Perception and Context: Native American vs. American - Duke McCargar

          There are many factors that play a role in the shaping of the ways in which someone comes to think about or understand someone or something.  Social ideologies, or the web of ideas and beliefs that people use to give meaning to the world and make sense of their experience, the way in which a narrative or idea is presented, and the context in which it is framed, strongly influences ones perception, and subsequently over time, their perspective of the narrative or idea being presented.  That being said, it is my belief that Native American mascots such as the Chiefs, Braves, Indians, and Redskins, are no more or less offensive than American mascots such as the Patriots and the Nationals.  Depending on the narrative and context in which each of these mascots is presented, perceptions regarding whether or not they are offensive ultimately lie in the eye of the beholder. 

Many current popular press articles have portrayed Native American mascots as offensive and derogatory in nature.  The Washington Redskin’s have been at the epicenter of this controversy, as some perceive the term Redskins to be a racial slur, while others have labeled it as a term of “honor”.  NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell defended the name as the embodiment of "strength, courage, pride and respect" in a June 5th letter to 10 members of Congress who had earlier urged team owner Dan Snyder to change the name of the team. Snyder has repeatedly vowed to never change the name, saying, “After 81 years, the team name 'Redskins' continues to hold the memories and meaning of where we came from, who we are, and who we want to be in the years to come.  I respect the feelings of those who are offended by the team name. But I hope such individuals also try to respect what the name means, not only for all of us in the extended Washington Redskins family, but among Native Americans too.”  As mentioned, perception plays a major role in deciding which side of the argument one ultimately agrees with.  A closer look at the narrative and context in which some American mascots are presented helps to make more sense of why perception is so important.  In doing so, it becomes easier to see and understand how almost anything can be perceived as offensive depending on the audience and the way in which the information is being presented. 

The Patriots and the Nationals.  Both nicknames/mascots are embodiments of what we commonly depict the United States of America as representing.  Words like strength, courage, honor, sacrifice, determination, and commitment are all words that come to mind and have been used to describe these terms.  However, this is because of the narrative and context in which America, and what it stands for, has been presented to people.  Yet, one could easily flip these terms upside down and present them in a way that would paint an entirely different picture of the United States of America and what it represents.  What do I mean by this? 

Simply put, the U.S. is a country that was founded on bloodshed, robbery, racism, and sexism.  However, these are characteristics and aspects that are seldom mentioned when talking about the U.S.  Why?  Because the media and others in positions of power have framed the U.S. in a way that highlights and celebrates the accomplishments of this country, while minimizing or even failing to mention any of the wrong doings and traits that might defer us from thinking anything less than America as the greatest country on earth.  The way in which the term ‘Redskins’ is being presented and exemplified by the Washington Redskins is not at all the way in which the media is portraying it.  The media is depicting it in a way that encompasses the negative connotation associated with it in its entirety, while conveniently choosing not to include what it is that makes Native American mascots desirable.   How is naming a public high school after George Washington any less offensive than a sports team having a Native American mascot?  After all, George Washington was a slave owner among other things. 

Or what about the fact that that many Native American people here in the U.S. take pride in the term ‘Redskins’, finding it anything but racist or offensive.  American Indian Daniel Thomas had this to say regarding the controversy surrounding his beloved Redskins, “I can’t speak for everybody, but I’m proud of my team, I support my team, and I stand behind my team. I don’t want them to change the name.”  Thomas would go onto to say that he could understand if other Native Americans feel differently, but he is not offended by the moniker. Instead, he pointed to a team name that conjures images of another time in history that he said should bother American Indians more.  “If you’re Native American,” he said, “and you root for the Dallas Cowboys, I think that’s a problem.”  Thomas is spot on with this comment, and it reiterates the importance that narratives and context has on framing perceptions of individuals.

