This Week:

Our legislators are a lot like us - and then some!

The Star Tribune and Iraq, Part 3

Greetings,

Nygaard Notes will be traveling to Nicaragua for the month of February, and part of March. If any of you readers have interesting things to say about the place, please give a call or E-mail. Our itinerary is not set, so we'd love ideas of people to contact, things to check out, and so on. I'm not sure if Nygaard Notes will be published during the trip. Depends on if I have access to E-mail. I'll let you know.

‘Til next week,

Nygaard

Our legislators are a lot like us - and then some!

I have commented on the phenomenon of the "mystery headline," in which the headline of an article in the Star Tribune (Newspaper of the Twin Cities!) seems unrelated to the content of the article. Well, to quote Ronald Reagan, "There they go again." Actually, what I noticed in the Sunday Strib of January 3rd was a different, but related oddity. In the midst of a big article about what to expect from our new state legislature, the Strib devoted a whole page to the issue of representation. The headline: "They represent you, but do they represent you? In lifestyle and personal background, legislators are a lot like the rest of us - and then some."

Accompanying the article was a large chart comparing our state legislators to the rest of Minnesota's adults on a range of factors - "lifestyles" as they said. Here are a few of the things the chart shows us: 54% of Minnesotans consider themselves to be political "Moderates;" for legislators the number is 15%. 48% of Minnesotans have gone to college; 92% of legislators have. In terms of religion, 35% of Minnesotans identify as something other than Christian (including, to my surprise, 17% with "no preference"); 85% of legislators are Christian. 21% of Minnesota's adults earn less than $20,000 per year. Exactly ZERO legislators do, probably because they get paid $31,140 for being legislators. Still, only 23% of legislators make less than $50,000; 59% of Minnesotans fall short of that number. And on it goes.

As I looked at this chart, the legislature didn't seem to me to represent Minnesota very well at all in terms of "lifestyle and personal background." What is notable about the headline of this article is that it is lifted almost exactly from the text. Despite the facts I just mentioned, the author, Robert Whereatt, makes the statement that our legislators "are like us, and then some."

"And then some?" For the life of me, I can't figure out what this means. Does it mean that they are so "like us" that they are more like us than we are? Are they like us in the sense that they are how we would be if we were more like ourselves? Or are we too much like them, so they have to compensate by acting like we should be acting? What is a "lifestyle," anyway? And, who was that masked man?

I have to start thinking of names for these phenomena. "Mystery headline" seems to work for the misleading or oxymoronic headline. But what to call a journalistic interpretation that does not follow from the very facts being reported, as in the current example? "New horizons in objectivity?" "Cognitive dissonance in print?" "You, too, can be a reporter?" I'll keep working on this; it could be a regular feature. Your ideas welcome.

I have been told on numerous occasions that I "think too much," and this has always struck me as an curious sort of criticism. But I admit that I have been thinking about Mr. Whereatt's interpretation of the lifestyles of our legislators, and I always end up laughing. Do I laugh because I think too much? If so, what's wrong with that?

I often end up laughing when I read the Star Tribune (Newspaper of the Twin Cities!) Maybe that's why I love it so. Ha Ha Ha.

Am I thinking too much? I don't know; I'll have to think about it.

The Star Tribune and Iraq: Part 3

Race and Compassion

On the second day of the Star Tribune's coverage of the bombing of Iraq, readers were exposed for the first time to some serious expressions of concern for Iraqi civilians. Notably, every single one of these expressions came from Arab or Arab-American people. Page A23 had three separate articles with a "local angle." One article featured interviews with high school students from the Twin Cities, the second article quoted some Arab citizens visiting the Mayo clinic, and the third featured interviews with local Muslims. In each of these articles, serious concern was expressed for Iraqi civilians, including concern about the effects of the ongoing economic embargo on the population.

