In his essay, Why
Americans hate welfare: Race, media and the politics of antipoverty policy, Martin
Gilens argues that there is a misrepresentation in the media in regards to
recipients and the underserving poor (1999).
In other words, blacks and whites wrongly perceived that not only are African
Americans the majority of welfare recipients, but they are also undeserving.
Although his study is over a
decade old, there are still misrepresentations present. An example is in the new Healthcare Reform, the Affordable Care Act,
commonly referred to as “Obamacare.” When President Obama's name is part of the healthcare, his opponents are more likely willing to oppose it as well. Not to mention that the images of people displayed in the official Illinois health reform website are those of African
Americans.
Did
anybody see Jimmy Kimmel’s facetious video, where people were asked which
healthcare reform they preferred—the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare—which ironically
is the same thing.
Was it a coincidence that the
whites in the video preferred the Affordable Care Act over the “Obamacare?” The people didn’t actually pull the race card. They never explicitly mentioned that they relate the term Obamacare to African Americans, but instead implicitly associated the latter to a negative thing, such as by referring to it as 'socialist
and healthcare for the poor' (the "undeserving"), as well as 'un-American.'
Kimmel makes a good point when he says, "Interestingly, polls show that most Americans don't like Obamacare, but they like what's in it."
Just like the Willie Horton ad from the 1988 election, "Obamacare" implicitly contains a racial reference. When referred to as "Obamacare," people associate the reform with African Americans and are therefore against it.
See Jimmy Kimmel's video for yourself and tell me what you think.
Kimmel makes a good point when he says, "Interestingly, polls show that most Americans don't like Obamacare, but they like what's in it."
Just like the Willie Horton ad from the 1988 election, "Obamacare" implicitly contains a racial reference. When referred to as "Obamacare," people associate the reform with African Americans and are therefore against it.
See Jimmy Kimmel's video for yourself and tell me what you think.
Do you agree with my example of implicit racial appeal?
Thank you for sharing the video. This is a great video for understanding how people categorize words in a certain way. It is clear, that although no one played the race card, people did try their best to differentiate between the two. You wrote that Obamacare was linked to African Americans, which might have been the reason why the people interviewed were against it. I think this is also because people lack the concept of what welfare and other government benefits actually are and what they have to offer. For individuals to say that healthcare is for the poor “undeserving or for un- American” can be misleading because there are many people who are on welfare and have a job, yet cannot afford to pay for their family. This is important to take into account because people assume that individuals who have an opportunity to work choose not to work, so they can be supported by the government. The concept of gratification pertains the how individuals feel about healthcare, and other support systems because in society there is constant move to change neighborhoods to upper class lifestyle, which many individuals cannot afford. By making changes in society to help one group of people ( people who can afford to live in that area) we take away from the other individuals who cannot afford to live or eat in the neighborhood which was once home for them. It is essential to look at the bigger problem, that is causing people to rely on healthcare and other support systems rather than seeing what group of people are getting the most benefit from it.
ReplyDeleteZeba, you are right. Americans do lack the understanding of the concept of welfare.
ReplyDeleteIn his essay, "Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy" Gilens finds finds evidence for the influence
of racial attitudes and the perception that welfare recipients are undeserving.
He describes the undeserving as lazy and poor. In other words, these people are poor because they do not want to work, and instead rely on welfare.
Gilens also found that Americans over-estimates the number of African-Americans in poverty and similarly, under-estimate the number of poor whites.
Because African-Americans are perceived as being poor, and are overrepresented in the media as welfare recipients, they are therefore judged as the undeserving poor. This is what our schemas have lead us to believe.
However, as you mentioned, there are several government benefits offered. For example, students applying for FAFSA, when going to college, are therefore applying to some form of welfare. As we have discussed in class, (and as is evident when glancing around our classes, and only a small fraction of our peers are African-Americans), African Americans are underrepresented in universities.
My question is therefore: How are African Americans still being misrepresented as the undeserving poors, who are abusing the system? If just an x amount of African-Americans make up college campus, then why are they being labeled as the primary recipients?
For our schemas to change, the representation of welfare images must change first. Instead of portraying African-Americans images on welfare ads and sites, why not display images from all the other races that have used welfare in any shape and form?