web analytics




Currently Browsing: Stereotypes

Covering the Transgender Community Requires Clarity and Sensitivity—Part II

Currently, news outlets are covering the transgender community in a variety of ways. Some examples:

1. News-making transgender individuals, such as this story in The Huffington Post’s “Gay Voices” section about the transgender model Carmen Carrera.

2. Stories about the variety of issues involved in being a transgender person. For example, New York Magazine wrote about parents of transgender children.

3. Transgender individuals as sources in news stories that have nothing to do with transgender living or issues. These are people tapped for their expertise, period. Appropriately, that level of inclusion of the transgender community in news stories may go completely unnoticed by news consumers. In this role, the individuals are sources of information on a particular topic, and their race, ethnicity, age—or sexual orientation or gender status—has nothing to do with their contribution to the article.

Key points to think about when covering the transgender community include:

* Writing for an underrepresented community as opposed to about it. The latter objectifies and distances the people being covered; the former seeks to explain and increase knowledge about a group of people in society.

* Ensuring the most accurate description of a person is used in the news coverage, but that the description is also explained if necessary. Try to avoid ostracizing the news audience with jargon. Illuminate the news audience with clear, concise descriptions.

Here’s a good example to follow: The author of a Rolling Stone article about a rock star in a punk band who is transitioning to a female helps readers understand the terminology (in this case, gender dysphoria), which is presumably foreign to most in the Rolling Stone audience, and also gives the space to allow the profile subject to describe it:

“For as long as he can remember, Gabel has lived with a condition known as gender dysphoria. As the textbooks explain it, it’s a feeling of intense dissatisfaction and disconnect from the gender you were assigned at birth. As Gabel explains it, “The cliché is that you’re a woman trapped in a man’s body, but it’s not that simple. It’s a feeling of detachment from your body and from yourself.”

* Journalists are trained to emphasize a person’s humanity by leading with a person, as in: a person who is deaf or a person who is visually impaired. So too, personhood should be emphasized in coverage of the LGBTQ community. Word choice, as discussed in Chapter 8, The Power of Words and Tone, is essential to educating news consumers concerning a topic about which most have little knowledge.

Here are a couple examples to avoid:

The headline on the online site, AsiaOne.com: “Right to ban transgenders from clubs?”

Or, this New York Daily News headline: “Transgenders win discrimination tiff with American Eagle Outfitters, AG Andrew Cuomo forces changes.”

* “Transgender” is not a noun; it is an adjective, so use it accordingly. One tool for keeping abreast on the terminology for all LGBTQ individuals is the GLAAD Media Reference Guide.


Covering the Transgender Community Requires Clarity and Sensitivity—Part I

An extremely useful discussion can take place in newsrooms and classrooms due to the recent appearance of writer and trans activist Janet Mock, on the primetime CNN interview show, “Piers Morgan Live.”

Perhaps we can stop this post right now, because the hurried, harried reader might have already quit reading, wondering: What is a “trans activist”?

As comedian Steven Colbert said on his show, The Colbert Report, when introducing Mock as a guest: “You see, as a broadcaster, when it comes to transgender issues, I don’t know what I should say to these people. Here to say what I should say to these people, please welcome transgender activist . . . Janet Mock.”

As usual, Colbert nailed it. Yes, journalists’ primary allegiance is to their audience and that means clarity and conciseness. However, in complicated matters of individual identity, gender expression and transitioning from one gender to another, the brevity of news writing does not always serve the laypeople in the news audience or the transgender community being covered.

Which brings me to the Mock-Morgan clash, a true learning moment for all. Mock, the author of the New York Times bestseller Redefining Realness: My Path to Womanhood, Identity, Love & So Much More, appeared on CNN to promote her book. The video is here.

After the interview, Mock tweeted that she was displeased that Morgan repeatedly described her as having been born a boy and that she used to be a man. Mock posted on her Facebook account that she and fellow transgender woman, actress Laverne Cox, “did not appreciate the lack of nuance in framing my story.”

Mock asserted that Morgan’s persistence in differentiating between the before and after of her surgical changes missed the nuanced point that she was female long before she physically took on female characteristics. This can be difficult to convey quickly in a headline or a news story, but it is important to maintain the goal of accurately representing a source.

Twitter_JanetMock

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Morgan’s response was anger that Mock hadn’t said anything to correct his depiction of her during their interview, which both agreed was a pleasant exchange. Morgan said he didn’t think he had said anything offensive or inaccurate during the interview but had emphasized his support of Mock’s identity and her work. Morgan insists he is an ally, supportive of Mock and a champion of equality for LGBTQ people. Here was his Tweet in response to the maelstrom of criticism he received from Mock supporters and the transgender community:

Twitter_LGBT

 

 

 

 

 

 

Morgan invited Mock to return to the show to sort out the terminology and her reaction. If you don’t have much time, watch this second appearance as opposed to the first interview. It highlights the perspectives of both journalist and source in a head-to-head exchange:

In addition, Morgan invited three guests on a later show to critique the interview and his performance. Each guest had a different take on what went wrong and right during the interview. Watch a portion here, or simply read a quick text recap at the same link.

