NIGA RESOURCE LIBRARY

I recently participated in a panel that addressed the topic, "Indian Gaming in the News." This monthís newsletter hits on the high points of my presentation on that panel. Thanks for reading the NIGA Library Newsletter. Remember, any comments and suggestions are most welcome!

This paper will address the issue of "Why Media Matters." I argue that media "matters" for three main reasons. First, media frames what people think about issues, including Indian gaming and Indian issues. Media accounts act as a short cut for people to "learn" about issues, so media framing determines how issues will be received and internalized. Second, media influences public opinion by exposing the public to particular ideas and not exposing them to other ideas. By selecting particular stories for publication, media selects a range of opinion choices that will be made available to readers. Third, media matters because stories can be used by policy makers to justify policy positions. Media accounts often masquerade as research and policy makers can employ these accounts to bolster pet policy projects.

There have been three significant media trends in the last decade with regard to Indian gaming issues in the news. First, sheer media volume has increased. [1] Second, there has been a "framing shift" in terms of content in the coverage of Indian issues in the media. Third, there has been a change in the location of stories about Indian issues. In general, there has been a shift from the "culture" or "local interest" section of some newspapers to the front page or business section of important newspapers.

These three trends are important because they inform a number of important questions. First, what is the impact of this dramatic increase in media stories about Indian issues, particularly Indian gaming? What frames are being employed by particular reporters and how do these frames shape public opinion? How do media accounts relate to and influence public policy? How should Indian nations decide what issues to socialize and which to privatize? In other words, is visibility of Indian issues good for the Indian gaming industry?

It is important to keep in mind that while public support for Indian gaming and Indian nations in California remains high, people support Indian gaming for very different reasons. A 1995 Public Opinion Poll revealed both gender and party distinctions in support for Indian gaming. For example, 79% of democratic men support Indian gaming because they feel "we should leave the Indians alone." Democratic women (73%) support Indian gaming because "their profits improve life on the reservation." Meanwhile, republican men support Indian gaming (69%) because it "gets Indians off welfare," and 85% of republican women support Indian gaming when "Indians are accountable to keep operations free from corruption." These differing foundations of support resonate with different media accounts of Indian gaming's scope and impact, so it is crucial to encourage the publication of articles that document the impacts that most people support.

At my request, Dr. Steve Livingston, a professor of Media Affairs at the George Washington University, did a media search of the Agua Caliente Tribe (one of the hosts for this conference) for the years 1990 and 2000. This search revealed a number of findings that were not surprising but were revealing. Dr. Livingston's media search of the five major papers in California [2] reveled a number of patterns.

First, there is a significant increase in the sheer number of stories about Agua Caliente and their Indian gaming enterprises. In 1990, these five papers carried a total of 37 stories that mention Agua Caliente. By 2000, these five papers ran 173 stories about the Tribe. Second, there is a distinct topic shift of these Agua Caliente stories. Earlier headlines focused on culture, tradition and Indian history. For example, a 1990 headline stated, "Museums, Festivals, Classes Open Door to Learning Indian History." There is an emphasis in these earlier stories on the length of Indian presence in the Coachella Valley and in celebrating the Agua Caliente's resilience. By 2000, the headlines for stories about Agua Caliente have changed significantly. Nearly all of them mention money or politics. For example, an August 17, 2000 headline states, "Indians find that Money Buys Access. With Cash Accumulated From Reservation Casinos, Tribes Host Caucuses and Parties for Convention-Goers."

In addition to the change in volume and topic, there is also a shift in the location of stories about the Agua Caliente. In 1990, these stories appeared in the Festival Section of the L.A. Times, in "Zones" (the culture section) of the San Diego Union Tribune, and in the "View" section of the L.A. Times. By 2000, the stories have shifted to the National desk, the front page and the Business section. There was even a profile of Agua Caliente's esteemed Chairman Richard Milanovich in the Sunday Los Angeles Times Magazine. As if to support my point, on the day before my presentation, The Desert Sun ran a top story in their Sunday paper with the headline, "More Than Just Gaming Rights Won in Prop. 1A Victory: Tribes Now Wield Greater Political Clout, Influence." This story was the centerpiece of a series called "Gaming: Is it a Safe Bet?" that included stories on reinvesting Indian gaming revenues and a story about the head of the new Gambling Control Board.

These findings support the observation that there have been significant shifts in the way Indian issues are framed in the California print media. Framing determines how an issue is received and incorporated by the public. People cannot keep up with all the issues that appear in the newspapers, so most readers rely on short cuts to "keep current." Those of us who follow Indian issues for a living know that it is a full-time job simply to keep up with what is happening in Indian gaming nationally. Certainly the individual California voter cannot possibly read every article, but they can peruse headlines. Therefore, many people rely on headlines and "frames" in order to understand and form opinions about particular issues. During Propositions 5 and 1A in California, the Tribes did a tremendous job of framing the ballot issue as an Indian Self-Reliance Issue. A "yes" vote for proposition 5 or 1A was framed as a vote for California Indian Self-Reliance. The California voters were incredibly supportive of the Initiatives and continue to support Indian gaming and Indian nations.

The analysis of news headlines and news content from the 1990's reveals a patterned framing shift in the media coverage of Indian issues. As mentioned earlier, in 1990, Indian nations were portrayed as cultural and religious groups who were of media interest because of their history and tenacity. Readers were encouraged to learn more about the tribes and there was a sympathetic tone to stories that documented historical atrocities. Over time, stories about Indian nations began to focus more on tribal sovereignty and the fact that Indian nations were sovereign cultural groups. Later, sovereignty becomes portrayed in the media as an attribute of tribal governments and there is an emphasis on gaming rights as the primary expression of tribal sovereignty. More recently, Indian nations are "framed" almost exclusively through their relationship to gaming. Even those Indian nations that do not engage in gaming are defined as "non-gaming" tribes, meaning that their identity (to outsiders) is ultimately expressed through their relationship to gaming even if they do not have a gaming facility. Indian gaming stories now focus almost exclusively on economic and social issues, in particular the ways Indian nations are investing their money. Indian Nations are framed as political groups or interest groups who use their gaming revenues to make political contributions, implying that this is somehow unfair or unusual.

