Toward an Empirical Analysis of Hate Speech in Commercial Talk Radio

HARVARD JOURNAL OF HISPANIC POLICY

VOLUME 25, 2012-2013

AN HKS STUDENT PUBLICATION www.harvardhispanic.org Twitter: @HarvardHispanic STAFF LIST 2012-2013 Octavio González Editor-In-Chief

Printed on responsibly harvested, Dante Pérez agency-certified paper containing 50% Marcos Valdez post-consumer recycle content Managing Editors Cynthia Thaler Associate Publisher for Board Relations

Donations provided in support of the Monica Garcia Associate Publisher for Marketing and journal are tax deductible as a non- Distribution profit gift under Harvard University’s Senior Editor for Web Content IRS 501 (c) (3) status. Contributions should specify “for use only by the Juan Salazar Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy” in Stephanie Oviedo Senior Editors for Articles and Features order to facilitate the required account- ing procedures. Jesus Davila Senior Editor for Book Reviews All views expressed in the Harvard Javier Oliver Journal of Hispanic Policy are those of Senior Editor for Commentaries the authors or interviewees only and Anne Y. Kim do not represent the views of Harvard Senior Editor for Print and Web Inter- University, the John F. Kennedy School views of Government at Harvard University, the staff of theHarvard Journal of Ernesto Umaña Senior Editor for Special Content Hispanic Policy, the Executive Advi- sory Board of the Harvard Journal of Melissa Flores Hispanic Policy, or any associates of the Senior Editor for Art Content journal. Mark Diaz Truman Alberto Auidifaz González, Jr. © 2013 by the President and Fellows Julian López of Harvard College. All rights re- Senior Editors-At-Large served. Except as otherwise specified, Martha Foley no article or portion herein is to be Publisher reproduced or adapted to other works without the expressed written consent Richard Parker of the editors of the Harvard Journal of Faculty Advisor Hispanic Policy. ii ■ The Honorable Grace Flores- Hughes SPONSORS American Author and Vice President, F&H 2 Inc. The Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy (ISSN ISSN 0892-6115) is funded entirely Alma L. Guajardo-Crossley through subscriptions and contributions. Director, Corporate Diversity, General The John F. Kennedy School of Govern- Motors ment at Harvard University provides Tony Jimenez only in-kind assistance due to an official President & CEO, MicroTech policy that prohibits funding student- coordinated publications. We would like Edwin Meléndez to thank the following sponsors who have Professor of Urban Affairs and Planning; made the publication of our twenty-fifth Director of the Center for Puerto Rican volume possible: Studies, Hunter College Robert S. Nelsen Office of Dean David Ellwood- President, University of Texas-Pan The Executive Advisory Board American of the Harvard Journal of Hilda H. Polanco Hispanic Policy Founder and Managing Director, Fiscal Management Associates, LLC Henry A.J. Ramos Principal, Mauer Kunst Consulting EXECUTIVE ADVISORY Dr. Carlos Santiago Senior Deputy Commissioner for BOARD Academic Affairs, Massachusetts James R. Carr Department of Higher Education Chair, Executive Advisory Board Roberto Suro Genoveva L. Arellano Director of the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute; Professor, School of Policy, Principal, Arellano Associates Planning and Development, University Kenneth C. Burt of Southern California Political Director, California Federation of Teachers Sylvia M. Zaldivar-Sykes Executive Director, The Lake County Alejandra Campoverdi Community Foundation Senior Advisor, Innovation and Communications Strategy, Univision Dr. Gabriela Baeza Ventura Associate Professor, US Latin@ Network News Literature; Director of Graduate Alfredo Estrada Studies, Department of Hispanic Editor, Latino Magazine Studies University of Houston Marlene L. Garcia Manager, Strategic Initiatives Group, Apple Education, Apple Inc

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■■ iiiiii CONTENTS

2 Editor’s Note Octavio González

COMMENTARIES 5 La Gente Unida Jamás Será Vencida: The Power of Changing Demographics in the 2012 Elections and Beyond by Katherine Culliton-González 15 STEM, Shoots, and Leaves: Increasing Access of Underrepresented Groups to High-Quality, Career-Readying Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education by Chelsea Martinez

SPECIAL CONTENT 27 Anatomy of a Community’s Coming of Age by Henry A. J. Ramos 35 Borderlands: U.S.-Mexican Border Policy in Pictures by Maria Davydenko

FEATURED ARTICLES 49 When English Is Not Enough: Escamilla v. Cuello by Donathan L. Brown 69 Toward an Empirical Analysis of Hate Speech on Commercial Talk Radio by Chon A. Noriega and Francisco Javier Iribarren

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ v CONTENTS FORMER EDITORS

97 The Importance of Preparing Teachers to Educate Vulnerable Populations by Blanchi Roblero

BOOK REVIEWS 118 The Search for Kitsch: A Review of The Riddle of Cantinflas: Essays on Hispanic Popular Culture by Ilan Stavans Reviewed by Jesus Davila 121 Self-Reflection and Discovery: A Review of Mi Voz, Mi Vida: Latino College Students Tell Their Life Stories Edited by Andrew Garrod, Robert Kilkenny, and Christina Gómez Reviewed by Anthony R. Jimenez, President and CEO, MicroTech

ART CONTENT 26 A Struggle for Every Generation by Daniel González 29 Justice Has No Borders by Henry A. J. Ramos 33 Infusion 34 Freedom Battle by Ray Rosario 68 El Soldado by Eric J. Garcia 117 Materia Prima by Antonio Pazaran

vi ■ FEATURE ARTICLE

TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH ON COMMERCIAL TALK RADIO by Chon A. Noriega and Francisco Javier Iribarren

Chon A. Noriega is professor of Cinema and Media Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, where he is also director of the Chicano Studies Research Center. He is the author of Shot in America: Television, the State, and the Rise of Chicano Cin- ema and a coauthor of Phantom Sightings: Art After The Chicano Movement and L.A. Xicano. He is currently completing a book-length study of Puerto Rican multimedia art- ist Raphael Montañez Ortiz and a longitudinal study of online and social media strategies among nearly 180 art museums in the United States. Noriega has edited anthologies on Latino, Mexican, and Latin American cinema, as well as the collected works of Car- melita Tropicana and Harry Gamboa Jr. Since 1996, he has been the editor of Aztlán: A Journal of Chicano Studies. He is the editor of three book series as well as the Chicano Cinema & Media Arts DVD series.

Francisco Javier Iribarren is the assistant director of the UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center. He also teaches in the Department of Social Welfare and serves FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN in the Spanish Speaking Psychosocial Introduction Clinic at UCLA. Iribarren is a coauthor of “Salivary Biomarkers in Psychobiological he considerable and often heat- ed debate over hate speech has Medicine,” published in Bioinformation, produced numerous reports, and “A Family Intervention to Reduce Tarticles, and books. These studies have Sexual Risk Behavior, Substance Use, and looked at the issue from a number of Delinquency Among Newly Homeless disciplinary perspectives, including Youth,” published in the Journal of Ado- those of journalism, law, linguistics, lescent Health. He was recently named economics, history, and philosophy chair of the Community Engagement (Butler 1997; Cortese 2006; Dharma- Subcommittee for the Clinical and Trans- pala and McAdams 2003; Kellow and lational Science Institute Working Group Steeves 1998; Lendman 2006; Lewis 2007; Meddaugh and Kay 2009; Neiw- on Global Informed Consent at UCLA. ert 2009; O’Connor 2008; Slagle 2009; Tolmach Lakoff 2001). These studies offer valuable theoretical, concep- Abstract tual, interpretive, and descriptive in- This pilot study uses qualitative con- sights into hate speech, but they often tent analysis to examine hate speech rest upon unsubstantiated empirical that targets vulnerable groups, in- premises about the phenomenon it- cluding ethnic, racial, religious, and/ self. To date, there is limited research or sexual minorities, in commercial on hate speech using scientific ap- broadcasting. The study quantifies a proaches to medium, content, and i recurring rhetorical pattern for target- impact. The main goal of this pilot ing specific vulnerable groups through study is to develop a sound, replicable the systematic use of unsubstantiated methodology for qualitative content claims, divisive language, and nativist analysis that can be used to examine code words. For example, Latino im- hate speech that targets vulnerable migrants were often coded as crimi- groups, including ethnic, racial, re- nals and then linked to social institu- ligious, and/or sexual minorities, in tions that were presented as complicit commercial broadcasting. This pilot with immigrants. In this way, target study establishes data-driven descrip- groups were characterized as a powerful and direct threat to the nation. i. Research in economics involves the While vulnerable groups are targeted, development of models with empiri- calls for action from talk radio are then cal support (Dharmapala and McAdams directed against those identified as 2003). Media research has established scientific approaches for impact as it relates supporters of these vulnerable groups. to advertising as well as to media violence (Bushman and Anderson 2001).

