Advocay and Defense: Spanish-Language Media in the
United States
United States
Barriozona Magazine and a group of authoritative experts analyze the historical and contemporary role
of Spanish-media language in the United States, the pros and cons of advocacy journalism, the ideals
that journalists should strive for, as well as the historic relevance that current social events may reach in
the future.
of Spanish-media language in the United States, the pros and cons of advocacy journalism, the ideals
that journalists should strive for, as well as the historic relevance that current social events may reach in
the future.
By Eduardo Barraza
Phoenix. Arizona. Soon after the massive immigrants’ demonstrations that took place in many U.S. cities
during the month of March of 2006, Gillian Flaccus, an Associated Press writer wrote a story that was
widely published in many print and electronic media outlets. Flaccus, AP’s diversity and religion reporter
for Southern California, was far from revealing a new trend. However, for most of mainstream America,
he exposed the mobilizing power behind the unprecedented and multitudinous marches of Latinos –
particularly undocumented immigrants.
In his article, Flaccus establishes that “for English-speaking America, the mass protests in Los Angeles
and other U.S. cities over the past few days have been surprising for their size and seeming spontaneity.
But they were organized, promoted, or publicized for weeks by Spanish-language radio hosts and TV
anchors as a demonstration of Hispanic pride and power.”
Flaccus’ observation was not only far from being inaccurate; it captured the open and wide support that
historically has been the main characteristic of Spanish-language media in the United States, as well as
its advocacy role for the Mexican-American and Latino population. Perhaps the Associated Press writer
was not entirely aware of this traditional function of Spanish-language media, but was definitely correct
in crediting what has been, and is in essence, a powerful force behind the current push for immigration
reform.
Even though these actions and the media's role in promoting them may appear new to many, the
relationship between Spanish-language media and the Latino population’s struggle for civil rights has a
long history of interaction and involvement. Therefore, the pro-immigrant rallies can be considered the
most recent link in a chain of events that spans for more than 100 years.
Historian Christine Marin cautions new generations to “not assume that the current call for immigration
reform is a new phenomenon in the Southwest. Since the early 1900s…Mexican immigrants made great
attempts to fight for their labor, political, economic and human rights and have made great sacrifices to
achieve the American Dream of education, success and home ownership.”
Dr. Marin, a Curator and Archivist of the Chicano/a Research Collection at Arizona State University,
believes that what some observers consider an emerging social movement, is a recent expression of that
continued struggle for rights: “The marches and rallies you see occurring in the Southwest and
elsewhere are manifestations of a civil rights movement, a socio-economic movement, a political
movement, and a human rights movement.”
One of these attempts Dr. Marin refers to, the creation in 1894 of the “Alianza Hispano Americana,”
sheds light in understanding how and why Spanish-language media become an instrument of advocacy
in the pursuit of social justice.
According to another historian, Dr. Manuel G. Gonzales, the Alianza Hispano Americana “functioned as a
mutual aid and benefit society…Primarily, however, the Alianza was a defense organization.” Dr.
Gonzales, professor of history at Diablo Valley College in California, establishes that the Alianza was
created as a response to the fact that “people of Mexican descent in Tucson were beginning to suffer the
same prejudice and discrimination as the Mexican Americans in other parts of the Southwest.”
Relevant to the objective of this essay, and fundamental to understand the role of Spanish-language
media in the context of social causes, is the work of an “Alianza Hispano Americana’s” key member, and
its first president, Carlos I. Velasco. Not coincidentally, Velasco was by then the publisher and editor of
“El Fronterizo,” a Spanish-language newspaper he had founded twelve years earlier.
“El Fronterizo” was a four-page weekly published for a period of thirty-seven years, dealing particularly
with politics, industry, and commerce, but in the Velasco’s words, it was essentially a vehicle of advocacy
in the Mexicans’ search for civil rights. In the second issue of this historic newspaper, Velasco clarified his
editorial position when he wrote that “the Fronterizo will establish itself as a zealous defender of the
interests of the Mexican people in both countries, expressing their point of view and directing their
initiative along the path leading to their moral perfection and material progress.”
