Messaging And Report Tag: criminal justice

Public Opinion Review

Executive Summary

Without question, the last half-century has witnessed an enormous shift in public attitudes toward black-white relations, segregation, and blatant prejudice. At the same time, racial tensions, obstacles, and stereotypes persist, and Americans of different racial and ethnic backgrounds hold divergent understandings of the issues facing black men, discrimination, and the causes of racial disparities.

Besides contributing to a negative civic environment, stereotypes and fundamental disagreements in understanding issues matter because they may undermine support for policies that can help strengthen communities and address racial disparities.

The analysis that follows provides a (necessarily brief) overview of some central themes emerging from public opinion research regarding understandings of black male achievement, awareness of racial disparities, and the causes of and responsibility for addressing them. It is intended to offer communicators a synthesis of key ideas that exist in public understanding that can either derail the conversation or move it forward.

This analysis highlights the views of black men, and about black men and the issues they face.

Throughout, much of the focus is on differences between black and white survey respondents, and the challenges suggested by divergent opinions.1 It takes research findings that seem contradictory and divisive on the surface, and offers a perspective to make sense of the underlying dynamics at play.

Perceptions of and by black men

More African-American men experience significant life challenges than do white men. African- American men also have higher levels of worry, and are harsher in their judgment of black men as well. For example:

• Black men are more likely than white men to say they have faced a number of traumatic experiences, from murdered friends to wrongful arrest to being a victim of a violent crime.
• African-American men cite higher levels of worry about a range of concerns.
• Black men consider a number of problems facing them severe, and are harshly critical of the priorities of black men as a group. For example, they are critical of what they see as black men’s insufficient emphasis on education, health, family, and   work.

At the same time, more black men than white men say they are focused on achieving success in a career, or on living a religious life, and more black men say they are optimistic about a bright future. In just about every area, black men are their own harshest critics, as well as the most optimistic that things will be better.

Disparities and discrimination

People of color, including African Americans, view discrimination as widespread and as leading to disparities in education, income, health, and imprisonment. White Americans recognize that

discrimination still exists, and while they generally understand that disparities between the races exist, they underestimate the extent of racial disparities, downplay the prevalence of discrimination, and they do not see discrimination as an influence on disparities.

Though responses from whites and African Americans to questions about discrimination and disparities are almost always at odds, we see hope in this pattern, as it seems clear that responses diverge because white Americans and black Americans have different understandings of what racial disparities are “about” — just the kind of challenge that communications reframing is designed to overcome.

First, African Americans have a more encompassing view of how discrimination unfolds than white Americans do. For white Americans, discrimination tends to be about relationships between individuals — interpersonal relationships. Black Americans, however, have an understanding that extends beyond the personal to include the way discriminatory practices can be embedded in policies and institutions. So even if all people recognize that discrimination exists, white people tend to think it is due to personal prejudice and are less likely to see the influence of institutional racism, obscuring the role of collective action and policy solutions.

Questions in public opinion surveys almost always imply that discrimination is about personal prejudice and “race relations,” as though the issue is solely about personal interactions and individual behavior. The role of institutions and systems is largely unstated and rarely explored.

Similarly, black Americans and white Americans tend to have different understandings of how disparities arise, and therefore different interpretations of who or what is responsible for addressing disparities. Analysts often point to a contrast between “individual” and “structural” explanations for disparities:

• Overall, roughly equal percentages choose an explanation for disparities grounded in individual responsibility (e.g., do individuals have the motivation to pull themselves up) and structural obstacles (e.g., will individuals have the chance for education). However, black respondents are more likely to point to structural obstacles while white respondents are more likely to point to individual responsibility.
• Overall, one-third point to discrimination, but far more black respondents than white respondents say discrimination leads to disparities.
• Few choose the blatantly prejudiced belief that black people have less ability to learn.

With these divergent understandings of discrimination and disparities in mind, communicators need to take into account whether they are implicitly sending a message that works against the notion of collective responsibility. They need to keep in mind the following frames that dominate Americans’ thinking about responsibility:

• “Me” and “Personal Responsibility” — Individuals are responsible for achieving their own success; therefore, individuals have to create their own solutions.
  • As a general stance, Americans overwhelmingly believe in personal empowerment and self- determination.
  • Similarly, as an explanation for disparities and problems facing black men, people turn to the idea of individual responsibility. In this view, racial disparities exist because individuals  of different races are not trying equally hard to achieve, and black people need to take more responsibility.
  • The “me” stance is gaining ground; black respondents have shifted toward a personal responsibility perspective to explain gaps in black achievement since the mid-1990s.

This approach is unlikely to lead to collective action.