70 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH tive categories for such speech and pected to see significant results so as creates a preliminary baseline or ref- to establish and test data-driven de- erence point for future research. scriptive categories. Future full-scale The backdrop for this study is the analysis would need to include a com- 1993 National Telecommunications parative dimension. and Information Administration Commercial talk radio is the focus (NTIA) Report to Congress, which of this pilot study. Radio has the great- addressed the role of telecommuni- est penetration of any media outlet cations in the commission of hate (print, broadcast, or digital), reaching crimes. The NTIA advises the presi- 90 percent of Americans each week, dent on telecommunications and and the news-talk format is the pre- information policy and manages the dominant radio format in terms of federal government’s use of the radio dedicated stations nationwide (more frequency spectrum. Mindful of First than 1,700) and the second most Amendment protections as well as popular format in terms of audience related federal legislation and policy, share (12.1 percent; country music is the 1993 NTIA report established a 13.3 percent) (Houston Santhanam definition of hate speech drawn from 2012). We examined commercial the Hate Crimes Statistics Act of 1990. radio talk programs reaching audi- Now, two decades later, the NTIA re- ences in Los Angeles County because port continues to provide a viable def- it is the most populous county in the inition for hate speech, but it no lon- United States and because Latinos ger reflects significant recent changes made up nearly half—48 percent—of in federal policy, telecommunications the county’s population in 2011 (U.S. platforms, and programming formats Census Bureau 2011). and content. Furthermore, the origi- As the fastest-growing and largest nal study relied on data that was, by minority group in the United States, the NTIA’s own account, “scattered Latinos represented 16.7 percent of and largely anecdotal,” and it there- the U.S. population, or about 51.9 mil- fore failed to provide a scientific basis lion people, in 2011 (U.S. Census Bu- for data assessment, let alone a meth- reau 2011). Noncitizens make up 44 odology or baseline for future study. percent of the adult Latino population, In developing this pilot study, we of which 55 percent is undocumented considered areas in which we ex- (Pew Hispanic Center 2007). Nation-

Radio has the greatest penetration of any media outlet (print, broadcast, or digital), reaching 90 percent of Americans each week.

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 71 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN

Nationally, hate crimes against Latinos, when compared with hate crimes against other racial/ ethnic groups, have risen by the highest rate, with a 25 percent increase between 2004 and 2008. This increase may be linked to the me- diagenerated negative discourse against immigrants that has been prevalent on the airwaves. ally, hate crimes against Latinos, when threaten to incite ‘imminent unlaw- compared with hate crimes against ful action,’ which may be criminalized other racial/ethnic groups, have risen without violating the First Amend- by the highest rate, with a 25 percent ment”; or (2) “speech that creates a increase between 2004 and 2008 (Fed- climate of hate or prejudice, which eral Bureau of Investigation 2004; Fed- may in turn foster the commission eral Bureau of Investigation 2008). This of hate crimes” (U.S. Department of increase may be linked to the media- Commerce 1993). The definition of generated negative discourse against hate speech used in this pilot study is immigrants that has been prevalent on derived from this definition as well as the airwaves. In a 2007 national sur- the definition used in the hate crimes vey, about 64 percent of U.S. Latinos legislation: hate speech is speech that reported that the immigration debate targets a vulnerable group and threat- had negatively impacted their lives, ens or fosters the commission of hate while 78 percent reported feeling that crimes against that group, as defined discrimination remained a problem by law.ii affecting their community (Pew His- panic Center 2007). ii. Our study relies on the original target groups for hate speech put forward in the 1993 NTIA report: “‘Hate speech’ would Methodology therefore encompass words and images The 1993 report was the result of the that ‘manifest evidence of prejudice based NTIA’s mandate to examine and re- on race, religion, sexual orientation, or port to Congress on the media’s role ethnicity.’” That said, our use of “vulnerable group” as a generalized description in “crimes of hate and violent acts for hate speech targets allows for the fact against ethnic, religious, and racial that the groups constituted as vulnerable minorities.” The report defined hate may change over time or across different speech as either: (1) “words that contexts.

72 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH

Inclusion Criteria grams: The Lou Dobbs Show: Mr. In- dependent (syndicated by the United The 1993 NTIA report considered Stations Radio Networks), broadcast all telecommunication at that time: on 31 July 2008; The Savage Nation “broadcast television and radio, cable (produced at KFMB 760 AM and television, public access television, syndicated by Talk Radio Network), computer bulletin boards, and other broadcast on 24 July 2008; and The electronic media” (U.S. Department John & Ken Show (KFI AM 640, Los of Commerce 1993). For the purposes Angeles), broadcast on 30 July 2008.iii of this pilot study, we focused our at- These programs share certain general

Hate speech is speech that targets a vulnerable group and threatens or fosters the commission of hate crimes against that group, as defined by law.

features of the news-talk format (news tention on samples from one medium commentary, guest interviews) and fo- (radio) and one programming format cus on conservative topics (anti-immi- (news-talk) in one market (Los An- gration and free speech). At the same geles County). We decided to look time, each program has a distinct pro- specifically at conservative talk radio, file:The Lou Dobbs Showis an example which accounts for 91 percent of to- of a program featuring a high-profile tal weekday talk radio programming media personality who has access to (Halpin et al. 2007). This allowed multiple traditional media platforms us to consider exemplary instances (at the time of the broadcast, Dobbs with respect to media penetration, hosted radio and television shows). a predominant format, and a large The Savage Nation is a prominent ex- and diverse market. Furthermore, ample of popular syndicated talk ra- by examining the news-talk format, dio. The John & Ken Show represents program content could also be measured against established professional journalistic standards, specifically, the iii. Media Matters for America, a not- for-profit media monitoring organization, Code of Ethics developed by the Soci- provided audio files and transcripts for ety of Professional Journalists (1996). The Savage Nation for 21-31 July 2008. Segments of thirty to forty minutes More information about obtaining cop- were selected from each of three pro- ies of the transcripts used in this study is available on request.