Dr. Gonzales also asserts that “Velasco employed his newspaper to combat negative stereotypes of his
people,” thus defining the main characteristic of “El Fronterizo,” and of American Spanish-language press
as well, as a strategic tool for the “defense of the Mexican population from Anglo abuse.” Velasco’s
publication was not an isolated approach but rather a consistent trend of Mexican and Mexican American
journalism.
This tendency is widely analyzed by Gabriel Meléndez, Professor and Chairman of the Department of
American Studies at the University of New Mexico, in his book “Spanish-Language Newspapers in New
Mexico, 1834-1958.” Meléndez views Spanish-language newspapers as cultural productions, and the
work of their editors, as an organized movement against cultural exclusion in the midst of the massive
arrival of easterners to the Southwest.
The Spanish-language media traditional characteristics of advocacy and alliance have vehemently
surfaced as a constant in contemporary societies. The recent mobilization of millions of immigrants –both
documented and undocumented– have recreated again the social scenario where this relationship
between a social cause and its treatment in Spanish-language media can be seen more clearly and
fervently expressed.
“There does seem to be a tradition of advocacy among Spanish language newspapers that might seem
out of place in mainstream journalism,” said O. Ricardo Pimentel, editor of the Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel's editorial page. Pimentel, a longtime journalist and former columnist and member of The Arizona
Republic’s editorial board, affirms that more than anything, “Spanish-language media, like news media
everywhere, should serve as an ally of truth. Often truth can seem like advocacy. It's tempting to judge
Spanish-language media against the practices and traditions of mainstream media. We shouldn't mistake
knowing your community and tapping into its concerns and interests necessarily as slanted journalism.”
Pimentel points out that “mainstream journalism often holds itself hostage to ‘balance,’ setting up a
situation in which far too many stories are of the he-said, they-said variety without telling the reader
what is true.” He believes that “addressing concerns of your audience is not necessarily serving as an
ally in a social cause.”
Editors of Spanish-language newspapers around the country communicate this advocacy and alliance
role consciously. However, there may not be a complete awareness of the extent of the effects –positive
and negative– that an open editorial line of support for the undocumented immigrants’ cause may
generate.
David Ramirez, Metro news editor and columnist for El Diario/La Prensa, a New York newspaper with a
daily circulation of more than 80,000 copies, considers that “part of the spirit of the media as such, is to
support and to motivate every cause or social movement that it is sustained in principles of solidarity,
respect to the Human Rights, and so forth. In the particular case of Spanish-language media and the
(immigrants’) movement, I believe that it fits what I mentioned above. Therefore, my criterion is that we
have to be allies of this movement.”
Dr. Cristina L. Azocar, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Journalism at the San Francisco State University said
“I’m not sure if an ally would be a correct way to serve —or at least the word doesn’t work. To me, it
serves as an informant on the social cause –the pros and cons, the process, etc. It can definitely take a
pro or con stance also in the editorial stance of the outlet.”
Spanish-language media’s concern to express an advocacy role in the undocumented immigrant’s cause,
as an example, may be a valid approach, but evidently it has also developed a trend to present only
positive information of what it supports and only negative information of what it opposes. This technique
is what seven decades ago, sociologists Alfred and Elizabeth Lee identified as one of the seven “tricks of
the trade” of propaganda. The Lee’s coined the term “card stacking” to refer to the practice of making
something sound as though there is only one conclusion that a rational person can draw.
Regarding this propagandistic approach to journalism, Professor Azocar, who is also the Director of the
Center for Integration and Improvement of Journalism in San Francisco, California, said “I don’t believe in
self-censorship and I do believe that a social movement should have all the information possible to
actually move, otherwise, what do you gain? People are smart enough to realize that with every
movement and every gain there will be areas of fall back —but this helps us remember where we came
from and what we still need to overcome and deal with. People can use the damaging information to
show that they are not ignorant and willing to consider both the benefits and negative possible
outcomes.”
Pimentel sees this as “a matter of intellectual honesty and integrity. Intellectual honesty and integrity
would demand that the story or opinion piece deal with the counter-arguments, if only to knock them
down. The best editorials, for instance, are those that target the folks who are likely to disagree. They
are far more persuasive because they are built on reasonable argument. The best stories are those that
offer a variety of views, but ultimately truth as well.”