Daniel Thomas is not the only American Indian who takes pride in the nickname ‘Redskins’.  Wellpinit Washington High School, which has a student body population that is 91.2 Native American, takes great pride in the ‘Redskins’ name and they proudly display it across their chest.  Yet, if this were indeed an offensive and derogatory slur aimed at the marginalizing of Native Americans, why would Native Americans willingly do such a thing?  Again, it is ultimately ones own perception and perspective that marks something as offensive or inoffensive.  "I've talked to our students, our parents and our community about this and nobody finds any offense at all in it," says Tim Ames, the superintendent of Wellpinit schools. "'Redskins' is not an insult to our kids. 'Wagon burners' is an insult. 'Prairie n-----s' is an insult. Those are very upsetting to our kids. But 'Redskins' is an honorable name we wear with pride. … In fact, I'd like to see somebody come up here and try to change it."  This perspective is polar opposite to that of which the media is depicting and stories such as this one are far, few, and in-between in the popular press.  Shouldn’t it be the voices of these people that are being heard in the popular press?  Shouldn’t they be the ones who ultimately have the greatest impact regarding this controversy and whether or not it should be considered offensive?

One might think so, however this is not the case.  Instead, it’s white men, such as Bob Costas, whose perceptions and perspectives are being heard and distributed largely among popular press.  During halftime of a recent Cowboys VS Redskins game Costas ask the viewers to think about what the equivalent would be if directed towards African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, or any other ethnic group.  He goes on to state that when considered in this way, the term ‘Redskins’ can’t possibly honor a heritage or noble character trait, nor can it possibly be considered a neutral term.  Rather, he pigeonholed it as an insult and a slur, no matter how benign the present day intent might be.  Does Costas have a point? Absolutely.  However, one must not forget to consider the way he is presenting his narrative and the context of which he is presenting it.  But in all honesty, what bothers me the most is that Bob Costas’s perspective is considered and offered as superior to not only your perspective or mine, but most importantly that of Native Americans and Indian Americans who are the very ones whom these mascots and nicknames are allegedly offending and insulting. 

         What is important to remember is that social ideologies, or so called societal “norms”, are not only deeply rooted within a particular society, but they are also ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of that society.  Or in other words, those of power, or those having the ability to influence the behaviors of other people, have largely shaped these ideologies.  Simply put, the societal notion of what is constituted as good or evil, moral or immoral, right or wrong, just or unjust, acceptable or unacceptable, and offensive or inoffensive, are all theories that have been given meaning by those possessing power. Perspectives regarding these adjectives ultimately rest in the eye of the beholder.  It is our own responsibility to make sure that we are not basing these perspectives solely on the narrative and context in which it may be presented to us.  Rather, it is important to consider the many narratives and context in which particular information can be presented to us, then, and only then, should one decide whether or not this is something they agree or disagree with.

Links
  https://email.uiowa.edu/owa/redir.aspx?C=49hq0ENjHEWOZqYYNRjXuboELjAcuNAIM8wUrUpj2QL7NAhlqJcEfyUQwg8SQciAAfdddnCHmAA.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.washingtonpost.com%2flocal%2fone-indian-says-he-loves-the-redskins-and-doesnt-want-dan-snyder-to-change-the-name%2f2013%2f11%2f16%2fbbeade76-4ef8-11e3-9890-a1e0997fb0c0_story.html

https://email.uiowa.edu/owa/redir.aspx?C=49hq0ENjHEWOZqYYNRjXuboELjAcuNAIM8wUrUpj2QL7NAhlqJcEfyUQwg8SQciAAfdddnCHmAA.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cnn.com%2f2013%2f10%2f12%2fus%2fredskins-controversy%2f

https://email.uiowa.edu/owa/redir.aspx?C=49hq0ENjHEWOZqYYNRjXuboELjAcuNAIM8wUrUpj2QL7NAhlqJcEfyUQwg8SQciAAfdddnCHmAA.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.wtae.com%2fsports%2f-%2f9681176%2f19967552%2f-%2f75tjcoz%2f-%2findex.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2013/10/13/bob-costas-on-redskins-name-its-an-insult-a-slur/