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 73 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN successful local market news-talk ra- vation of criteria from the data, based dio (it is also syndicated nationally). on background considerations and We selected the broadcast segments research objectives (Barrett 2007). shortly after the start of a project grant Materials are analyzed for patterns, from the Social Science Research for which descriptive codes are de- Council. This coincided with the veloped; these patterns may indicate controversy surrounding San Fran- the presence of larger themes. As the cisco’s status as a sanctuary city for analysis progresses, categories are undocumented immigrants. Not sur- either revised or removed based on prisingly, this issue is reflected in the their frequency and reliability. The transcripts; nevertheless, we analyzed inductive process of category devel- speech targeting any vulnerable group opment is followed by the deductive (as defined by the 1993 NTIA report). process of category application (May- ring 2000). This involves assigning Qualitative Content Analysis category definitions within a coding agenda, in essence defining how texts In this study, we employed con- should be coded with a category. Data ventional qualitative content analy- findings and interpretations are relat- sis, also known as inductive category ed to pertinent research and literature development, whereby we derived and, as relevant, to common experi- coding categories directly from the ence (Barrett 2007). textual data, in this case, transcripts of the program segments (Mayring Establishment of Analytic 2000). This approach uses delineated Categories and replicable methodologies that al- low the generation of inferences from Trained readers (undergraduate and a given text without being bound to graduate students), working in con- inflexible quantification. Conven- junction with the investigators, ex- tional qualitative content analysis is amined the transcripts for each of the ideal for areas of study supported by three program segments. Emphasis little theoretical or research literature was placed on identifying the rela- (Kondracki and Wellman 2002), as is tionship between speakers and tar- the case for empirical studies of hate gets—basically, who said what, about speech. or to whom, and for what purpose. Conventional qualitative content This allowed the research team to analysis follows an iterative process, identify targets—vulnerable groups beginning with the repeated reading and/or their supporters—through im- of the data (transcripts) and the for- plied and named (specific) references mation of the coding process. Cat- to them as well as through a speaker’s egory development involves the deri- call for action against them (that is,

74 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH suggesting or implying that listeners mentation (with a focus on fallacies), might do something that could affect divisive language (deixis), dehuman- the target). izing metaphors, and selected indexi- The research team then identical terms (indices for nativism). To fied four types of statements that ensure a robust methodology, we re- were made relative to these targets: examined these six categories, first in unsubstantiated claims, flawed ar- relation to the transcripts and then in gumentation, divisive language (that relation to one another. The first step is, “us-them” constructions), and de- yielded some corrections with respect humanizing metaphors. Utterances to the coding process. In comparing could be categorized, simultaneously, the findings across categories, we not- within two or more of these catego- ed a certain degree of overlap. In some ries. The readers then developed a instances this revealed how particular fifth analytical category for indexi- rhetorical strategies resonated with cality, wherein a word (or other sign) one another, but in other instances it points to a context-dependent mean- merely produced redundant findings. ing. Given the labor-intensive nature of coding for indexicality, the read- Category Refinement ers focused on a ten-minute sample Two categories—dehumanizing meta- from one of the program segments phors and flawed argumentation— (The John & Ken Show), adapting and raised particular concerns given the using open source software (Trans- redundancy of their findings with ana) for both audio and transcript other approaches, the expertise re- analysis. The readers focused on in- quired for credible analysis, and the dexical terms, or code words, that contention among scholars in each pointed to a nativist attitude on the area with respect to methodology and part of the speaker, then determined interpretation. Our main concern had which indexical terms were used to do with whether these categories most frequently. Readers also identi- contributed to the project research fied patterns of rhythm, stress, and objectives by generating reliable find- intonation (prosody) and discourse ings and a replicable methodology. The alignment among speakers. The four interdisciplinary nature of the project most recurrent indices in the ten- and the volatile nature of public de- minute segment of The John & Ken bate over hate speech, not to mention Show were then used to analyze the practical considerations with respect three transcripts. to the limited resources for full-scale The preliminary findings pro- research, required a methodology that vided data for all three programs in could be implemented or replicated by six categories: targeted statements, nonexperts. unsubstantiated claims, flawed argu-

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 75 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN

The inherent difficulty of reliably formal argument (Finocchiaro 1981). identifying formal arguments (that is, We found that another analytical cat- statements that make and present evi- egory used in our preliminary find- dence for a claim) in natural-language ings, unsubstantiated claims, provid- contexts and the inability of formal ed a more productive approach, one logic to adequately evaluate natural- in which speech targeted at vulnerable language argument (for example, groups could be assessed through a identifying logical fallacies to invali- standard fact-checking methodology. date a claim) led us to reconsider an Initially, metaphor analysis pro- approach in this direction (Hahn et al. vided a compelling framework by 2009).iv which we could measure the extent to As Trudy Govier cautions, “In prac- which the radio programs dehuman- tice it is often difficult to tell whether ized vulnerable groups by establishing people are offering arguments or not, the sameness between two unrelated and whenever this interpretive issue things or ideas. Phrases such as “love is contestable, a comment to the ef- is a rose,” “the ship of state,” or “im- fect that a fallacy has been committed migrants are a virus” are metaphors will be similarly contestable” (1982, that facilitate an understanding of 6). Although the research team could one thing (love, nation-states, immi- identify and reach a consensus about grants) in the terms of another (flow- “traditional fallacies” in the tran- ers, ships on an ocean, disease). This scripts (particularly, ad hominem at- type of analysis has already generated tacks), it proved much more difficult considerable insight into the media to connect them to a corresponding depiction of Latinos. In Brown Tide argument. Doing so depended on the Rising: Metaphors of Latinos in Con- charity of the interpreter, who might temporary American Public Discourse, fill in premises needed to establish a Otto Santa Ana (2002) provides an empirical analysis of the ways in iv. The study of informal logic—the at- which the mainstream, and ostensibly tempt to assess and therefore improve rea- liberal, press uses metaphors to char- soning in ordinary (natural) language— acterize immigrants in nonhuman seems to be moving away from a focus on terms, such as a dangerous threat, a fallacies as a way to evaluate the validity of an informal argument (Groarke 2012). virulent disease, an invasion, or an For our purposes, the central issues have animal-like force. As Santa Ana notes, to do with the limited ability of informal “These metaphors are not merely logic (and “traditional fallacies,” in par- rhetorical flourishes, but are the key ticular) to address natural-language argu- components with which the public’s ment (Hahn et al. 2009). This approach concept of Latinos is edified, rein- also resonates with at least one attempt to forced, and articulated” (2002, xvi). redefine fallacy on the basis of the falsity Cognitive linguists emphasize that or truth of the premises (Boone 1999).

76 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH metaphors can also operate on a con- while also revealing other metaphoric ceptual level. If a linguistic metaphor constructions used to describe not uses one thing or idea to understand only vulnerable groups but also race another, a conceptual metaphor uses (using terms such as “card game,” one “coherent organization of experi- “nature,” and “criminals”). Given the ence” to understand another, as with small sample, however, we identified “life is a journey,” wherein the experi- only one significant and recurring ence of life is understood through the pattern with respect to dehumanizing metaphor of travel toward a destina- metaphors: the repeated use of the tion (and, hence, a purpose) (Kövec- terms “illegal alien” or “illegal aliens” ses et al. 2010, 4). Thus, the study of and “illegal” or “illegals” to describe linguistic and conceptual metaphors immigrants. These terms were also has the potential to reveal the rhe- identified in our examination of in- torical strategies and underlying con- dices for nativism, wherein they code ceptual systems by which vulnerable immigrants as antithetical to the na- groups are understood and perhaps tion. We found the latter approach even acted against. more productive insofar as it provides In the preliminary analysis for our a comparative framework with two study, the readers used a consensus sets of indices for an external enemy methodology to identify linguistic (“anarchist” and terms including “ille- and conceptual metaphors directed gal”) and home country (terms refer- against vulnerable groups. These were ring to community and free speech). then reviewed, and only those metaphors that dehumanized members of Findings a vulnerable group were selected. The preliminary findings proved sugges- Targeted Statements tive and resonated with Santa Ana’s Drawing from the 1993 NTIA report findings (describing, for example, La- and the Hate Crimes Statistic Act, tinos as a threat, disease, or animals) this pilot study foregrounds two fea-

Phrases such as“love is a rose,”“the ship of state,”or“immigrants are a virus”are metaphors that facilitate an understanding of one thing in the terms of another. This type of analysis has already generated considerable insight into the media depiction of Latinos.