Take a moment to think about the perspectives presented in both of the exchanges. What points do you agree with and why? What lessons are to be learned here? What stereotypes or clichés come to your mind with the topic of transgendered individuals? Try to identify your personal attitudes about this group of people; then, take the next step of addressing how you would combat unfair or biased attitudes when reporting on the transgender community. (For tips in identifying and managing stereotypes, “Ch. 4, Story Without Stereotype, may be helpful.)

Journalists can find their way through this changing landscape with a few basic tools:

* First, the Associated Press, among other style guides, advises journalists to use the pronoun preferred by the source. If no preference is given or available, then use the pronoun that reflects the gender that the person lives publicly.

* Second, always ask a source how they want to be described. If the person goes by a different name than the one on their birth certificate, use it. Madonna, Cher, Lady Gaga and other celebrities get that treatment. (In legal and crime cases, a full legal name is necessary to report the story and track the documents.)

* Third, get educated. Read up on the LGBTQ community and its issues, including proposed laws, demographics, crime stats against community members, economic issues and more.

* Fourth, only mention where the person is in his or her medical transition process if it is relevant to the story. Move beyond the before-and-after coverage of transgendered individuals. Capture their humanity in their daily living and focus on what makes them the subject of a news story in the first place.

Journalists’ first service is to their readers/viewers/listeners. Dean Baquet, the managing editor of the New York Times emphasized this when explaining that the news outlet’s decision, initially at least, was to continue using the name Pfc. Bradley Manning. Manning, who was convicted of releasing classified U.S. government documents, announced a day after the court sentencing that she was a female and requested to be called Chelsea Manning.

“Generally speaking we call people by their new name when they ask us to, and when they actually begin their new lives. In this case we made the judgment readers would be totally confused if we turned on a dime overnight and changed the name and gender of a person in the middle of a major running news story. That’s not a political decision. It is one aimed at our primary constituency—our readers.”

The Times shortly after adopted the policy of using the “she” pronoun and the wording “Chelsea Manning, formerly known as Pfc. Bradley Manning.” But in the midst of an ongoing news story, clarity ruled.


One man, one execution, many descriptions

Edgar Tamayo was described in many ways in the hours preceding and following his execution by the state of Texas. The range of descriptors assigned to him captures the range of interpretations of his story.

In reading these descriptions, it is telling to note the news source, whether is U.S.-based or Mexican-based or somewhere else altogether, and how Tamayo is presented. In each case, the headlines and leads are enough to get the sense of how his story is being framed: Tamayo as a convicted cop killer or Tamayo as victim denied his rights.

These various descriptors highlight the power of words as discussed in Chapter 8 of Overcoming Bias, as well as the notion of perspective — U.S. or Mexican or global — that is discussed throughout the book. Consider the “Fault Lines” of race/ethnicity and geography discussed in Ch. 1, Context, Culture and Cognition, when looking over these examples:

  • “Cop Killer In Texas, Edgar Tamayo, Given A Heroes Burial In Mexico”

headline from The Global Dispatch (an online news site)

  • “Mexican man executed in Texas for killing a police officer is given a hero’s burial in his home town”

“The 46-year-old Mexican was controversially executed in Texas less than two weeks ago for the killing of a Houston police officer in 1994, despite outrage from human rights groups and last minute appeals from his lawyers for clemency on the grounds that Tamayo was mentally disabled.”

– headline and lead from the UK’s Daily Mail

  • “Texas executes Mexican national after Supreme Court rejects appeal”

“Texas executed Edgar Tamayo Wednesday night after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an 11th-hour appeal to keep the Mexican national from death at Huntsville State Penitentiary in Texas. Tamayo, 46, was convicted of fatally shooting Houston police Officer Guy Gaddis in 1994.”

– headline and lead from AlJazeera America

  • “The US state of Texas has executed a Mexican for murder, despite objections from the US and Mexican governments.”

– lead from the BBC News

  • “HUNTSVILLE, Texas (AP) A Mexican national has been executed in Texas for killing a Houston police officer, despite pleas and diplomatic pressure from the Mexican government and the U.S. State Department to halt the punishment.”

– lead in The New Zealand Herald, which used an Associated Press story.

  • “EU High Representative, Catherine Ashton, has condemned the execution of Edgar Tamayo Arias in the US state of Texas. Tamayo was on death row for killing a police officer in Houston, Texas in 1994. The Mexican government also said that his execution violated international law.”

– the lead from NewEurope (which describes itself as “the European Political Newspaper that mainly publishes and discusses news concerning EU politics and issues”).