Media Influences Policy

From the perspective of Indian nations, media matters because stories can be used by policy makers to promote a political agenda (by creating a "problem") and then to justify a favored political "solution." Policy makers, like other Americans, take short cuts when it comes to understanding issues. Human beings have a narrow capacity for complexities, so a tiny fraction of what we hear and know influences our behavior.

Indian gaming is often reduced to two competing metaphors, representing the simplest possible way to understand its profound and historic impacts on Indian Country. The two competing metaphors are "Indian gaming is good because it produces jobs and stimulates economies," and "Indian gaming is bad because it creates problem gambling and other environmental concerns." Of course, anyone familiar with the industry and its far-reaching impacts understands that Indian gaming produces incredibly complex and profound impacts on Indian and non-Indian communities, including reducing certain types of crime, reducing welfare payments and unemployment, and improving community relations. Beyond the community impacts, however, are the personal stories of lives improved and given new direction through Indian gaming. Many employees of Indian casinos come directly from welfare rolls. For some, fulltime employment and full benefits allows families to buy adequate homes or send kids to college, often for the first time. These impacts are masked by dominant metaphors that simplify gaming to polemic rhetoric that can be easily manipulated for political purposes.

Media Passing as Research

Perhaps the most disturbing trend revealed by a media analysis of Indian gaming is the ways that media stories have been co-opted as research by the American public and policy makers. A February 24, 2001 article in the Las Vegas Review Journal had a headline reading, "GAMING REVENUE: Tribes Surpass Nevada in Winnings." This article supposedly summarized a Merrill Lynch Report on the gaming industry. However, the headline was not supported by the article, which revealed that the findings were based on estimates (for Indian gaming) and projections (for other industries.) The article also failed to elaborate on the fact that Merrill Lynch's Indian gaming estimate of $9.9 billion was higher than the NIGC's finding of $9.6 billion, based on actual audits. Additionally, the comparison is not relevant since comparing Nevada to an industry spanning 28 states seems hardly conclusive of anything. Nonetheless, the article accomplishes a number of political ends. It creates a threat to the Nevada gaming industry, possibly distracting attention from their growth and power. The article diminishes the size of Nevada's industry, including the lucrative amateur sports wagering market that is currently under attack in Congress. Finally, it puts Indian gaming in the spotlight, encouraging further "study" of its growth.

I would argue that most readers of this article have not read the Merrill Lynch Report but will take at face value both the figures reported in the article and the "analysis" presented in the headline. As one lobbyist likes to say, "It takes only one minute to make an accusation, but it takes 20 minutes to respond."

Fallout from the Boston Globe Series

An even more dangerous example of media stories passing as research occurred in December, 2000. Last fall, the Boston Globe did a 10-part series on Indian gaming. Many of the stories recycled long-standing misperceptions about Indian gaming, including the insinuation that outsiders are benefiting from Indian gaming or that Indian gaming is vulnerable to criminal infiltration. In spite of the series' shabby research and biased portrayals, one theme resonated politically in Washington: that there is a problem with the Federal Acknowledgment Process.

On December 19, 2000, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Virginia) sent a letter to the President and Vice President and to the GAO asking for an investigation into the Federal Recognition Process. According to a press release on Mr. Wolf's website, "Wolf's actions stem from a series of articles on Indian gaming that appeared in the Boston Globe last week." In his letter to Vice President Cheney, Mr. Wolf states, "These reports illustrate the unforeseen inequities of the Indian Gaming Regulatory ActÖthe Globe series reported ëThe story of Indian gaming is now one of congressional intentions gone awry.'" These statements elevate the Globe stories to that of research by using words like "illustrate" and "reported" to describe the content of these reports. However, this nuance seems irrelevant to policy makers who are able to justify their policy measures by casting the biased stories as "research findings."

No Permanent Victories

Language from newspaper reports can cast interpretations as reality and be used by policy makers to further their calculated political desires. In order to strengthen support for a favored policy solution, policy makers can indirectly encourage media to pursue stories in order to "keep them hot." The American public has a short attention span. We are fickle readers, tiring of particular stories if we perceive them to be "over exposed."[3] However, if policy makers hope to push their policy agenda, they must align themselves with a media agenda that supports their actions. In essence, the media and policy agendas create a closed loop which is mutually reinforcingÖthe media writes about the issue, policy makers pick up the story as "evidence" of its importance, then the media writes about the policy maker taking action on the issue, which is newsworthy in itself.

Media Distractions

Negative stories like those created by the Boston Globe have essentially created a negative feedback loop. However, these political platform pieces miss the point of Indian gaming and deprive interested readers of the real stories of Indian gaming: that Indian gaming is changing lives, healing communities and revitalizing cultures. These stories of the complex and profound success of Indian gaming are much more interesting and meaningful than political tirades. These true stories of Indian gaming revitalizing communities and creating long-term change are bound to move people. Sadly, they have yet to be given equal treatment simply because they do not move policy.

Written by Kate Spilde, Ph.D. April, 2001

[1] For this paper, I refer to print media only.

[2] The Los Angeles Times, The Palm Springs Desert Sun, The San Diego Union Tribune, The Sacramento Bee, The San Francisco Chronicle.

[3] Think of the Elian Gonzales story, for example.