A STUDENT asked me recently why the Variety does not report suicides and bomb threats. He also wants to know why we don’t disclose the nationality or ethnicity of the persons mentioned in our news stories.
Here’s why. Studies have shown that reports about suicides and bomb threats, particularly in small communities, only tend to encourage a repeat of similar incidents. (Those who phone-in bomb threats, incidentally, usually do so in the hope of making it on the pages of the newspapers. Why should we oblige those morons?) Hence, journalism gurus in the U.S. advise reporters not to touch such stories. There are exceptions, of course, particularly if the suicide involves top officials and other celebrities, but we generally prefer to stick to this rule, which is appreciated by the grieving relatives of the victim.
I also told the student that the nationality or ethnicity of a person is usually irrelevant. If, for example, we say that the suspect in an assault case is Filipino, are we implying that his citizenship has something to do with his alleged crime? Does it explain his motivation? Of course not. So why mention it? This practice, moreover, fails what I like to call the absurdity test. Allow me to re-write a recent Variety police story with the information on ethnicities intact: “A Chamorro teen-ager convicted by a mainland American judge for the fatal beating of a Filipino security guard was sentenced last week for the beating of his Palauan girlfriend.” But why stop there? America is the land of immigrants. If we’re going to mention that so-and-so is Palauan American or Filipino American, what about the Irish Americans, the Italian Americans, the Anglo Americans, etc. “A Greek American was accused of stealing $50,000 in cash from his German American employer, the Japanese American police spokesman said.” Ridiculous, right?
This unfortunate practice is no longer observed by American journalists who don’t work for the Elvis-is-Alive tabloids. Everyone (well, almost everyone) now realizes that it only reinforces a prejudicial mindset, which is always fatal to a multi-cultural community. The last thing we need in the CNMI is stereotyping the various peoples of these islands.
Stereotypes, of course, are convenient. They save us the mental effort to fully understand and know the individuals we encounter. However, as writer Robert Heilbroner once noted, aside from the injustice it does to others, stereotyping impoverishes us, too. “A person who lumps his fellowmen into simple categories [all Filipinos are philanderers, all Chinese are stupid pedestrians, all statesiders are drunkards, all locals are lazy] is in danger of becoming a stereotype himself. He loses his capacity to be himself, to see the world in his own unique and independent fashion.”
Unfortunately, stereotyping begins early in our lives, which is why it is not easy to get rid off. But we must. The first thing we have to do, according to Heilbroner, is to become aware of the standardized pictures in our heads, in other people’s heads, in the world around us. Second, “we can be suspicious of all judgments that we allow exceptions to ‘prove.’ (There is no more chastening thought than that…it takes but one tiny exception to topple a whole edifice of ideas.) Third, we can learn to be chary of ALL generalizations about people.”
Letters. Let me remind our online readers that they still have to follow the same rules regarding letters to the editor. You still have to include your phone number in your e-mail message. We still need to confirm that you are its sender. We will call you, even if you are in Watauga or Wauwatosa.
We encourage real people with real opinions to take advantage of our Forum section. We don’t—we will NEVER—print anonymous or name withheld letters.
It is your right to speak out on any issue and to air your opinion, but you can only benefit from this right if you use it.