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 77 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN tures that are crucial to the report’s the three programs, readers identified definition of hate speech: a vulnerable thirty-three instances of call for ac- group as the target and speech that tion. threatens or fosters the commission Just over two-thirds of targeted of hate crimes against that group, as statements focused on undocument- defined by law. In that context, vul- ed immigrants and Latinos (73 of nerable groups are defined as ethnic, 117, which includes 4 of 28 instances racial, religious, and/or sexual mi- related to people of color in public of- norities. We included undocumented fice). Averaged on a per-program ba- immigrants insofar as they are asso- sis, Latinos (both citizen and undocu- ciated with an ethnic group (Latinos) mented) represented 91 percent (43 of in the transcripts. We also gathered 47, including those in public office) of data on calls for action against those the targeted vulnerable groups on The identified as supporters of vulnerable Lou Dobbs Show; 43 percent (15 of 35) groups. on The Savage Nation; and 43 percent (15 of 35) on The John & Ken Show. Methodology The figure forThe John & Ken Show is actually higher, since 34 percent Readers identified statements in the (12 of 35) of the targeted statements transcripts that were targeted at vul- in this broadcast segment focused on nerable groups, then distributed the the residents of “South L.A.” (South statements into three categories: im- Central Los Angeles), an area that is plied target, which does not explic- roughly 55 percent Latino and 41 per- itly identify a member of a vulnerable cent African American. group but the intent is clear; named Readers identified two calls for target, which specifically identifies a action against a vulnerable group: member of a vulnerable group; and one was a general call related to im- call for action, in which hosts suggest migration and the other focused on or imply that an action might be tak- people of color in public office who en against the vulnerable group (see supported immigration reform. Inso- Tables 1 and 2). far as both were oriented toward the political representation system, each Results might also have been identified as a Readers identified 148 instances that call for action against supporters. The met the study’s criteria for statements other thirty-one calls for action clear- targeting a vulnerable group or a ly focused on supporters: these were group’s supporters. Seventy-nine per- specific elected officials, advocacy cent of these instances (117) targeted groups (ANSWER Coalition, Media vulnerable groups, and 21 percent Matters for America), and employ- (31) targeted their supporters. Across ers of undocumented immigrants.

78 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH

Table 1 — Summary of Targeted Statements by Statement Type

Call for Ac- tion against Call for Ac- Vulnerable tion against Implied Named Total by Program Group Supporter Target Target Program Lou Dobbs Show 1 6 10 36 53 Savage Nation 0 10 12 23 45 John & Ken Show 1 15 14 20 50 Totals 2 31 36 79 148

Table 2 —Summary of Targeted Statements by Target

Un- docu- Lati- People South mented nos or of Color Sexual L.A. Immi- Mexi- in Public Mus- Minori- Resi- Total by Program grants cans Office lims ties dents Program Lou Dobbs 36 3 8 0 0 0 47 Show Savage Na- 15 0 12 5 3 0 35 tion John & Ken 12 3 8 0 0 12 35 Show Totals 63 6 28 5 3 12 117

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 79 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN

This suggests a rhetorical strategy in erate distortion is never permis- which vulnerable groups are targeted sible. and identified as a social problem or threat but the call for action is di- • Tell the story of the diversity and rected against advocacy groups, pub- magnitude of the human experi- lic figures (and political administra- ence boldly, even when it is un- tions), or legal enforcement. popular to do so. Twenty-six of the thirty-three calls • Examine one’s own cultural values for action focused on Latinos and im- and avoid imposing those values migration. Seven related to a report on others. by Media Matters for America that criticized the host’s statements about • Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, autism, gays, and Democrats as fas- age, religion, ethnicity, geography, cists (The Savage Nation). sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, or social status. Unsubstantiated Claims • Support the open exchange of The assertion of false, unverifiable, views, even views one finds repug- and/or distorted claims emerged as a nant. significant feature of all the segments we analyzed. This finding is important • Distinguish between advocacy and insofar as news-talk programming is news reporting. Analysis and com- presented within a general journalis- mentary should be labeled and not tic framework that is associated with misrepresent fact or context. fact-based news commentary and expert-driven interviews on topical • Admit mistakes and correct them issues. The relevant professional or- promptly. ganizations—Radio and Television The code is a set of guidelines, as News Directors Association, the In- the SPJ notes: “The code is intend- ternational Federation of Journalists, ed not as a set of ‘rules’ but as a re- and the Society of Professional Jour- source for ethical decision-making. It nalists (SPJ)—underscore the impor- is not—nor can it be under the First tance of both freedom of the press Amendment—legally enforceable.”v and ethical journalism. The SPJ Code As with other professional organiza- of Ethics (1996) includes the follow- tions, membership signals adoption ing professional standards for journalists: v. SPJ elides a crucial distinction here: • Test the accuracy of information the First Amendment protects journalists from all sources and exercise care from governmental censorship, not necessarily from “decision making” related to to avoid inadvertent error. Delib- content made by media corporations.

80 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH of the standards and thereby also pro- guest speakers and interviewees in vides a basis for identifying noncom- our analyses, alongside those of the pliance with widely held professional shows’ hosts, since their claims sup- standards. In contrast to other profes- ported positions with which the host sional organizations, however, the SPJ agreed. Each statement of fact was itself does not enforce its code. In- cross-checked with credible sources stead, it “encourage[s] the exposure of (published articles from academic and unethical journalism” and notes that national media sources; official, non- its code “is widely consulted and ap- commercial institutional Web sites). plied in newsrooms and classrooms as The claims summarized in Table 3 are the definitive statement of our profes- those that we were able to disprove or sion’s highest values and a helpful way question with reliable evidence. The to think about the specific and unique statements are organized into three journalism quandaries we confront degrees of unreliability: false claims, d ai l y.” which were proved to be untrue; un- While it is beyond the scope of this verifiable claims, which were based study to resolve the ongoing debate on facts that could not be verified; and over the relationship of news-talk ra- distorted claims, which were based on dio to journalism and professional facts that were exaggerated or taken codes of behavior, we do note that Lou out of context. Each claim was then Dobbs has served on the board of the correlated to a target—a vulnerable Society of Professional Journalists. In group or a supporter—that would be addition, all three shows analyzed here impacted negatively if the unsubstan- adopt a fact-finding, truth-exposing tiated claim were accepted as true. stance with regard to their programming content. While often imbued Results with considerable emotion, opinion is nevertheless usually presented as In the transcripts, readers identified based on fact. 114 fact-based claims. Of these, 37 percent (42 of 114) were unsubstantiated, with 11 proven false, 18 found Methodology to be unverifiable, and 13 found to be We employed a standard fact-check- distorted. The reliability of fact-based ing methodology for analyzing claims claims varied according to program: in the transcripts. Each transcript claims on The Lou Dobbs Show were was marked for explicit factual cita- 87 percent accurate; claims on The tions (figures, statistics, percentages) Savage Nation were 53 percent ac- and for arguments or assertions with curate; and claims on The John & strong factual implications. We in- Ken Show were 55 percent accurate. cluded fact-based claims made by In the transcripts, Lou Dobbs made