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9689220/redskins-name-change-not-easy-sounds

A Historical Sport Perspective on Native Iconology and Underrepresentation - Nick McCargar

For decades Native American symbols, logos, and mascots have been used by sports teams at the high school, collegiate, and professional level to represent pride and promote a fiercely competitive image. Institutions currently using Native American imagery claim their representations of Native people are meant to honor the courage, strength, and discipline inherent of Native cultures as opposed to exploiting and demeaning them. By bringing to light issues of underrepresentation and correlations between Native American history and Native American participation in sport, I will provide evidence that the Native American mascot controversy is a white cultural facade rather than a Native American outcry against racial and ethnic discrimination.

            Looking out onto a collegiate football field or basketball court, rarely does one find a Native American student athlete. According to the most recent (2009-10) NCAA Student-Athlete Race and Ethnicity Report, Native American males account for only .4% of all male student-athletes, regardless of division. Coincidentally, Native American females likewise account for .4% of all female student-athletes in the NCAA (Zgonc 55). Clearly Native Americans are underrepresented in collegiate sport, however the same cannot be said for the use of Native American iconology in the NCAA where 35 universities currently use Native American mascots and nicknames (Hart 1). Previously, as many as 600 schools have used Native American iconology to represent their sports programs (Hart 2).

            The issue in the mainstream sport media regarding Native American nicknames and mascots concerns mainly the physical depiction of Native Americans and a misrepresentation of individual tribal cultures. Yet, the question of who is actually making Native iconology in sports an issue is debatable. A prime example of such a debate occurred in 2012, when the Oregon State Board of Education banned the use of Native American themed mascots to avoid possible racism through inappropriate mascot images. However, the decision met backlash from in-state tribes. A spokesman for the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians insists the board’s decision was made by “people who have no knowledge of Indian communities” and does nothing to address “real issues of racism” (Kost, 2012). Furthermore, a spokeswoman for the Confederation Tribes of Grande Ronde adds, “We are very disappointed that they’ve trampled our sovereignty and have ignored something that our tribes in Oregon have been called for years, which is a curriculum that accurately describes Oregon’s native history” (Kost, 2012). Both statements call attention to Native American underrepresentation, the real underlying issue regarding Native Americans and American sport culture

            Interestingly, underneath the media’s shaming of Native mascots, particularly prominent mascots such as the Redskins, is a diverse population of Native American influence and opinion that spans from the Pacific to the Atlantic coast. Yet oddly enough, American society continues to perpetuate Native American stereotypes and general ideologies regarding all Native American cultures as one native society rather than a variety of different native cultures and groups. There is no denying that some Native American groups and tribes oppose Indian mascots and insist such images are racist and inappropriate. Yet, there are many other native tribes who identify native mascots and nicknames as honorable and symbolic of the positive intangibles that native tribes may possess. By taking one native tribe or individual’s disapproval of Indian mascots and nicknames and using such an opinion to speak for all Native Americans, the majority white society therefore prohibits native individuality and power. As a result, a domino effect occurs in the media and society, placing all native people at the center of unnecessary controversy while the white media speaks on behalf of the so-called racist misrepresentation of Native Americans.

            What goes largely unnoticed in the process of banning Native American iconology in sport is the systematic cleanse of Native American presence in sport. Given native athletes make up less than one percent of all NCAA competitors, each university that is forced to remove their redskins, Indians, warriors, or braves nickname, is forced to essentially erase Native American presence from the overall landscape of sport and popular culture. As a consequence, future generations of sports fans will instead continue to relate the courage, strength, discipline, and work ethic of American sports team athletes to generic mascots such as birds, dogs, cats, and fish, instead of the intangible attributes possessed by native individuals and tribes of the American past. That being said, the removal of Native American iconology in sport perpetuates white racial dominance and further weakens Native American participation and representation in American sport.