• “They” and “Interpersonal Relations” are Responsible — Discriminatory behavior by individual white Americans directed toward individual black Americans is the cause of racial disparities; prejudiced individuals are responsible for disparities and attitude change is the solution.
  • This stance is the normative standpoint embedded in most public opinion research, and the default pattern that often results in an “us and them” confrontational conversation. In this view, the problem is defined as how individuals treat each other; therefore, the solution is attitude change and stripping culture of stereotypes.
  • White Americans and black Americans have divergent views regarding the prevalence of discrimination and its role in creating disparities.
  • Most Americans believe that race relations are good, that problems will be worked out, and that more dialogue will help.
• “All of Us” and “Structures” are Responsible — The choices we have collectively made, and the systems we have created, have led to disparities that hold us all back. This stance relies both on a sense of interdependence and an understanding of structural dynamics.
  • Public understanding of the influence of structures or systems in leading to gaps in achievement is a very limited area of inquiry in public opinion surveys.
  • The few questions that explore some aspect of systemic influences demonstrate divergent views between racial groups.

This stance creates more opportunity for collective action and policy change, compared to an individual responsibility stance.

Issue focus

There are reasons to be optimistic about developing an “All of Us” conversation that leads to broad- based support for collective action and policy change. While any number of issue areas may be advantaged by such an approach, three policies rise to the top:

• Education: Education shows potential as an issue that can cross race, engage white people in  coalition with black communities, and energize black men on their own behalf and on behalf of   their families. It affords the opportunity to discuss what we can do collectively to advance people’s well-being, rather than allow people to simply blame lack of ambition and hard work.
  • Education is a top priority and concern for all Americans, and one area where people readily see a collective stake and a collective responsibility.
  • There is widespread agreement that education matters to economic mobility, and the role of education in creating opportunity is particularly valued in the black community.
  • Importantly, Americans are willing to make low-income and minority children a priority in education efforts.
• Jobs/Income: The current weak economy has highlighted the role of broken systems in people’s economic well-being, although this issue can easily lead to racial divisions and zero-sum thinking if not framed carefully.
  • Jobs, income, and the economy are at the top of Americans’ agendas, and are central to efforts  to address racial  disparities.
  • In the current economy, people are more able to see the role of systems/structures in aiding or impeding individual success (though opinion continues to emphasize individual responsibility).
  • However, jobs and income represent an area where the role of race seems particularly divisive and where stereotypes are persistent.
  • There is widespread support for a number of policies that would improve economic mobility. However, African Americans support an active, engaged role for government, while white Americans are more likely to see government as the problem.2
• Crime and Justice: Black Americans rate crime as a top priority and police bias as a serious problem. Of all the issue areas, white respondents are most likely to respond that black Americans may receive different treatment in the justice system (though even here the percentages are not high and successful framing will be key).
  • Crime has declined as a national priority, and yet, crime continues to be a top concern among black respondents.
  • Surveys consistently show that black respondents have less confidence in police and in the justice system generally than white respondents  do.

Finally, many organizations have taken up “fatherhood” as an important issue for black men and the black community generally. The public opinion research base for fatherhood initiatives is rather thin, and tends to focus narrowly on personal behaviors and involvement with children, rather than take a broader view on policy or social action.

Communications directions

In some respects, there has been a significant amount of research recommending messaging on issues of race. However, much of this research is limited in its utility either because it was designed to accomplish a narrow goal (and therefore is ineffective or even harmful for broader goals), or because its focus is so broad it can be difficult to demonstrate effectiveness in advancing specific policy objectives.

There are a number of framing choices that continue to be controversial: should advocates communicate about race or class, race or place, etc. Strategists often recommend avoiding race due to the well-known and obvious pitfalls in trying to have a frank conversation about disparities; advocates (quite rightly) are frequently dissatisfied with that recommendation, and seek research on how — not whether — to discuss race and equal opportunity.

Even researchers who have been studying and recommending strategies on this issue for some time may find it difficult to build support among communicators for a particular approach, to refine their recommendations, and to demonstrate success. While much work needs to be done, this review finds three promising directions for further consideration and development:

• Calling attention to effective solutions to disparities (and existing institutional bias), a color- conscious strategy that highlights proven solutions;
• Explaining the role of structures and systems in leading to disparities, thereby overcoming the “personal responsibility” barrier; and
• Creating a sense of interdependence and shared fate, thereby breaking down the “group competition” that is pervasive in racial attitudes.

In sum, we need to develop communications strategies that join people in common purpose and shared fate, while not erasing race in the process. This analysis points to the need for a frame flip and a unifying narrative to break through deeply entrenched views on these issues. Specifically, new framing on this issue needs to: mend the in-group/out-group cycle and establish a sense of “we” in a shared fate; look for ways to characterize the unique challenges facing black men while not inadvertently implying that other groups will have less opportunity, e.g., “breaking down obstacles” instead of “addressing disparities”; and harmonize the broad overarching narrative about black male achievement with specific issue categories that most matter to African-American men — jobs and income, education, and criminal  justice.