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 81 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN three unsubstantiated claims, with a tiative to ban the construction of new guest making one in addition.vi Mi- fast-food outlets for one year in South chael Savage made one false claim Central Los Angeles, using these but a significant number of unverifi- claims to discredit a local elected of- able and distorted claims (eight in ficial (Jan Perry), disparage the “Mexi- each category). John Kobylt and Ken can diet,” and portray economically Chiampou made seven false claims, disadvantaged Blacks and Latinos as four unverifiable claims, and fiver inherently violent and undeserving of distorted claims; their guest made a the public’s support. As with the two similar number of false and unverifi- other programs, The Savage Nation able claims. made unsubstantiated claims related The targets of these unsubstanti- to immigration, but it also made un- ated claims were congruent with the substantiated claims with respect to a vulnerable groups and supporters that wider range of targets, including liber- are identified in the targeted state- als, Democrats, media, and advocacy ments. In The Lou Dobbs Showand groups. Other unsubstantiated claims The John & Ken Show, the unsubstan- focused on vulnerable groups identi- tiated claims related either entirely or fied by their race, religion, or sexual predominantly to undocumented im- orientation. migrants and governmental agencies or public officials that were character- Divisive Language (Deixis) ized as supporting them or facilitat- In examining media discourse, it is ing their negative impact on society. just as important to analyze word The unsubstantiated claims magnified choice and how rhetorical effects are the sense of an immigrant threat (at- used to appeal to listeners as it is to tributed alternately to immigrants as analyze the factual accuracy of state- criminals or public officials as accom- ments. For the pilot study, we focused plices), overstated the effectiveness on one particular way that language of the hosts’ preferred immigration establishes, maintains, or reinforces policies, and linked immigrant rights in-group status vis-à-vis a targeted advocacy groups to terrorism. In ad- out-group: deixis. dition to this focus on immigration, In linguistics, deixis refers to words The John & Ken Showmade eight un- or phrases that require contextual substantiated claims related to an ini- information in order for the reader or listener to grasp the denotational vi. We do not include Dobbs’s claim, “But, by God, I’m an anti-illegal employer meaning, that is, to understand the as well” (lines 985-986), which has been referent (who speaks, to whom and proven untrue (Nation, 25 October 2010); of whom, and where and when the that was not known at the time of the speech occurs) for the deictic term broadcast.

82 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH All Claims 114 - All Sub stantiated Claims 27 19 26 72 - All Unsub stantiated Claims 4 17 21 42 Subtotal 3 1 0 17 7 9 5 Distorted Distorted Claims 0 0 0 8 2 3 0 13 Unverifiable Unverifiable Claims 3 1 0 8 2 2 2 18 False False Claims 0 0 0 1 3 4 3 11 Speakers Lou Dobbs Brimelow Peter Camarota Stephen Savage Michael Kobylt John Chiampou Ken Gilchrist Jim Table 3 —Summary of Unsubstantiated Claims by Type Claim Program Dobbs Lou Show Nation Savage & Ken John Show Total

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 83 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN or terms (Lyons 1977; Rapaport et membership may establish evaluative al. 1994). For example, the sentence, predispositions toward both posi- “And now we don’t like those peo- tive and negative targets, depending ple over there” includes four terms on group membership, in a kind of that require contextual information: linguistic conditioning (Perdue et al. “now” (meaning at the present time), 1990). Hence, deixis provides an easy “we” (presumably, both the speaker and effective tactic at the level of lan- and the addressee), “those people” (a guage, rather than at the level of factu- third party previously mentioned), alness, for talk radio hosts to establish and “over there” (the spatial location and maintain a cognitive and ideolog- of “those people”). In effect, deictic ical bond with their audience.vii words “point” to specific persons, places, situations, values, ideologies, Methodology and/or group ascription in an often unconscious fashion. Deixis fre- Readers identified pronouns with a quently occurs between speakers in deictic function in the transcripts— the same speech community, where those that indicated in-group or out- members share the same discussion group status—such as “we,” “us,” “ours,” topics, values, and worldviews and “they,” “them,” and “theirs,” and also can therefore use deictic phrases “I,” “my,” “me,” “you,” “he,” and “his,” within their community without be- plus pronouns such as “these,” “this,” ing misunderstood. “those,” and “that” when they had a de- Because of their capacity to attri- ictic role. Each transcript was marked bute in-group and out-group status, for deictic phrases and words. Those collective pronouns carry a great de- that appeared to refer to a sociopoliti- ictic charge. In fact, they act as influ- cal, economic, or cultural division were ential shapers of perception and social vii. In a Los Angeles Times article on the cognition at a very fundamental level, National Tea Party Convention in Febru- determining group belonging or lack ary 2010, an attendee explained what she thereof. Research has demonstrated wanted from the movement: “Our way that collective pronouns utilized to of life is under attack. I truly believe they are trying to destroy this country. It’s just indicate in-group and out-group be- hard to say who ‘they’ is” (Hennessey longing play a powerful role in inter- 2010). The deictic phrasing reveals both group bias (Perdue et al. 1990). This the speaker’s fears for “our way of life” in is of great significance as perceived “this country” and her confusion about members of an in-group are thought the “they” posing the threat. Mass media to have more positive attributes in has the potential to provide contextual comparison to those of an out-group information that shapes these fears—and (Brewer 1979). Collective pronouns their us-versus-them configuration—by providing a clear referent for the deictic pointing at in-group and out-group term “they.”

84 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH placed in charts for analysis. Most of in The Savage Nationfashioned U.S. these listed instances suggested an “us leaders (President Barack Obama, versus them” framework. Thus, each House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, deictic occurrence was linked to an and the Bush administration) as out implied or stated in-group, an implied of touch with the values of the Ameri- or stated out-group, or the targeted can public. One passage in The John vulnerable group. An explication of & Ken Show established the wealthy the social function of the passages con- as an out-group given their obsession taining deixis provides context for the with physical appearance and health, project as a whole (the results are sum- thereby situating its listeners some- marized in Table 4). where between high-income families and low-income communities. Results The class positioning for appearance (“their slenderness” in wealthy fami- Readers identified 37 passages that lies versus “everybody’s fat” in South relied primarily or extensively on de- Central Los Angeles) and health ictic phrases. The number of instances (“they take care of themselves” versus were similar across the three pro- “they don’t care”) carries strong racial grams, with 13 passages identified for and ethnic overtones for the poor, The Lou Dobbs Show, 12 for The Sav- which the program hosts describe as age Nation, and 12 for The John & Ken “that tribe” in “these areas.” Show. The deictic phrases used tended Michael Savage’s statement about to posit an insurmountable sociopo- a CNN report on gay Iraqis suggests litical, racial, or cultural divide be- how a speaker can use deictic phrases tween a show’s audience and targeted to aggregate multiple targets around vulnerable groups. Fourteen passages an apparently simple us-versus-them focused on vulnerable groups: 7 on statement. Savage dismissed the re- immigrants, 1 on sexual minorities, port, commenting, “If the first thing and 6 on the Black and Latino resi- they did with their freedom—that’s dents of South Central Los Angeles. what American men have died for so In another 15 passages, the target they can be gay in Iraq?” In the con- was supporters of vulnerable groups trast between “being gay in Iraq” and (elected officials, advocacy groups, “American men,” the passage suggests and the media): The Lou Dobbs Show that gay rights are in direct opposi- contained 5 of these passages, includ- tion to American values, as measured ing 3 that were focused on Latino by military casualties. Savage’s use of elected officials;The Savage Nation,6; “American men” rather than “Ameri- and The John & Ken Show,4. can troops” emphasizes masculinity In addition, three passages in The as a positive trait, but it also ignores Lou Dobbs Show and four passages the fact that American women served

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 85 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN

and died in the Iraq War. Savage’s rhe- Indexical Terms torical stance is to claim a dismissive Indexicality is a concept that emerges lack of interest (“please leave me alone out of linguistics as well as the phi- with that already”), but the effect of losophy of language. Like deixis, it the passage is to align Iraqis, homo- describes references whose meaning sexuals, gay rights, and the liberal me- is dependent on context. An indexical dia against Savage and his articulation includes any sign—linguistic expres- of “freedom” as defended by “Ameri- sion, behavior, or thing—that points can men.” to other concepts, objects, or senti- As a discursive tactic, deictic pas- ments. The classic example is smoke sages may even be more effective than as an index of fire, insofar as we as- explicit calls for action against vulner- sociate smoke as a sign that points to able groups, as it requires audiences fire. In this context, smoke means fire, to accept or at least be constantly since we understand that fire produc- aware of the underlying context (the es smoke. The relationship between speaker’s set of beliefs) in order to un- an indexical sign or code and what derstand the speaker’s comments. it signifies is not necessarily causal, however. As we saw in the discussion

Table 4 —Summary of Divisive Language (Deixis) by Targeted Group

Vulner- able Undocu- South Group mented Sexual L.A. High- Support- Immi- National Minori- Resi- Income Total by Program ers grants Leaders ties dentsa Families Program Lou Dobbs 5 5 3 0 0 0 13 Show Savage 6 1 4 1 0 0 12 Nation John & Ken 4 1 0 0 6 1 12 Show Totals 15 7 7 1 6 1 37 aThese passages also referred, directly or indirectly, to Latinos (who make up a majority of the area’s residents) and Blacks, and/or undocumented immigrants.