            Since the arrival of white European settlers on American soil, Native Americans have
historically been demeaned and taken advantage of for the benefit of white society. Today’s 
American sport culture, which is run primarily by white males, is no different. Due to the low 
proportion of Native American athletic participation in collegiate sport and the ideological 
beliefs regarding Native American individuals, American white society is taking advantage of 
the underrepresentation of native cultures to eliminate the mainstream images and connections between Native Americans and sport permanently. 

Links
  <http://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=mcnair_journal>.

<http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/05/two_tribes_call_state_board_of.html>.

<http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/SAEREP11.pdf>.

Positive Stereotypes - Blake Hickman

     Native American mascots have been a popular topic in the sports world today. Growing up people viewed mascots of sports teams as figures to represent their programs in a proud way; especially Native American mascots. A Native American mascot represents a team to be fearless and vicious fighters and teams need players, like that, who isn’t scared to go against competition. In a Sport Illustrated article called Indian Wars, it had a section talking about positive stereotypes of the Native American mascots and how Americans view them in a positive way. Native Americans are known to be involved spiritually and known to be deeply connected to nature. Americans are not as connected to those aspects in life like Native Americans are. Some universities have chosen to use Native American mascots to honor the Native American culture and to show how we view them as a people who are strong and willing to fight for what is there’s. Americans like to see someone who is willing to take pride and be dominating, that’s why for some schools and professional teams they use Native American mascots; not to make them look bad or to despise them. 

     What make these positive stereotypes is because we are used to seeing Indians in movies and books as being fearless, protective and proud of where they come from.  The main stereotype we use for Native American mascots is “bloodthirsty savage.” This stereotype may sound negative toward Native Americans but it is not meant to be negative towards Native Americans. This stereotype is linked to the athletic qualities such as having a fighting spirit, being aggressive, brave, and proud. Mentioned before teams all look for players who have those qualities in them. Using Native American mascot not only represents the sports programs in a positive way but also in the classroom. Like Native Americans take pride of their culture, students have to take pride in their school and focus hard in the classroom. That bloodthirsty stereotype might not be as appealing to Native Americans but it’s a way we can honor their culture and use that to drive players and students to be better.

     These stereotypes are meant to embrace the positive things about their culture and not think about the negative ones, like being ruthless or nature lovers. Just like with African Americans embracing their positive stereotypes as being good at dancing, singing and sport and not focusing on negative ones like being lazy and being criminals. Also, Asian American embraces the stereotype of being more intelligent and hardworking. They don’t embrace the stereotypes of being bad drivers or evil.  So even though Native Americans may not agree was the tribute of the Chief before the Florida State or Illinois games, it’s a way Americans show honor to Indian cultures that were here before us.

Native Americans are proud of their culture and schools use them to help students become more embracive of their schools. Schools choosing Native American mascots and using them to make people take pride in their everyday lives are ways to encourage Native Americans to accept these positive stereotypes. 

 

According to the article, Indian Wars, the mascot’s stereotypes lead most to conclude that the Native American mascots are not racist. Many mascot supporters think that these mascots are actually countering racism by showing pride of and honoring Native Americans.  I agree with that because when you think of someone being racist you think more about the negative ways towards a racial group. These mascots are meant to show how people can be determined like Native American’s culture.  When I see Florida State’s mascot and the tribute they do before every football game, I see a man riding a horse who is ready for battle and ready to protect his land. Florida State goes on the field and protects it by giving it all they have and having that fighting spirit. I don’t see anything negative towards Native Americans and their culture. Native Americans should try and look at it this way because today some take it as disrespect because they think regular Americans are mocking them and showing that they are people who are ruthless and not prideful in where they come from.

     In conclusion, these ideas of the Native Americans are ways to show how Americans view Native Americans in a positive way. In the sport world we use that type of mascot to show dominance and to intimidate the competition. We don’t use those mascots to disrespect them or make them less them us. Something like this won’t change overnight because Native Americans still don’t find it as appealing to have. Native Americans is a culture that most people respect and I’m one of those who respects their way of living because I take pride in where I come from and I’m protective of my family. These stereotypes, having a fighting spirit, aggressive and pride are all things I try to have while playing baseball and just having those for my everyday life. Native American is important to this country and it’s time for them to see this and it starts with them accepting these positive stereotypes about their culture.