For Ramirez, “good journalism, this is to say, one that is based on ethics, should not conceal or distort
facts. I ratify that in the concrete case of the immigrants’ movement, and as an immigrant (from Ecuador)
myself…it is not necessary to take the path of suppressing truthful information.”
For some readers, the effect of a pro or con posture in Spanish-media language provokes different
feelings. For Jesus Aguirre, Spanish-language newspapers “need to be truthful, and present the reality,
but not reality in their own way. They should neither focus too much in the positive nor the negative.
They need to be neutral and to inform us, but also give us more ideas.”
A naturalized U.S. citizen, Aguirre emigrated from Mexico to Chicago in the early sixties, where he resided
many years before moving to Phoenix. An avid reader of Spanish-language publications, particularly
weekly newspapers, Aguirre said, “I love the news, but I think newspapers should have more variety,
and not publish so much information on the same topic. You see it right now, with the immigrants’
movement.”
For Aguirre, a longtime State of Arizona employee, the most important mission newspapers should
pursue is to present the truth. “When I read newspapers, I don’t want to feel like I am reading the
cowboy’s stories I used to read as a boy; newspapers need to say things as they are,” he concluded.
For another reader, whose name will keep anonymous, taking a con stance may be counterproductive,
specially coming from a Latino publication. In an opinion expressed through e-mail, the reader refers to a
Barriozona Magazine’s article titled “A day without…significant effect.” The article presented information
that made evident the shortcomings of what was intended to have a dramatic and greater effect, in
terms of showing the purchasing power of Latinos through an economic boycott.
“I would have preferred…that you'd chosen not to say anything about this particular topic, because the
bigots love reading that it was a failure, especially from another Latino. It gives them a good excuse to
continue to justify their warped thinking.” this reader wrote.
The reasoning behind this reader’s wish is that while “I agree with you…the difference is that I would
never publicize it for all the anti-immigrant world to see. I was one of your readers and was merely
expressing to you that reading your article made me wish you had not written it, even if in my heart I
agreed with some of the points you made.”
Aiming to further advance the immigrants’ call for immigration reform, or any other cause, the traditional
position of contemporary Spanish-language media may be accomplishing its goal, but apparently has let
many readers, activists, and other key people in the community, under the impression that means of
communication presenting factual information, which people perceive as not favorable to a cause or
movement, are antagonists to the same cause or movement.
A twofold counterproductive effect of the “card stacking” practice of journalists and editors is, first, a lack
of a healthy, unbiased self-assessment, and, second, a readership that consciously or not may be
predisposed to accept only what sociologist James M. Henslin calls a “one-sided version of reality.” In this
sense, Spanish-language advocacy journalism might be causing more damage than benefit to the people
it serves.
Aligning an editorial line with a social cause or movement represents a parallelism that may be justified in
terms of defending unalienable human rights and dignity, in essence, a noble endeavor. This parallelism
should not mean, however, that Spanish-language media, and furthermore, its readership and the
community in general, may not have equal access to a diverse array of opinions, in favor or not, which
are necessary to stimulate a democratic process. Most important, it is essential to present the truth as a
standard to measure successes and failures, even when the truth pinpoints negative or unfavorable
aspects. This requires a willingness to be bluntly honest, but leads to a cathartic analysis, and to a more
positive and beneficial outcome than the one achieved by omitting some aspects of the truth, negative
aspects of the truth, or the truth entirely.
Spanish-language media editors and journalists should be able to recognize that eagerness to present
opposing views, and the reality from different viewpoints and perspectives, will stimulate critical thinking
in their readers, as well as widen their opinions and attitudes toward issues or topics of which they may
have a narrow or limited outlook. If readers can view issues from different aspects and angles, their
understanding will be deeper. They may confirm or modify their opinions, but their decision to do so will
be an individual conclusion, and will take their standing on a more solid foundation.
Dr. Azocar believes “people should be given information to help them decide. But facts and figures from
certain organizations are often collected in a way to prove that their cause is correct. I think the best
way is to present the facts and figures that give people the most information. If there are competing
figures from other organizations than those should be presented to.”