86 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH of The John & Ken Show in the previ- of political nativism—the attitude or ous section, the hosts established the policy of favoring the native inhabit- word “appearance” as an indexical ants of a country over its immigrants. for wealth and “obesity” as an indexical for low-income Black and Latino Analysis of Sample families in South Central Los Ange- les. Analyses of indexicality offer in- Readers found that the speakers used sight into interpretative processes and indexicality in four ways in the sample the role of language in constructing segment: (1) the use of code words identity and societal attitudes (Inoue to establish Latinos, immigrants, and 2004; Ochs 1992). As Mary Bucholtz immigrant rights advocates as “other” and Kira Hall note, “Identity is the to the nation; (2) the use of rhythm, social positioning of self and other stress, and intonation (prosody) to em- [wherein] indexical associations can phasize nativist attitudes; (3) the rein- also be imposed from the top down by forcement of nativist attitudes through cultural authorities such as intellectu- word repetition; and (4) alignment be- als or the media. Such an imposed in- tween the hosts and guest. dexical tie may create ideological ex- Readers identified twenty passages pectations among speakers and hence in which indexical terms (code words) affect linguistic practice” (2005, 596). were used to identify certain groups as “other” to the nation. Terms such as “illegal alien,” “gangbanger,” “killers,” Methodology “anarchists,” “calamity,” and “domestic Given the large volume of data that terrorism” indexed Latinos, undocu- would be generated from coding all mented immigrants, and immigrant three transcripts for indexicality, we rights advocates, thereby associating focused on a sample drawn from these groups with crime, terror, and a one of the transcripts: ten minutes of foreign enemy. Heightening this mes- dialogue from The John & Ken Show sage was the juxtaposition of these between hosts John Kobylt and Ken terms with indices for a vulnerable Chiampou and guest Jim Gilchrist, home nation: “community,” “civilized founder and director of the Minute- community,” “freedom of speech,” man Project. During this segment “founding fathers,” “city,” and “coun- they discussed San Francisco’s sanc- try.” In seventeen passages, the speak- tuary policy in the context of murder er’s rhythm, stress, and intonation (and other crimes) and immigration heightened the indexical associations. (lines 45-267 of the transcript). This Rising pitch and syllabic emphasis on segment provides an example of the indices for crime, terror, and the identity construction as the “social enemy added a sense of urgency. Stut- positioning of self and other” by way ters and pauses when uttering usually

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 87 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN positive or neutral words (“advocates,” indexical analysis revealed that only in “endorsing,” “supporting,” “preference one instance did they all fully align. In programs”) to describe immigrant seven instances, the hosts used differ- rights proponents indexed ridicule, ing words to refer to the same discus- disgust, and condemnation. Four sion topic, and in one instance they terms were repeated between three used the identical word but in refer- and six times each over the course of ence to differing interpretations of it. ten minutes: “illegal alien” (6), “anar- This lack of alignment does not signal chist” (3), “community or communi- lack of agreement (they are all anti- ties” (5), and “free speech” or “free- immigration), but rather an appeal to dom of speech” (4). The first two index different audience segments through a foreign enemy, and the last two in- different approaches to the same end. dex the home nation. Finally, readers identified lack of Analysis of Transcripts alignment among hosts and guests in the sample segment—passages where For the larger pilot study, we counted speakers did not use the same words the occurrence of four indexical terms and tried to advance different ideas. that had the highest number of repeti- Prosodic and rhetorical elements such tions in the ten-minute segment, ei- as interruption, talking over each ther as a single word or in a phrase: “il- other, and changing the subject also legal” (including illegals, illegal alien, indicated a lack of alignment. In the illegal aliens, illegal immigrants, ille- ten-minute sample John Kobylt and gal immigration), “anarchist,” “com- Ken Chiampou frequently did not munity” (including communities), align: Chiampou characterized the and “free speech” (including freedom protesters as advocating immoral- of speech, free press, freedom of the ity, while Kobylt identified them as press). We then counted the occur- free speech suppressors; Chiampou rences of these terms in the transcript wanted to talk about the specifics re- for each of the three programs, deter- lated to California Lieutenant Gov- mining frequency by speaker and to- ernor Gavin Newsom and a type of tals for each term (see Table 5). gun, while Jim Gilchrist wanted to implicate Newsom using generali- Findings ties. Gilchrist also wanted to advance Program hosts and guests repeated the idea that “safe” communities were the four indexical terms 101 times in now in danger. These differences were the transcripts. Terms including the reinforced through word frequency. word illegal accounted for 68 percent In the nine instances where Kobylt, (69 of 101) of these indexical utter- Chiampou, and Gilchrist seemed to ances, with most of them occurring in engage and concur with one another,

88 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH

The Lou Dobbs Show (44). Dobbs used self as a victim of the censorship of terms with illegal in them 31 times, the political left, specifically in regard and his two guests used the code to philanthropist George Soros and words a total of 13 times, in reference media watchdog Media Matters for to deportation, statistical data about America.viii In several instances, Sav- the decline of recent illegal immigra- age directly cited the activities of Me- tion, employers of undocumented dia Matters as an impediment to his immigrants, and immigration re- own freedom of speech and portrayed form. Dobbs most frequently used the the organization as detrimental to phrase illegal alien (or illegal aliens), personal freedom, national freedom, which dehumanizes undocumented and public knowledge. Savage also immigrants and strips away broader called for financial investigations of socioeconomic contexts and factors. Media Matters. Finally, Savage used Dobbs used one other code word, “anarchist” in the context of describ- community, which was not tabulated ing left-oriented politics. The term because it was used outside a nativist was used in combination with “social- framework (Dobbs spoke favorably ists, communists, and anti-American- of technological incentives within the ism” to characterize crowds attending “business community”). Obama’s campaign speeches in the Savage used the term illegal alien as United States and abroad. The term a jumping-off point in a criticism of was also used twice to describe Media government, civil servants (Califor- Matters as an organization that wants nia Attorney General Kamala Harris), to censor Savage’s views. and public policies (the sanctuary In The John & Ken Show, “illegal policy). But he also established “this alien” or some variation was used nine illegal alien” as an index not only for times, largely as an index of immoral- the specific gruesome murder of a ity and criminality. Like Savage, Kob- father and his two sons but also for ylt and Chiampou associated “illegal “murderers, rapists, and pornogra- alien” with violent crime: “triple-mur- phers” in general. Savage used the dering illegal alien.” They also used the other three terms to establish an us- phrase four times to qualify the terms versus-them contrast between him- advocates, advocacy groups, and pro- self and socially liberal groups. He testers, thereby casting these groups used “community” to attack liberal in immoral and criminal terms as values and lifestyles with regard to the Middle East and to criticize San viii. Media Matters for America de- Francisco as a liberal community in scribes itself on its Web site as a “progres- connection to the sanctuary policy. sive research and information center ded- In using the different iterations of icated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative free speech, Savage positioned him- misinformation in the U.S. media.”