These eloquent expressions of compassion were refreshing to read. At the same time, in the overall context of the coverage, it's important to notice the virtual absence of any published concern for Arab lives on the part of Euro-American (i.e. "white") Minnesotans*. Two possible exceptions: a speaker at Thursday's anti-bombing rally was quoted as being concerned about the suffering of Iraqis. However, having been to Iraq in May, she would probably not be seen as representing "typical" Minnesotans. And, in an analysis on Thursday by critic Noel Holston of the TV coverage of the bombing, he remarked on the lack of footage showing any of the real impact of the bombing on the Iraqi people, noting that "[T]he gravity one would associate with war was scarcely in evidence." With these two exceptions, not a single word of compassion for Iraqis was heard from white Minnesotans.

I think this racially-imbalanced coverage sends a dangerous message to the average reader: White people don't care about Arab lives - only other Arabs do. So we are left to wonder if it could be true that compassion stops at the boundary of race.

Racism in the media, or in us?

This racial imbalance could be a problem primarily of the media. In this interpretation, our racial divisions are assumed by reporters and editors to be so deep that comments on Arab suffering are not even sought from "white" Minnesotans. Why not? They can't be expected to give a damn.

It is possible that the problem lies primarily within the larger Euro-American community, or at least those who might have been interviewed, for failing to clearly and forthrightly express their empathy and compassion.

I suspect that "The Case of the Missing Compassion" can only be solved by looking both at the press and at the public. Reporters have a responsibility to seek out a range of opinion, and Euro-Americans have a special responsibility to speak out even if not asked. It's too easy to criticize "the press" for reducing the reality of war to the equivalent of a video game. It's more difficult to take personal responsibility for countering the racist jingoism that leads to and justifies imperial aggression. If white people would like to say they are "anti-racist," there are thousands of opportunities to back it up with actions. Speaking out in war-time is only one such opportunity, but it's an important one. Racism is the lubrication that allows the wheels of war to run smoothly.

A related question arises when looking at the opinion pages during the bombings. With the honorable exception of Sanford Berman's letter to the editor on Friday (His entire letter, as submitted, read: "Now there's an undeniable ground for impeachment: murder."), I couldn't find a single word of compassion on the opinion pages that was authored by a Euro-American Minnesotan. Again, were such letters not written? Or were they not published? Did anyone at the Star Trib contact local anti-imperialists and ask for a commentary? Readers, let me know if they called you or your group.

It's notable that the opinion pages on Saturday, at the height of the bombing, contained not a single word about the bombings, in the letters section or elsewhere.

Outstanding quotes

In closing, let me share a few miscellaneous quotes that appeared in the Star Tribune between December 17th and 21st.

• Star Tribune lead editorial, December 17: "Bombing Saddam: Reason is clear; let attack be sustained"
• In a Washington Post article, the three previous bombings of Iraq since 1991 were referred to as "pinprick strikes."
• Minnesota Governor Arne Carlson's only comment: "Our prayers are for the well-being of all our many young men and women involved in the effort."
• Here is a transmission from Secretary of Defense William Cohen, who has apparently been living on Venus for a few decades: "The world knows that it cannot trust Saddam Hussein. The world also knows that it can trust the United States."

The final three quotes are all from a truly remarkable "analysis" entitled "Removing Saddam is a daunting goal" by Ethan Bronner and Youssef Ibrahim of the New York Times, which the Star Trib published on Sunday:

• "[President Clinton and Congress say that this bombing] was the first salvo in a campaign to remove Saddam and install a government more democratic..." They do not explain how the word "democratic" can possibly be applied to a government that is "installed" by a foreign power. I guess we should appreciate that they are deepening our understanding of the word "oxymoron."
• From the same article: "Any serious new government would have to come from Iraq's professional and middle classes." Why this would be true is not stated.
• And again, commenting on who is suffering under the sanctions: "The urban middle class has truly felt punished." "The urban poor" have not, though, because they "are used to scraping by." Villagers don't suffer, either, because "they can - and do - return to farming."

I may be done writing about Iraq for the moment. Or maybe not. Tune in next week.

* There are important reasons why I sometimes put the word "white" in quotes, and sometimes do not. I'll write about that at some point in a future Nygaard Notes.