Dr. Marin states that the role of journalists “is to provide an interpretation and point of view and
let…readers decide whether to agree or disagree with (their) interpretation and they can choose to
present another point of view or perspective of that event. The work of historians and journalists are
usually subject to criticism and evaluation and reinterpretation anyway. The responsibility of the historian
is to present a fair and objective interpretation of an event that may become historical over time.
Readers of the works of historians and journalists can choose whether or not to read one’s writings.
Journalists make their statements in their editorials or columns. And historians document their sources
and offer new and different interpretations. Readers can always look up the historian’s sources and re-
interpret the work.”
Pimentel thinks “fairness, accuracy and balance are worthy goals but they are tools in the furtherance of
dispensing truth, giving readers and viewers what they need to make good decisions.”
Elucidating about the importance of presenting different points of view, and the historical resonance
current events might eventually reach, Dr. Marin explains that “historians interpret events and, in the
course of their work, cite the sources used in the interpretation of those events. For example, if I am
going to write an article about the recent immigration demonstration, I will read the works of those who
have written on the event, and cite them in my work. But as a historian, it is my responsibility to be fair
and objective in my assessment of the works of others, present my own interpretation of those events,
and present various points of view and opinions and always cite my sources, regardless of whether I
agree with them or not. I am merely adding to the existing literature on the topic—adding another point
of view or interpretation for the next historian or scholar to digest and consider. I’m not concerned
whether my article advances or doesn’t advance the cause or the so-called “movement”. However, if the
“movement” is paying me to advance their point of view, then my article will be sympathetic to the cause
or movement. Another example: corporations might not always maintain good relationships with their
customers, nor have a good image with the public. To change that, corporations will hire a historian to
write their company’s history, and the historian will present that company’s history to the public in a
positive manner. It’s done all the time. It’s called propaganda history.”
Dr. Marin’s analysis brings up yet another aspect of Spanish-language advocacy journalism. Many of
these newspapers are distributed free of cost for readers, and depend entirely on the financial support
of paid advertising. Most of these newspapers are not able to afford but a weekly or monthly
distribution. Since they are provided to the readers at no cost, they can be sustained only through the
revenue generated by advertisers. If advertisers cease to buy space, these newspapers will cease to be
published.
This can be also true for newspapers that have a daily and paid circulation, but still depend to some
extent in advertising. But when a publication’s “funding” –be a newspaper or a magazine– comes from
advertisers, advertisers are their virtual publishers, since they make possible the production and
distribution costs. Therefore, these “publishers” may influence an editorial line, dictate the content and
the layers of truth allowed, and of course, to press for including or omitting facts or information that may
be counterproductive to their philosophy, interests, or products. This has caused the line dividing
advertising from news and information to become very blurred and in some cases even inexistent.
Without a doubt, contemporary Spanish-language media’s mission will continue serving as a vehicle of
advocacy for a growing Spanish-speaking population. Within the context of the current immigration
debate, the enduring struggle of thousands of human beings in search of a better life, or any future and
likely social cause, editors and journalists of Spanish-language or English-language Latino-oriented
publications, should strive to shape a more egalitarian readership, based on the same ideals that sustain
the democratic ideals of the United States.
Publications not written in English that serve a specific ethnic group, have the responsibility to advocate
for those less privileged sectors of the population that wouldn’t have otherwise a voice and a tribune to
be heard. These types of publications have a noble and challenging cause. Therefore, they should use
employ the same standard to present both their failures and their accomplishments. Not to be afraid to
face the truth, even when the truth points out to their necessity to learn and improve. And use the same
ruler they use to measure others to measure themselves.
during the month of March of 2006, Gillian Flaccus, an Associated Press writer wrote a story that was
widely published in many print and electronic media outlets. Flaccus, AP’s diversity and religion reporter
for Southern California, was far from revealing a new trend. However, for most of mainstream America,
he exposed the mobilizing power behind the unprecedented and multitudinous marches of Latinos –
particularly undocumented immigrants.