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 89 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN

Table 5 — Summary of Selected Indexical Terms

Total by Program Illegala Communityb Free Speechc Anarchist Program Lou Dobbs 44 0 0 0 44 Show Savage 16 2 12 6 36 Nation John & Ken 9 5 4 3 21 Show Totals 69 7 16 9 101 aCategory contains “illegal alien,” “illegal aliens,” “illegal immigration,” “illegal immigrants,” “illegal,” “illegals,” “illegal employers,” “illegal employees.” bCategory contains “community,” “communities.” cCategory contains “free speech,” “freedom of speech,” “free press,” “freedom of the press.”

well. Guest Jim Gilchrist did not use by which the following associations “illegal aliens,” but he did use “these are attached to immigrant rights ad- killers” in an indexical sense that vocates: “delusional,” “misinformed,” generalizes a single murder suspect “let’s suppress everyone else’s freedom to imply that all undocumented im- of speech,” and “domestic terrorists.” migrants are murderous: “They [San Interestingly, Chiampou used “an- Franciscans] don’t want these killers archist” in a different sense, distin- up here.” In the discussion, however, guishing between advocacy groups Gilchrist focused more attention on and “just anarchists who signed up the protests by immigrant rights ad- for the mayhem that day.” Gilchrist vocates as suppressing free speech, a responded by conflating both sens- point he repeats four times. Gilchrist es of the word around “domestic was the only speaker on the show to terrorism.” use “community” (five times), mostly as a reference point for fears about the Conclusion and Recom- dangers posed by undocumented im- mendations migrants. Finally, both host and guest used “anarchist” as an index for immi- The findings are based on data gen- grant rights advocates. For Gilchrist, erated from broadcast segments of “anarchists” becomes a code word thirty to forty minutes that were selected from three commercial talk

90 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH

The programs reveal a distinct and recurring rhetorical pattern for targeting specific vulnerable groups that relies on the systematic use of a combination of unsubstantiated claims, divisive language, and indexical terms that point to a nativist attitude. radio programs. Even using this antithetical to core American values, limited sample, the qualitative con- which were attributed by the hosts to tent analysis reveals a significant in- themselves, their audience, and the cidence of speech that incorporates nation. A significant and recurring in- targeted statements, unsubstantiated dexical construct was that of (Latino) claims, divisive language, and indexi- immigrants as criminals and, by ex- cal terms related to political nativism. tension, as an imminent threat to the Our analysis yielded no instances of American public. Latino immigrants the kind of hate speech that is defined were also linked to social institutions in the 1993 NTIA report as calling for that were presented as complicit with “immediate unlawful action” (U.S. immigrants. In this way, target groups Department of Commerce 1993). were characterized as both powerful Whether such speech exists on talk and a direct threat to the listeners’ way radio would require a broader study.ix of life (in some measure because they Based on the evidence we uncov- were seen as having captured major ered, the programs reveal a distinct social institutions such as the media). and recurring rhetorical pattern for What we see as most troubling in targeting specific vulnerable groups our findings is the extent to which that relies on the systematic use of this pattern relies on unsubstantiated a combination of unsubstantiated claims while the talk radio programs claims, divisive language, and indexi- situate themselves within the journal- cal terms that point to a nativist atti- istic context of “news” and “opinion” tude. Through this rhetorical pattern, directed at public policy debate. Al- vulnerable groups were defined as though our data included no explicit calls to criminal action, the programs ix. In an opinion piece on 1 August systematically placed unsubstantiated 2010, a Washington Post writer outlined claims in the context of divisive lan- a suggestive correlation between program guage and indexical associations that content targeting specific groups and vio- drew a sharp contrast between their lent acts (Milbank 2010).

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 91 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN targets (vulnerable groups and those ion presented as an interpretation depicted as in collusion with them) of fact. These unsubstantiated and their ideologically aligned listen- claims further serve as the basis for ers, whom they sought to mobilize. In targeting vulnerable groups as an this regard, it is notable that the pro- immediate and direct threat to the gram hosts often utilized specific situ- program audience (and nation). ations and people to exemplify larger Other studies could attempt to themes. Thus, while the targets may measure the impact of particular dis- have been specific (a political figure, cursive patterns, figures of speech, a news organization, undocumented linguistic expressions, and unsub- immigrants), the discourse itself had stantiated claims that target vulner- bigger political or policy aims. able groups while also calling for ac- The primary goal of the pilot study tion on the part of listeners. was to establish a rigorous and rep- The major challenge for a study licable methodology for a full-scale of hate speech involves determining study or series of ongoing studies. Al- whether some speech on news-talk though the limited size of our sample radio conforms to one of the two does not provide a basis for definitive definitions for actionable hate speech: conclusions, our findings nonethe- speech that threatens or fosters the less identify several distinct features commission of hate crimes. In this re- of speech among the talk radio pro- gard, it is important to note that there grams and raise useful questions for a is no inherent statistical or numerical full-scale study. These include broader threshold for any of the analytical cat- studies into the extent and nature of: egories used in this study that could • The discursive pattern whereby thereby provide unequivocal evidence vulnerable groups are targeted but for the existence of hate speech or a calls for action are directed against climate of hate or prejudice. Indeed, those identified as supporters of determining a causal relationship be- vulnerable groups. tween media discourse and the commission of hate crimes against vul- • The use of dehumanizing meta- nerable groups would require other phors, divisive language (deixis), approaches that can measure impact. and indexical terms (nativist code In this regard, the pilot study lays the words) to establish targeted out- groundwork for developing scientific groups as outside the realm of le- studies that would provide evidence gal protection or participation in related to impact: for example, bio- public discourse. markers for increased aggression (based on evidence that salivary bio- • The use of unsubstantiated claims markers can measure aggression as as a cornerstone of political opin- demonstrated by Gordis et al. 2006),

92 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH social psychology surveys, and social 1993 NTIA report’s recommendation network analysis (Wasserman and is more salient than ever: “To combat Faust 1994). We argue that qualita- hate speech with more speech.” But tive content analysis provides a neces- such a goal is also easier said than sary component of any such analysis, done. Indeed, one can reasonably ask, since it provides verifiable, precise exactly how and where will this “more delineations of program content. But speech” be spoken? the question about the relationship In the United States, the issue of between program content and hate hate speech has been framed largely crimes requires a multidisciplinary by First Amendment protections, fo- approach that can provide indicators cusing on freedom of speech and of for impact on different levels: physi- the press.x In some ways, the public ological, psychological, and social. discourse about free speech has be- Together, these approaches would come more about doctrine than pro- provide a more complete picture of cess, presuming that free speech is the nature and impact of program absolute and fixed rather than a free- content with respect to vulnerable dom from governmental restrictions groups. that must be defended and defined This project has numerous implica- through specific instances and for tions for policy development. In the which there have been notable excep- past, Latino groups have pushed for tions (sedition, war protests, obscen- change on three fronts with respect to ity, and, more recently, free speech media advocacy and policy: improv- zones). In the United States, the sys- ing on-screen and on-air portrayals, tem of checks and balances inherent increasing employment (for both tal- in the Constitution’s separation of ent and executives), and facilitating powers provides a necessary gover- media ownership. While our project nance context for adjudicating among does not explore the fine points of competing constitutional rights, for media policy or the public and politi- example, in the case of hate speech, cal debate that surrounds them, we do freedom of speech (First Amend- bring renewed attention to content is- ment) versus equal protection (Four- sues as they impact the Latino population. Our pilot study also highlights x. The First Amendment is actually the issue of codes of professional con- broader in scope: “Congress shall make duct for journalists. Moreover, our no law respecting an establishment of pilot project may generate questions religion, or prohibiting the free exer- about control over content produc- cise thereof; or abridging the freedom tion and distribution and how that of speech, or of the press; or the right of control affects the representation of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of vulnerable groups. In this regard, the grievances.”

