NATIVE AMERICANS

NATIVE AMERICANS

Clearly the most mistreated groups in the history of the North America, Native Americans were largely the object of extermination campaigns in the 18th and 19th centuries. Today they comprise less than 1% of the U.S. population, with one third living below the official poverty line. Stereotyped negative images have been pervasive in both news and entertainment media throughout U.S. history (Bird, 1996, 1999; Merskin, 1998; Weston, 1996). By far the best known image is the bloodthirsty and savage Indian of old movies and early television. Westerns were one of the most popular genres of television and movies through the early 1960s. Indians were usually depicted as vicious killers and, at their very best, as lovable but simple, slow- witted sidekicks to European American men, for example, Tonto and the Lone Ranger (Morris, 1982). Some of the stereotypical behaviors actually came from others; for example, “scalping” was performed by European Americans on Native Americans rather than the reverse. Later, slightly more serious portrayals of Indian men were most often the “doomed warrior” or “wise elder” characters (Bird, 1999). For the most part, when Westerns declined in popularity, Native Americans disappeared from the screen altogether. When Mastro and Greenberg (2000) did their content analysis of the 1996–1997 prime-time TV season, they found no examples of Native American characters at all! There have very occasionally been the

75 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication

exceptional characters such as those on Northern Exposure and Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman in the 1990s.

Although there are 555 officially recognized Native American tribes today, those who have appeared in the media (usually in Westerns) were almost always Plains Indians, and behaviors like living in teepees and hunting buffalo came to be identified with all Native Americans, although they were no more characteristic of the northeastern Iroquois or northwest Tlingits than they were of the English or Africans. The overemphasis on Plains Indian peoples is still seen in a few more recent and otherwise non- traditional films like Dances With Wolves (1990), Thunderheart (1992), and Geronimo (1993). Women seldom appeared, and when they did, they were passive and rather dull background figures. The powerful women in matriarchal societies like the Navajo and Mohawk have never been seen on TV or film. Most media Indians are seen in the historical setting of Westerns; the few modern characters are usually presented as militant activists or alcoholics. There is hardly any Native American news and what does appear is usually about land claims litigation or Indian-run casinos. Without a large national constituency, substantial change may come only from Native American film and television production (Geiogamah & Pavel, 1993).

Given this situation, there is great confusion in the socialization process for Native American children. There is almost a complete lack of non-Plains Indian role models. When Native American children play cowboys and Indians, they are as likely as Whites to want to play the cowboys (i.e., the good guys).

To add to the confusion, one of the few places that Native American ethnic identity appears in mainstream culture is in the names of school and professional sports teams that have nothing to do with their heritage. A currently very controversial issue in many places is the use of Native American names and themes for U.S. sports teams (Atlanta Braves, Kansas City Chiefs, Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians). Although the most visible examples are names of professional teams, the same issue exists at a local level, where many high schools and colleges use Indian names and mascots. Mostly named many years ago, before much consciousness of ethnic stereotyping existed, such labels probably arose to suggest the strong, fighting, even savage nature associated with the Indian image from Westerns.

Now it is time, argue many, to replace these names with others that do not demean any ethnic or racial group or co-opt and cheapen its cultural symbols (Pewewardy, 1999; Springwood & King, 2001). The issue first came to a head during the 1991 baseball World Series. Fans of the Atlanta Braves had

a hand motion called the tomahawk chop to support their team. Critics argued that the use of comparable symbols or names from any other minority

Media Portrayals of Groups 76

group would not be tolerated; could one seriously imagine teams called the Chicago Jews, Washington Wetbacks, or the Dallas Orientals, although we do have the Notre Dame Fighting Irish and the Minnesota Vikings?

As of the early 21st century, many high school teams and a few college teams (though almost no pro teams) had changed their names or mascots, but old traditions die hard. Sometimes circumstances prevail to make change especially difficult. For example, when the controversy arose at the University of North Dakota’s “Fighting Sioux” mascot late in 2000, the President convened a commission to study the issue and make recommendations to him. Before its work was complete, however, the school’s major alumnus donor, Las Vegas casino mogul Ralph Engelstad, wrote a letter threatening to withdraw his latest $100 million gift for a luxurious hockey arena already under construction if the school dropped the Sioux mascot. Shortly after, the state Board of Higher Education issued a unanimous pre-emptive strike to keep the name, and the money (Brownstein, 2001).

However, others were taking stands. For example, the Portland Oregonian (1992), the state’s largest daily, the Lincoln (NE) Journal Star (2003), and several papers near the University of North Dakota announced they would no longer publish names or nicknames of sports teams that used racial or ethnic stereotypes. The teams would hereafter be referred to only by their city or school. Some radio stations or broadcasters in different places have similar policies. Predictably, many called the whole flap much ado about nothing, but Native Americans were almost uniformly pleased. This controversy is not going away.

The history of oppression of the native peoples is by no means unique to North America. They have been similarly marginalized in Australia, New Zealand, and European-oriented Latin American countries like Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Uruguay, and Costa Rica. An interesting exception to this pattern is Mexico, which, unlike the rest of North America, has always had a very large urban indigenous population. At the time of the Spanish conquest in 1521, the Aztec capital Tenochtitlán was one of the world’s most populous cities. In spite of early severe oppression by the Spanish conquistadors, the Indian identity has come to be fused with the Spanish into

a unique culture that is the essence of modern Mexico. It is the last Aztec ruler, Cuauhtémoc, not the conquering Spaniard Cortez, who is the Mexican national hero.