In his article, Flaccus establishes that “for English-speaking America, the mass protests in Los Angeles
and other U.S. cities over the past few days have been surprising for their size and seeming spontaneity.
But they were organized, promoted, or publicized for weeks by Spanish-language radio hosts and TV
anchors as a demonstration of Hispanic pride and power.”
Flaccus’ observation was not only far from being inaccurate; it captured the open and wide support that
historically has been the main characteristic of Spanish-language media in the United States, as well as
its advocacy role for the Mexican-American and Latino population. Perhaps the Associated Press writer
was not entirely aware of this traditional function of Spanish-language media, but was definitely correct
in crediting what has been, and is in essence, a powerful force behind the current push for immigration
reform.
Even though these actions and the media's role in promoting them may appear new to many, the
relationship between Spanish-language media and the Latino population’s struggle for civil rights has a
long history of interaction and involvement. Therefore, the pro-immigrant rallies can be considered the
most recent link in a chain of events that spans for more than 100 years.
Historian Christine Marin cautions new generations to “not assume that the current call for immigration
reform is a new phenomenon in the Southwest. Since the early 1900s…Mexican immigrants made great
attempts to fight for their labor, political, economic and human rights and have made great sacrifices to
achieve the American Dream of education, success and home ownership.”
Dr. Marin, a Curator and Archivist of the Chicano/a Research Collection at Arizona State University,
believes that what some observers consider an emerging social movement, is a recent expression of that
continued struggle for rights: “The marches and rallies you see occurring in the Southwest and
elsewhere are manifestations of a civil rights movement, a socio-economic movement, a political
movement, and a human rights movement.”
One of these attempts Dr. Marin refers to, the creation in 1894 of the “Alianza Hispano Americana,”
sheds light in understanding how and why Spanish-language media become an instrument of advocacy
in the pursuit of social justice.
According to another historian, Dr. Manuel G. Gonzales, the Alianza Hispano Americana “functioned as a
mutual aid and benefit society…Primarily, however, the Alianza was a defense organization.” Dr.
Gonzales, professor of history at Diablo Valley College in California, establishes that the Alianza was
created as a response to the fact that “people of Mexican descent in Tucson were beginning to suffer the
same prejudice and discrimination as the Mexican Americans in other parts of the Southwest.”
Relevant to the objective of this essay, and fundamental to understand the role of Spanish-language
media in the context of social causes, is the work of an “Alianza Hispano Americana’s” key member, and
its first president, Carlos I. Velasco. Not coincidentally, Velasco was by then the publisher and editor of
“El Fronterizo,” a Spanish-language newspaper he had founded twelve years earlier.
“El Fronterizo” was a four-page weekly published for a period of thirty-seven years, dealing particularly
with politics, industry, and commerce, but in the Velasco’s words, it was essentially a vehicle of advocacy
in the Mexicans’ search for civil rights. In the second issue of this historic newspaper, Velasco clarified his
editorial position when he wrote that “the Fronterizo will establish itself as a zealous defender of the
interests of the Mexican people in both countries, expressing their point of view and directing their
initiative along the path leading to their moral perfection and material progress.”
Dr. Gonzales also asserts that “Velasco employed his newspaper to combat negative stereotypes of his
people,” thus defining the main characteristic of “El Fronterizo,” and of American Spanish-language press
as well, as a strategic tool for the “defense of the Mexican population from Anglo abuse.” Velasco’s
publication was not an isolated approach but rather a consistent trend of Mexican and Mexican American
journalism.
This tendency is widely analyzed by Gabriel Meléndez, Professor and Chairman of the Department of
American Studies at the University of New Mexico, in his book “Spanish-Language Newspapers in New
Mexico, 1834-1958.” Meléndez views Spanish-language newspapers as cultural productions, and the
work of their editors, as an organized movement against cultural exclusion in the midst of the massive
arrival of easterners to the Southwest.
The Spanish-language media traditional characteristics of advocacy and alliance have vehemently
surfaced as a constant in contemporary societies. The recent mobilization of millions of immigrants –both
documented and undocumented– have recreated again the social scenario where this relationship
between a social cause and its treatment in Spanish-language media can be seen more clearly and
fervently expressed.