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 93 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN teenth Amendment). UCLA colleagues, Otto Santa Ana Furthermore, in adjudicating and Darnell Hunt, provided valuable among competing claims and claim- consultation during the early devel- ants, the government also plays an opment of the project. This research indirect role in restricting speech, as is supported in part by a grant from in the case of libel suits. With respect the Necessary Knowledge for a Dem- to broadcast media, the government ocratic Public Sphere Program of the determines which corporate interests Social Science Research Council with are allocated radio frequency (and, funds provided by the Ford Founda- hence, access to speech within ex- tion. The program supported col- pansive media), defines a regulatory laborations between researchers and framework that has a direct impact on advocacy groups. This research proj- programming formats (and, hence, ect is a strategic partnership between on content), and plays an explicit the UCLA Chicano Studies Research role in imposing fines and censorship Center and the National Hispanic around specific content. Our goal is Media Coalition. Additional support not to question freedom of speech but was provided by the W. K. Kellogg rather to acknowledge that it exists in Foundation, as well as by the UCLA the context of the entire U.S. Consti- Graduate Division. tution and our corresponding gover- nance system. In addressing the issue * Transcripts of all data used in the of hate speech and its relation to hate above can be accessible on the Harvard crimes, we need the “more speech” of Journal of Hispanic Policy website, sound research on the phenomenon www.harvardhispanic.com. itself, so that we have some basis other than unsubstantiated claims by which References to understand who says what, about whom, and to what effect on the pub- Barrett, Janet R. 2007. The researcher as lic airwaves. instrument: Learning to conduct qualitative research through analyzing and inter- preting a choral rehearsal. Music Educa- Acknowledgments tion Research 9(3): 417-433. Student researchers included Hec- Boone, Daniel N. 1999. The cogent rea- tor Peña, Raul Lugo, Alex Lee, Addy soning model of informal fallacies. Infor- Figueroa, Katherine Branson, Kristy mal Logic 19(1): 1-39. Norindr, Melany Bertrand, Antonio Brewer, Marilynn B. 1979. In-group bias Anfiteatro, and Clifford Hilo. We in the minimal intergroup situation: A would like to recognize the excep- cognitive- motivational analysis. Psycho- logical Bulletin 86(2): 307-324. tional contributions of Hector Peña and Clifford Hilo to this project. Our Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall. 2005. Identity and interaction: A sociocultural

94 ■ TOWARD AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF HATE SPEECH linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7(4- tion. Informal Logic 29(4): 337-367. 5): 558-614. Halpin, John et al. 2007. The struc- Bushman, Brad J., and Craig A. Anderson. tural imbalance of political talk 2001. Media violence and the American radio. A joint report by the Center for public: Scientific facts versus media mis- American Progress and Free Press. information. American Psychologist 56(6- Hennessey, Kathleen. 2010. “Tea Party” 7): 477-489. convention a forum for woes, worries. Los Butler, Judith. 1997. Excitable speech: A Angeles Times, February 6, A11. politics of the performative. New York: Houston Santhanam, Laura et. al. 2012. Routledge. Audio: By the numbers. State of the news Cortese, Anthony. 2006. Opposing hate media 2012: An annual report on Ameri- speech. Westport, CT: Praeger. can journalism. The Pew Research Cen- Dharmapala, Dhammika, and Richard ter’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. H. McAdams. 2003. Words that kill: An Inoue, Miyako. 2004. What does language economic perspective on hate speech and remember? Indexical inversion and the hate crimes. University of Illinois Law and naturalized history of Japanese women. Economics Research Paper No. LE02-004. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 14(1): Federal Bureau of Investigation. 2004. 39-56. Hate crime statistics, 2004. Uniform Kellow, Christine L., and H. Leslie Steeves. Crime Reports. 1998. The role of radio in the Rwandan ———. 2008. Hate crime statistics, 2008. genocide. Journal of Communication Uniform Crime Reports. 48(3): 107-128. Finocchiaro, Maurice F. 1981. Fallacies Kondracki, Nancy L., and Nancy S. Well- and the evaluation of reasoning. American man. 2002. Content analysis: Review of Philosophical Quarterly 18(1): 13-22. methods and their applications in nutrition education. Journal of Nutrition Edu- Gordis, E.B. et al. 2006. Asymmetry be- cation and Behavior 34(4): 224-230. tween salivary cortisol and alpha-amylase reactivity to stress: Relation to aggressive Kövecses, Zoltán, et al. 2010. Metaphor: behavior in adolescents. Psychoneuroen- A practical introduction. London: Oxford docrinology 31(8): 976-987. University Press. Govier, Trudy. 1982. Who says there are Lendman, Stephen. 2006. CNN’s vice pres- no fallacies? Informal Logic Newsletter ident of racism and associates. Montreal: 5(1): 2-10. Centre for Research and Globalization. Groarke, Leo. 2012. Informal logic. In The Lewis, Anthony. 2007. Freedom for the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall thought that we hate: A biography of the 2012 Edition). Stanford, CA: Metaphys- first amendment. New York: Basic Books. ics Research Lab, Center for the Study of Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Vol. 2. Lon- Language and Information, Stanford Uni- don: Cambridge University Press. versity. Mayring, Philipp. 2000. Qualitative con- Hahn, Ulrike et al. 2009. Argument content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social tent and argument source: An explora- Research 1(2).

Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy | Volume 25 | 2013 ■ 95 FEATURE ARTICLE | NORIEGA AND IRIBARREN

Meddaugh, Priscilla Marie, and Jack Kay. Tolmach Lakoff, Robin. 2001.The lan- FEATURE ARTICLE 2009. Hate speech or “reasonable racism?” guage war. Berkeley: University of Cali- The other in stormfront.Journal of Mass fornia Press. Media Ethics 24(4): 251-268. U.S. Census Bureau. 2011. State and coun- Milbank, Dana. 2010. Glenn Beck and the ty quickfacts for 2011 estimate. Oakland shooter. Washington Post, Au- U.S. Department of Commerce. 1993. The gust 1. role of telecommunications in hate crimes. Neiwert, David. 2009. The eliminationists: National Telecommunications and Infor- How hate talk radicalized the American mation Administration (NTIA). Washing- right. Sausalito, CA: PoliPoint Press. ton, DC: Government Printing Office. O’Connor, Rory. 2008. Shock jocks, hate Wasserman, Stanley, and Katherine Faust. speech & talk radio. San Francisco: Alter- 1994. Social network analysis. Cambridge: Net Books. Cambridge University Press. Ochs, Elinor. 1992. Indexing gender. In Rethinking context: Language as an inter- active phenomenon, 335–358. Edited by A. Duranti and C. Goodwin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Perdue, Charles W. et al. 1990. Us and them: Social categorization and the process of intergroup bias. Journal of Person- ality and Social Psychology 59(3): 475-486. Pew Hispanic Center. 2007. 2007 National survey of Latinos: As illegal immigration issue heats up, Hispanics feel a chill. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center. Rapaport, William J. et al. 1994. Deictic centers and the cognitive structure of nar- rative comprehension. Buffalo, NY: Center for Cognitive Science, State University of New York at Buffalo. Santa Ana, Otto. 2002. Brown tide rising: Metaphors of Latinos in contemporary American public discourse. Austin: Uni- versity of Texas Press. Slagle, Mark. 2009. An ethical explora- tion of free expression and the problem of hate speech. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 24(4): 238-250. Society of Professional Journalists. 1996. Code of ethics.

96 ■