Link
http://jss.sagepub.com/search/results?fulltext=The+Indian+wars&x=0&y=0&submit=yes&journal_set=spjss&src=selected&andorexactfulltext=and

 

 

 

Misrepresentation of Mascots - Devin Pickett

It is necessary to first look at how one viewing this topic from a negative side, would take offense to such a thing as Native-American mascots.  Taking a step back and putting yourself in someone else’s shoes or shifting paradigms, I can see how the Native-American culture is looked at as a joke.  For so long, as a society, we have put the Native-American race in the back seat and have viewed them as a secondary culture to races that we give more attention to such as African-American, Caucasian, and Asian-American.  My stance here is to not persuade one to why this is offensive or not, it is to make one aware of how this could this could be a misrepresentation to some. 

 

                The Native American mascot in sport is so prevalent today that I don’t even have think twice to what this mascot is pertaining to.  Teams like, Florida State, Cleveland Indians, Chicago Blackhawks, Central Michigan, and Washington Redskins to name a few are so common now a days that most people probably don’t take time to think about what these mascots original meanings are.  In a CNN blog post from Moni Basu, she spoke of the Cleveland Indians mascot, Chief Wahoo and how it is looked at as a “racist caricature”.  Also in the blog,  a lady by the name of Suzan Harjo fought against the name, “Redskins”.  She characterized this name of redskins as the same equivalence as calling a black person the “N” word.   Someone looking from the outside could definitely see where this lady is coming from in that this word has such a negative connotation and as a society today, we just simply look over it.  If there was a professional sports team that had some type of racist remark against a black, Hispanic, or white person, there would probably be a huge problem because those are first hand races.  The word, redskin, has passed over for so long that it has lost it’s vulgar and demonstrative meaning.  It is pretty evident today that the “N” word has not lost it’s meaning to an extent, of course it does not have the same sensitivity as it once did but it isn’t something that one would say in public without getting criticized.  This is what Suzan was saying in her statement. 

This whole thing with Native-American mascots has to do with a sense of empowerment.  In today’s society everything is ran by who has the most power. Everything we do in life it seems like includes, who can obtain the most power.  Today we look at the white man to have power over a lot of things within our society such as businesses, entrepreneurship, and in this case deciding on if the use of a redskin mascot is acceptable or not.  Roger Goodell, NFL commissioner, had his input on why the use of the redskin mascot was acceptable and not harmful.  Goodell began to pick apart and point at some of the strong quality traits and characteristics these people have.  So what we see here is how empowerment at it’s best.  Roger Goodell, an upscale, wealthy man clearing up what is a negative term used to describe the Native-American race.  This tactic is used to almost pacify the race and discount the race as a whole.  In another journal, The Indian Wars, the article stated that, “Today, mainstream Americans think that indigenous peoples should be very proud and honored to be portrayed in everyday sports culture.” This is another example of empowerment.  Society makes this culture appear that they should be honored to be mentioned with other races of majority in today’s society. 

                Another way as to why someone can view these mascots as a misrepresentation is because just like all white people and Hispanic people etc, aren’t the same, this statement applies to Native-American’s as well.  Just like different Caucasians are typically intertwined with another culture such as Irish or Italian, Native-Americans are also broken down into other branches of their race.  Today we have categorized the whole race of Native-Americans as one rather than acknowledging their different types of people of that culture.                             