“There does seem to be a tradition of advocacy among Spanish language newspapers that might seem
out of place in mainstream journalism,” said O. Ricardo Pimentel, editor of the Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel's editorial page. Pimentel, a longtime journalist and former columnist and member of The Arizona
Republic’s editorial board, affirms that more than anything, “Spanish-language media, like news media
everywhere, should serve as an ally of truth. Often truth can seem like advocacy. It's tempting to judge
Spanish-language media against the practices and traditions of mainstream media. We shouldn't mistake
knowing your community and tapping into its concerns and interests necessarily as slanted journalism.”
Pimentel points out that “mainstream journalism often holds itself hostage to ‘balance,’ setting up a
situation in which far too many stories are of the he-said, they-said variety without telling the reader
what is true.” He believes that “addressing concerns of your audience is not necessarily serving as an
ally in a social cause.”
Editors of Spanish-language newspapers around the country communicate this advocacy and alliance
role consciously. However, there may not be a complete awareness of the extent of the effects –positive
and negative– that an open editorial line of support for the undocumented immigrants’ cause may
generate.
David Ramirez, Metro news editor and columnist for El Diario/La Prensa, a New York newspaper with a
daily circulation of more than 80,000 copies, considers that “part of the spirit of the media as such, is to
support and to motivate every cause or social movement that it is sustained in principles of solidarity,
respect to the Human Rights, and so forth. In the particular case of Spanish-language media and the
(immigrants’) movement, I believe that it fits what I mentioned above. Therefore, my criterion is that we
have to be allies of this movement.”
Dr. Cristina L. Azocar, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Journalism at the San Francisco State University said
“I’m not sure if an ally would be a correct way to serve —or at least the word doesn’t work. To me, it
serves as an informant on the social cause –the pros and cons, the process, etc. It can definitely take a
pro or con stance also in the editorial stance of the outlet.”
Spanish-language media’s concern to express an advocacy role in the undocumented immigrant’s cause,
as an example, may be a valid approach, but evidently it has also developed a trend to present only
positive information of what it supports and only negative information of what it opposes. This technique
is what seven decades ago, sociologists Alfred and Elizabeth Lee identified as one of the seven “tricks of
the trade” of propaganda. The Lee’s coined the term “card stacking” to refer to the practice of making
something sound as though there is only one conclusion that a rational person can draw.
Regarding this propagandistic approach to journalism, Professor Azocar, who is also the Director of the
Center for Integration and Improvement of Journalism in San Francisco, California, said “I don’t believe in
self-censorship and I do believe that a social movement should have all the information possible to
actually move, otherwise, what do you gain? People are smart enough to realize that with every
movement and every gain there will be areas of fall back —but this helps us remember where we came
from and what we still need to overcome and deal with. People can use the damaging information to
show that they are not ignorant and willing to consider both the benefits and negative possible
outcomes.”
Pimentel sees this as “a matter of intellectual honesty and integrity. Intellectual honesty and integrity
would demand that the story or opinion piece deal with the counter-arguments, if only to knock them
down. The best editorials, for instance, are those that target the folks who are likely to disagree. They
are far more persuasive because they are built on reasonable argument. The best stories are those that
offer a variety of views, but ultimately truth as well.”
For Ramirez, “good journalism, this is to say, one that is based on ethics, should not conceal or distort
facts. I ratify that in the concrete case of the immigrants’ movement, and as an immigrant (from Ecuador)
myself…it is not necessary to take the path of suppressing truthful information.”
For some readers, the effect of a pro or con posture in Spanish-media language provokes different
feelings. For Jesus Aguirre, Spanish-language newspapers “need to be truthful, and present the reality,
but not reality in their own way. They should neither focus too much in the positive nor the negative.
They need to be neutral and to inform us, but also give us more ideas.”
A naturalized U.S. citizen, Aguirre emigrated from Mexico to Chicago in the early sixties, where he resided
many years before moving to Phoenix. An avid reader of Spanish-language publications, particularly
weekly newspapers, Aguirre said, “I love the news, but I think newspapers should have more variety,
and not publish so much information on the same topic. You see it right now, with the immigrants’
movement.”
