and responds to bias and discriminatory practices in the media. We must press for more effective press councils and other self-regulating bodies. Most of all we need to continue to demand responsibility, accountability and meaningful change in the decision-making processes and daily practices of media organizations in Canada.

Carol Tator lives in Toronto, and is an active member of the Urban Alliance on Race Relations.