Use Clear Language to Avoid Stigmatizing Victims in Child Sex Abuse Cases

The power of words to imply unintended meanings or perpetuate stereotypes is evident in the wake of the trial of Jerry Sandusky, a retired assistant football coach at Pennsylvania State University under the late Joe Paterno. On June 22, Sandusky was found guilty of 45 of the 48 charges of sexual abuse of young boys over a 15-year period. Adding to the difficulty of providing thorough, sensitive coverage of child sex abuse is that the language of criminal cases can obfuscate the horror of what really happened. Here are some points to consider:

  • Good news writing should find ways to simplify and state clearly what happened to a minor who is the victim of sexual abuse.

You can see examples of problematic and appropriate language used in a real court cases at the Judicial Language Project website. The goal of the Judicial Language Project is “to identify ways in which the language used in legal opinions perpetuates stereotypes and stigmatizes victims, diminishing the severity of what happened,” according to the group’s website.  The project is part of the Center for Law and Social Responsibility at New England Law/Boston. The project “seeks to open the dialog about inappropriate language in appellate level sexual assault cases and offer alternatives.”

The site is understandably graphic in its language of court rulings that used language that implied consent or pleasure on the part of a minor who was a victim of sexual abuse or assault. The site identifies problematic language in a variety of court rulings, focusing particularly on the notion that children should not be described as having engaged in any action of their own volition.

The appropriate language proposed seeks to clearly demonstrate the one-sided and non-consensual nature of a defendant’s actions.

In addition, a list of useful sites (including the Judicial Language Project) for reporters covering sexual abuse cases involving children is offered at Poynter Institute’s News University. At this site, you’ll find resources on definitions, experts and statistics.

  • Good news writing balances all perspectives.

Overcoming Bias discusses the need to avoid stigmatizing news sources by emphasizing fairness and seeking out the perspectives of all the major players involved in a news event — in this case, the victims, their families and the perpetrators (Chapter 5: “Understanding Culture, Understanding Sources”). To explore this further, download the presentation from Kelly McBride, Truth and Fairness When Reporting on Child Sexual Abuse,” available on Poynter’s News University website. It covers using your ethical journalism tools to ensure that your coverage of sex abuse is fair, doesn’t perpetuate stereotypes and shields victims.


Just in Time for the Fall Election News Frenzy

For practicing journalists in newsrooms and for student journalists learning to avoid misinformation, here’s an excellent resource: “Misinformation and Fact-Checking: Research Findings from Social Science” by Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler.

It’s a research paper for the Media Policy Initiative of the New America Foundation; the link will bring you to a Columbia Journalism Review article about the report as well as a link to download a PDF copy of the report.

Don’t let the “research paper” title fool you. This 28-page document is readable (skimmable if you have to) and loaded with understandable recaps of research findings, pithy graphics and news media examples that deal with “the prevalence of misinformation in contemporary politics,” as the document summary states.

Below is a verbatim list from the document listing the social science findings detailed in the paper. When applicable, I’ve noted the chapter in parentheses from Overcoming Bias (OB) that complements or discusses the findings:

Summary of social science findings

  • Information deficits: (OB Chapter 2: “Habits of Thought”) Factual information can change policy preferences, but the effect is not consistent. Information seems to be most effective in shaping preferences about government spending. One drawback to these studies is that they generally do not directly measure changes in misperceptions.
  • Motivated reasoning: (OB Chapter 7: “Critical Decisions Before Deadline”) People’s evaluations of new information are shaped by their beliefs. Misperceptions seem to generally reflect sincere beliefs. Information that challenges these beliefs is generally unwelcome and can prompt a variety of compensatory responses. As a result, corrections are sometimes ineffective and can even backfire.
  • Ad watches: Studies examining campaign ad watch stories reached conflicting conclusions about the effectiveness of these segments.
  • Belief perseverance and continued influence: (OB Chapter 3: “Encountering the News”) Once a piece of information is encoded in memory, it can be very difficult to eliminate its effects on subsequent attitudes and beliefs.
  • Sources matter: (OB Chapter 5: “Understanding Culture, Understanding Sources”) The source of a given statement can have a significant effect on how the claim is interpreted. People are more receptive to sources that share their party affiliation or values and those that provide unexpected information.
  • Negations, affirmations, and fluency: (OB Chapter 8: “The Power of Words and Tone”) Attempts to correct false claims can backfire via two related mechanisms. First, repeating a false claim with a negation (e.g., “John is not a criminal”) leads people to more easily remember the core of the sentence (“John is a criminal”). Second, people may use the familiarity of a claim as a heuristic for its accuracy. If the correction makes a claim seem more familiar, the claim may be more likely to be seen as true.
  • Identity and race: (OB Chapter 1: “Context, Culture and Cognition”) When information about race or social identity is salient, it can undermine the effectiveness of corrections about public figures from different racial or cultural backgrounds.
  • Threats to control: When people feel a lack of control, they compensate with strategies that lead to greater acceptance of misperceptions.
  • Visuals: (OB Chapter 6: “Training the Reporter’s Eye”) Graphics may be an effective way to present corrective information about quantitative variables. However, graphical representations of the accuracy of political statements were found to have no effect on factual knowledge.

 


« Previous Entries

Powered by WordPress | Designed by Elegant Themes