                The last point that I wanted to bring about as to why people may view the Native-American mascot as a misrepresentation is because of the how some of the sports teams rallies may represent a form of mockery.  One of the most prominent gestures we see in sports is the tomahawk used by the Atlanta Braves and Florida State. With the gesture being used as a symbol of rallying on a team to some, it doesn’t to others.  Some view this as a form of mockery to the culture.  Another example of this was at the University of Illinois where their mascot Chief Illiniwek would do a supposed tribal that was found to be very offensive to some because it was viewed as disrespect to the Native-American culture.  This action was such a disturbance to some that the mascot was no longer allowed to do the routine.

                As I stated earlier, my stance on this is that this is not a big of a deal as some people make it out to be.  Sometimes you can read into to something so hard that it can almost be erratic at some of the thoughts that we have on these topics.  My position was to show how the other side would potentially view this topic. 

 

Links

http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/04/native-american-mascots-pride-or-prejudice/

http://jss.sagepub.com/search/results?fulltext=The+Indian+wars&x=0&y=0&submit=yes&journal_set=spjss&src=selected&andorexactfulltext=and 

 

Positive Representation - Cody Cox

                The use of Indian tribe mascots in sport has become an increasingly talked about subject. It has been questioned whether or not using a tribe’s name is inappropriate and degrading for its members. In the majority of cases, the opposite is true. Indian related mascots are something the tribe’s members can have pride in and use as a means of sharing their culture.

                A mascot for any team is always something fans and alumni cherish and represent outside of sport. Professional, collegiate, and many other programs use their mascot as a way to identify the backbone of what their team represents Native Americans are given the ability to use this as a means of sharing their culture with others in our community. The meaning behind these tribe mascots goes beyond fake feathers and war paint. Saginaw Chippewas public relations director, Frank Cloutier, describes Central Michigan’s mascot as a way of honoring the triumph of the resilient and competitive members of their tribe.

                When such teams as the Chippewas take the playing field they are fighting like a Chippewa, fighting to win. These qualities of determination and bravery are messages that young children across America should follow. The fact that the face of these messages is a Native American tribe is something it’s members can take great pride in because their tribe is depicting an image every person strives to portray in society. It is a very honorable thing to be identified with the core values of many of the tribes found throughout America.

                Without Native American mascots, it would be nearly impossible for some tribes to get their message out. For schools such as Central Michigan, the cultural heritage education provided to the students regarding the mascot is the most important aspect. It allows for its large number of students to be informed about what the tribe stands for and what it means to be a member. For Navajo Nation member Leon Yazzie, Native American mascots have given him the chance to give the public a sense of who he is.

                Yazzie is a fluent Navajo speaking Native American who wears the Chicago Blackhawks’ symbol any chance he gets. He explained that he had never paid attention to the sport of hockey, but loves the idea of a successful huge market team representing Chief Black Hawk every time they take the ice. These mascots give Yazzie and his fellow Native Americans something to root for and believe in. Gained interest in sports teams much like Yazzie will also encourage young Native Americans to pursue opportunities in sport they may not have considered otherwise.

                Non Native American individuals are very much to blame for the misconstrued meaning behind much of the controversy surrounding these mascots. With the installment of these mascots, an educational system should also be set regarding the tribes history. Frank Cloutier and Central Michigan have made great strides in portraying each party’s intentions with the use of the mascot. Bringing both parties to a mutual agreement on the matter has allowed for a prime example of successful cultural sharing between two very different groups.

                The misunderstanding and misuse of Native American mascots is where these mascots can become demeaning to the tribes. As long as there is educational systems set up for the parties involved, the continued use of these mascots will be far from racist. There will be now power hungry groups if each side is set out with the same mission in mind. This mission is what represents the cultural basis being portrayed when a team takes the playing field.

                Much like Frank Cloutier and Leon Yazzie, many Native Americans see the possibilities and benefits that result from the use of Native American mascots. The honor and positivity portrayed through a Native American mascot is the perfect dynamic to gain the interest of individuals who otherwise would be oblivious to the existence of some of these tribes. With the tribes involvement in issues related to the mascot it offers possible financial, educational, and political gains for each tribe.