The analysis that follows is just one part of a much larger effort to understand the current context, and to create a path forward.

Download Full Report

This analysis provides an overview of the central themes emerging from public opinion research regarding understandings of black male achievement, awareness of racial disparities, and the causes of and responsibility for addressing them. In addition, the review includes short discussions of four issues of particular interest to advocates — jobs and the economy, education, criminal justice, and fatherhood.

Much has been written on these topics, yet many questions remain to be investigated. This review is far from comprehensive. Rather, it is designed to offer communicators a synthesis of key ideas that exist in public understanding, which can either derail or move the conversation forward. These key ideas need to be taken into account in any message strategy.

This strategic overview takes research findings that on the surface seem contradictory and divisive, and offers a perspective that makes sense of the underlying dynamics. How can people both recognize that disparities exist, and still oppose efforts designed to address these disparities? How can people believe that discrimination is widespread, yet think it has nothing to do with limiting opportunity?

Note that the analysis is just one piece of a larger effort. It is intended to provide communicators with a strategic overview of key public attitudes, and to inform future stages of the project — and it is those later stages that will focus more on action steps going forward.

Download Full Report

Public opinion research relevant to black male achievement is an area rich with investigation, and dozens of books could easily be written summarizing each of the topics identified in this review. Indeed, hundreds of studies informed this analysis. Rather than cite every study or every statistic on a particular measure, the report highlights key themes and ideas for communicators to keep in mind, illustrated by targeted statistics.

Topos reviewed original data from more than 100 public opinion surveys, as well as survey analyses published in academic journals. In addition, qualitative research studies were also examined for the very specific purpose of understanding prescriptive communications recommendations. The studies included in this review were conducted by reputable, nationally known research organizations and media outlets, and meet best practices for quality including appropriate sample size and methodologically sound design. All of the data examined are publicly available.

The analysis relies most heavily on research conducted in the past five years, though some long-term trends are included, for three reasons: 1) many historical reviews of changing perceptions of race are readily available; 2) historical trends are very useful, but limited in providing actionable insights for developing strategy in the current environment; and 3) the election of the nation’s first African- American president brought significant attention to issues of race, making it prudent to emphasize recent survey findings as much as possible.

To be actionable for advocates and other lay readers, this paper is necessarily brief and strategic, and undoubtedly raises new questions for researchers. The interpretations expressed are the authors’ alone.

Download Full Report

Since the mid-20th century, the United States has seen an enormous shift in public attitudes toward black-white relations, segregation, and blatant prejudice. At the same time, racial tensions, obstacles, and stereotypes continue, and Americans of different racial and ethnic backgrounds hold divergent understandings of discrimination and the causes of racial disparities.3

Besides contributing to a negative civic environment, stereotypes matter because they may undermine support for efforts to reduce racial disparities. If white people view African Americans as lazy, they are less likely to support government anti-poverty programs. Or, if it is commonly believed that black people are unintelligent or violent, it will hinder efforts for school or neighborhood integration, for example. And if black people believe these negative things about their own group, it may contribute to low self-esteem and other problems.

Public opinion research suggests that positive and negative views toward black people may be grounded in multiple arenas. In other words, while one might assume that a particular experience or aspect of a person’s background would cause an individual to feel either positively or negatively toward a racial group, or to ascribe to one of two opposing views (black people are hardworking or lazy, etc.), research suggests that responses toward a racial group may have different antecedents and be multifaceted.

For example, in research conducted by Patchen, Davidson, Hofmann, and Brown in 1977, they found that:

Positive behaviors toward black people are predicted by racial contact, while negative behaviors are predicted by aggressiveness and family/peer racial attitudes.

Lipset and Schneider, in their 1978 analysis of the Bakke case, and Katz and Hass in their study of “Racial Ambivalence and American Value Conflict” (1988) found that:

Positive attitudes toward black people are based in humanitarianism (sympathy toward the disadvantaged), while negative attitudes are based in individualism (self-reliance).

The conscious attitudes about racial and ethnic groups reviewed in this section probably tell only one small part of the story, and subsequent sections (for example, discussions of personal responsibility and altruism) are highly relevant to attitudes of racial groups as well.