For Aguirre, a longtime State of Arizona employee, the most important mission newspapers should
pursue is to present the truth. “When I read newspapers, I don’t want to feel like I am reading the
cowboy’s stories I used to read as a boy; newspapers need to say things as they are,” he concluded.
For another reader, whose name will keep anonymous, taking a con stance may be counterproductive,
specially coming from a Latino publication. In an opinion expressed through e-mail, the reader refers to a
Barriozona Magazine’s article titled “A day without…significant effect.” The article presented information
that made evident the shortcomings of what was intended to have a dramatic and greater effect, in
terms of showing the purchasing power of Latinos through an economic boycott.
“I would have preferred…that you'd chosen not to say anything about this particular topic, because the
bigots love reading that it was a failure, especially from another Latino. It gives them a good excuse to
continue to justify their warped thinking.” this reader wrote.
The reasoning behind this reader’s wish is that while “I agree with you…the difference is that I would
never publicize it for all the anti-immigrant world to see. I was one of your readers and was merely
expressing to you that reading your article made me wish you had not written it, even if in my heart I
agreed with some of the points you made.”
Aiming to further advance the immigrants’ call for immigration reform, or any other cause, the traditional
position of contemporary Spanish-language media may be accomplishing its goal, but apparently has let
many readers, activists, and other key people in the community, under the impression that means of
communication presenting factual information, which people perceive as not favorable to a cause or
movement, are antagonists to the same cause or movement.
A twofold counterproductive effect of the “card stacking” practice of journalists and editors is, first, a lack
of a healthy, unbiased self-assessment, and, second, a readership that consciously or not may be
predisposed to accept only what sociologist James M. Henslin calls a “one-sided version of reality.” In this
sense, Spanish-language advocacy journalism might be causing more damage than benefit to the people
it serves.
Aligning an editorial line with a social cause or movement represents a parallelism that may be justified in
terms of defending unalienable human rights and dignity, in essence, a noble endeavor. This parallelism
should not mean, however, that Spanish-language media, and furthermore, its readership and the
community in general, may not have equal access to a diverse array of opinions, in favor or not, which
are necessary to stimulate a democratic process. Most important, it is essential to present the truth as a
standard to measure successes and failures, even when the truth pinpoints negative or unfavorable
aspects. This requires a willingness to be bluntly honest, but leads to a cathartic analysis, and to a more
positive and beneficial outcome than the one achieved by omitting some aspects of the truth, negative
aspects of the truth, or the truth entirely.
Spanish-language media editors and journalists should be able to recognize that eagerness to present
opposing views, and the reality from different viewpoints and perspectives, will stimulate critical thinking
in their readers, as well as widen their opinions and attitudes toward issues or topics of which they may
have a narrow or limited outlook. If readers can view issues from different aspects and angles, their
understanding will be deeper. They may confirm or modify their opinions, but their decision to do so will
be an individual conclusion, and will take their standing on a more solid foundation.
Dr. Azocar believes “people should be given information to help them decide. But facts and figures from
certain organizations are often collected in a way to prove that their cause is correct. I think the best
way is to present the facts and figures that give people the most information. If there are competing
figures from other organizations than those should be presented to.”
Dr. Marin states that the role of journalists “is to provide an interpretation and point of view and
let…readers decide whether to agree or disagree with (their) interpretation and they can choose to
present another point of view or perspective of that event. The work of historians and journalists are
usually subject to criticism and evaluation and reinterpretation anyway. The responsibility of the historian
is to present a fair and objective interpretation of an event that may become historical over time.
Readers of the works of historians and journalists can choose whether or not to read one’s writings.
Journalists make their statements in their editorials or columns. And historians document their sources
and offer new and different interpretations. Readers can always look up the historian’s sources and re-
interpret the work.”
Pimentel thinks “fairness, accuracy and balance are worthy goals but they are tools in the furtherance of
dispensing truth, giving readers and viewers what they need to make good decisions.”
