Racy Words

      We as a society (or at least I, personally), like to consider ourselves above being manipulated by the media or the larger forces that be. I like to think that my opinions are formed because they are what I believe, not because they are what I was told to believe. This is why I’ve recently been confused at the GOP candidate’s accusations that Mitt Romney wins only because he has money…maybe he pays for really good advertisers?My question in this has been: The meaning of his beliefs and message doesn’t have anything to do with it? Honestly, I am not planning to vote in that party, and outside of my morning Today Show and listening to NPR Morning Edition during my hour-long drive to work, I don't read extensively on the candidates. Maybe I’m missing something from the ads that I quickly change away from when they appear on my Ohio TV. (by the way…CAN’T WAIT for the election and all of the Ohio ads….not.) Anyway, this and my linguistics background got me to thinking about how it must be the ads and the wording in the ads that somehow compels people to vote for Romney. I let this thought roll around in my head during my long commute, and then kind of let it go. Yesterday, however, I was restruck by the power of words in the news reporting of the case of Trevon Martin.

            A week or two ago, when the killing surfaced in national news (it had already been circulating in the black news community), George Zimmerman was referred to as white.  I distinctly remember the Today Show pasting a picture of the accused man with the newscaster reading, “A white man has allegedly shot and killed a black teenager in the state of Florida…” As the story has progressed, we’ve learned more about the black teen and his packet of candy and can of iced tea as well as information about the alleged white killer (side note: the media also NEVER says shooter, but alleged shooter – it makes me wonder if this is a legal thing – innocent until proven guilty in courts but also in the media?). George Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch volunteer, middle-aged, claiming self-defense, who attacked a black boy. Since the news has surfaced, we have seen the March of a Million Hoodies and other instances in which the black community rallied around Trevon Martin’s devastated parents. The nation has watched as the issue has become not only about justice for a dead teen, but justice for racial discrimination: a black teen, seemingly innocent and definitely unarmed, killed by a white man. Yesterday, however, something changed. When I was listening to updates on the story, George Zimmerman all of a sudden became Hispanic and the case became that of a black teen killed by a Hispanic man. The feel was different to the phrase; somehow it was less shocking or scandalous. I reflected on this for a good 30 minutes of my drive: why does “a white man” carry different nuances than “a Hispanic man” in this case? And what is the result for the listeners? Has the media or George Zimmerman switched to highlight the man’s Hispanic heritage in order to steer the story away from race by making it one minority killing another? Why is that better or more okay than a white killing a black or vice versa? I am blown away by the power there is in changing one adjective to present an alleged killer. All of a sudden, the media presenting the story/George Zimmerman moves this story from a racial issue to an "even playing field" because both of the parties are minorities. What does that say about the engrained stereotypes and racial issues that apparently still exist in our society? And besides...shouldn’t this story just be about a teen wrongly shot dead by an overzealous man?