                Native American culture is very under heard and understood in our society today. The small numbers of some of these tribes makes it very difficult for them to be understood by the public. Native American mascots are something that should be kept and used as a tool to educate the public about the meaning and significance of the many Native American tribes. The brave resiliency of the different tribes symbolized in mascots is something Native Americans can keep their pride alive in.

 

LINKS

http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/fandom/post/_/id/18484/tribe-supports-native-american-mascots

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/indian-team-names-no-problem-some-native-americans-irritant-others

http://www.cherokeephoenix.org/Article/Index/1208

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300448.html

Media Coverage Creates Issue - Michael Rooney

Media is a means of communication which holds a significant impact on today’s American society. In this country there is a long history of white empowerment controlling the media which can lead to a subjective outlook, specifically on issues of race. In recent years, the topic of offensive mascots has been a controversy throughout the media. The media has created the problem itself by generalizing the topic of offensive mascots based on the assumptions from those in power creating negativity instead of taking advantage of these educational opportunities.

The influence that the media holds can portray false assumptions of virtually any topic because of the power that they hold. In the diverse 21^st century that we live in, everyone is entitled to their own opinions and reactions. There is not one way that a group of people will respond to anything within society but the media can easily portray it in this way. In the ESPN article Have the People Spoken, the topic of offensive mascots is discussed. The article describes a number of schools who have used these tribal mascots as an honor and pride rather than offense. The assumption that Native Americans are taking offense to these names is often times wrong, but the empowered media wants to think otherwise. “White America has spoken. You aren’t offended, so we’ll be offended for you” (Reilly). Even if one person is offended by these mascots, the media can make it seem that the majority is offended, when this doesn’t seem to be the case at all. In today’s society, virtually anyone can take offense to anything, so the media must decipher between the opinions of singular people and majority of a group.

The media has created an overall negative stance on the topic of potentially offensive mascots which seems to have created the issue in itself. The majority of coverage on this issue speaks of the violation and disrespect that these mascots hold, but rarely are living Native Americans used as a source. Many sports mascots such as the Washington Redskins, Atlanta Braves, and Florida State Seminoles have been a part of American athletics for many decades, but the media has decided only in recent years that these names should be taken to offense by Native Americans. In my opinion, the fact that these mascots have had such a long history with minimal controversy shows that the issue may not be as substantial as portrayed by the media. A topic that seemed to be less of an issue can turn itself into a considerable issue by continually mentioning it within the media. People hear the idea that these names are offensive enough that they start to agree that it must be reality.

The media uses its power to show the negativity associated with the Indian mascots and often overlooks the importance of these groups of people and educational opportunities that exists. Native Americans and minorities in general is a difficult subject to bring up in today’s society, but something such as a sports mascot can bring up the subject, bring light to it, and enlighten the general public about the history of these minorities. According to another ESPN article titled Tribe Supports Native American Mascots, this idea is further supported, “it’s important to talk about the true history about the settling of the United States, and to talk about those things that happened to Native Americans that are often not talked about” (Lukas). Our nation cannot and should not hide from our history. Native Americans play a large role in the history of this country so instead of creating a bigger, negative issue, the power that the media holds could use this as an opportunity to educate the general public on these groups of people.

Race and social class are brought to attention while interpreting media coverage of offensive mascots. The idea of race is the reason that the topic is controversial in the first place, and it is the American white empowered media that interprets these circumstances to give to the general public. Linked closely to race is the connection to social class. The inferior, lesser Native Americans are said to be insulted by the more powerful, significantly white American society. These connections to race and social class make the topic difficult to approach, but in my opinion the topic can and should be handled in a completely different way with an emphasis on educating. The American society in general knows very little about the history of Native Americans. Seeing that changes with these mascot names are not happening quickly, the media can take its power and impact on society as an opportunity to educate about the history of Native Americans and bring positive light to the situation.

Links

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9689220/redskins-name-change-not-easy-sounds

http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/fandom/post/_/id/18484/tribe-supports-native-american-mascots