Elucidating about the importance of presenting different points of view, and the historical resonance
current events might eventually reach, Dr. Marin explains that “historians interpret events and, in the
course of their work, cite the sources used in the interpretation of those events. For example, if I am
going to write an article about the recent immigration demonstration, I will read the works of those who
have written on the event, and cite them in my work. But as a historian, it is my responsibility to be fair
and objective in my assessment of the works of others, present my own interpretation of those events,
and present various points of view and opinions and always cite my sources, regardless of whether I
agree with them or not. I am merely adding to the existing literature on the topic—adding another point
of view or interpretation for the next historian or scholar to digest and consider. I’m not concerned
whether my article advances or doesn’t advance the cause or the so-called “movement”. However, if the
“movement” is paying me to advance their point of view, then my article will be sympathetic to the cause
or movement. Another example: corporations might not always maintain good relationships with their
customers, nor have a good image with the public. To change that, corporations will hire a historian to
write their company’s history, and the historian will present that company’s history to the public in a
positive manner. It’s done all the time. It’s called propaganda history.”
Dr. Marin’s analysis brings up yet another aspect of Spanish-language advocacy journalism. Many of
these newspapers are distributed free of cost for readers, and depend entirely on the financial support
of paid advertising. Most of these newspapers are not able to afford but a weekly or monthly
distribution. Since they are provided to the readers at no cost, they can be sustained only through the
revenue generated by advertisers. If advertisers cease to buy space, these newspapers will cease to be
published.
This can be also true for newspapers that have a daily and paid circulation, but still depend to some
extent in advertising. But when a publication’s “funding” –be a newspaper or a magazine– comes from
advertisers, advertisers are their virtual publishers, since they make possible the production and
distribution costs. Therefore, these “publishers” may influence an editorial line, dictate the content and
the layers of truth allowed, and of course, to press for including or omitting facts or information that may
be counterproductive to their philosophy, interests, or products. This has caused the line dividing
advertising from news and information to become very blurred and in some cases even inexistent.
Without a doubt, contemporary Spanish-language media’s mission will continue serving as a vehicle of
advocacy for a growing Spanish-speaking population. Within the context of the current immigration
debate, the enduring struggle of thousands of human beings in search of a better life, or any future and
likely social cause, editors and journalists of Spanish-language or English-language Latino-oriented
publications, should strive to shape a more egalitarian readership, based on the same ideals that sustain
the democratic ideals of the United States.
Publications not written in English that serve a specific ethnic group, have the responsibility to advocate
for those less privileged sectors of the population that wouldn’t have otherwise a voice and a tribune to
be heard. These types of publications have a noble and challenging cause. Therefore, they should use
employ the same standard to present both their failures and their accomplishments. Not to be afraid to
face the truth, even when the truth points out to their necessity to learn and improve. And use the same
ruler they use to measure others to measure themselves.
Eduardo Barraza is a journalist and writer,
Barriozona Magazine's editor, and director of
the Hispanic Insitute of Social Issues.
E-mail: editor@barriozona.com
Barriozona Magazine's editor, and director of
the Hispanic Insitute of Social Issues.
E-mail: editor@barriozona.com
| ADVERTISEMENT |
| "Spanish-language print media act as a basic survival guide for immigrants in a hostile world…" Ed Morales - freelance journalist |
| Documented Dreams |
| A collection of letters written by students struggling to continue with their education due to their immigration status. The letters document the socio-economic plight of Arizona immigrant students who were brought to the United States as children, and due to their legal status are forced to abandon college or pay out-of-the state tuition. A fully bilingual book in English and Spanish; includes black and white photographs. $19.95 + $3.99 s/h Total $23.94 |
| ADVERTISEMENT |
Published by the Hispanic Institute of Social Issues in Phoenix, Arizona
| HISTORY IS ABOUT TO CHANGE Grassroots Journalism |
OLD TREND The Spanish-language
media traditional characteristics of
advocacy and alliance have
vehemently surfaced as a constant
in contemporary societies.
Photo by Eduardo Barraza
media traditional characteristics of
advocacy and alliance have
vehemently surfaced as a constant
in contemporary societies.
Photo by Eduardo Barraza
| Barriozona Magazine Founded in 2002 Published by the Hispanic Institute of Social Issues www.hisi.org Contact: admin@barriozona.com |
| follow us |