Though it has become less of a focus in recent years, public opinion research has at times measured public assessments of different racial groups, including their character traits. For example, when a Harris poll (2009) asked respondents to rate various racial and ethnic groups on a thermometer scale “with 1 meaning extremely negative and 100 meaning extremely positive,” Americans overall give the highest ratings to “white Americans” (83.2) and the lowest ratings to “Hispanic/Latino Americans” (77.7). Respondents give almost identical ratings to “Black/African Americans” (79.9), “Chinese Americans” (79.9), and “Asian Americans” (79.7).

Many studies over the years have found that people are willing to assess groups on a variety of image traits with no description other than racial category. In research done by the National Opinion Research Center in 2010, people were asked to place racial groups on a 1 to 7 scale, with one end of the scale anchored by a particular trait and the other anchored by its opposite trait. Pluralities of survey respondents opted out of rating blacks or whites on intelligence, work ethic, and (to a lesser extent) wealth. However, of those who did give ratings, more said whites are intelligent than said blacks are intelligent (44 percent gave “intelligent” ratings for whites, 30 percent for blacks), and the same pattern held for “hard working” (37 percent for whites and 20 percent for blacks), and “rich” (41 percent and 7 percent, respectively) (see Figure 1).

Source: National Opinion Research Center, August 2010

More black men experience significant challenges than white men, have higher levels of worry, and are harsher in their judgment of black men. Even so, more are focused on achieving success in a career, on living a religious life, and are optimistic about a bright future. In just about every area, black men are their own harshest critics, as well as the most optimistic that things will get better.

Many black men have faced traumatic experiences in their lives. In a Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard 2011 study entitled “The Race and Recession Survey,” more black men than white men report having a close friend or relative who was murdered (61 percent and 29 percent, respectively), wrongfully arrested (31 percent, 16 percent), or the victim of a violent crime (25 percent, 18 percent). In only one area surveyed in this study have more white men than black men experienced a challenge — getting laid off or fired from a job (62 percent of white men, 54 percent of black men), a gap closed since the start of the recession (see Figure 2). Now, 27 percent of black people and 21 percent of white people say they have been laid off or lost a job in the past year, and more black people than white people say they are unemployed (44 percent and 40 percent, respectively) or underemployed (17 percent and 12 percent,  respectively).

Source: Washington Post/KFF/Harvard, April 2006

It follows that more black men cite high levels of worry about a range of concerns. Compared with white men, more black men are worried about every problem surveyed, from access to health care to getting arrested. A note of caution: This particular set of findings is based on a survey that occurred two years prior to the economic crash in 2008. It is highly likely that the same questions today would show far higher levels of worry on most measures, but particularly on economic measures. Important dynamics would likely remain unchanged: the gap in levels of worry between white and black men, as well as the high levels of worry on multiple issues among black men (see Figure 3).

Source: Washington Post/KFF/Harvard, April 2006

According to the 2006 Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard study, “African American Men Survey,” in rating a series of problems facing black men, black men themselves are more likely than other audiences to rate a range of problems facing them as severe, including not taking education seriously enough (91 percent), becoming involved in crime (88 percent), drug and alcohol abuse (87 percent), not being responsible fathers (85 percent), not having good jobs (85 percent), HIV/AIDS (82 percent), poverty (77 percent) and, lastly, discrimination (68 percent) (see Figure 4). Black women’s ratings are similarly high, while white men and women are not as grim in their assessment of the problems facing black men. Asked to choose the single biggest problem facing black men, 31 percent of black men chose “not taking their education seriously enough.”

Source: Washington Post/KFF/Harvard, April 2006

Note that many of these “problems” — not taking their education seriously enough, not being responsible fathers, becoming involved in crime, etc. — can be read as admonishment of black men or black families. Black men are their own harshest critics in this regard.

Black men and white men report very different priorities. For example, according to the Washington Post/KFF/Harvard 2006 study, compared with white men, black men put more importance on being successful in a career (76 percent of black men, 56 percent of white men), living a religious life (70 percent, 44 percent), being respected by others (76 percent, 59 percent), and standing up for their racial or ethnic group (76 percent, 33 percent) (see Figure 5).

Source: Washington Post/KFF/Harvard, April 2006

Black men are harshly critical of the priorities of black men generally, saying that black men put too little emphasis on education (69 percent), health (66 percent), their families (48 percent), and getting ahead at work (43 percent), and too much emphasis on sports (49 percent), maintaining a tough image (41 percent), and sex (54 percent) (see Figures 6a and 6b). Black men and black women tend to give far harsher ratings on these measures than white men and white women have of black men’s priorities, except the areas of maintaining a tough image and sports, where opinions converge.

Source: Washington Post/KFF/Harvard, April 2006

Though black respondents express significant worries and see a great number of problems facing black men, they still express great optimism about their future. Fully 85 percent of black respondents are optimistic about their future, compared with 72 percent of white respondents. A majority (59 percent) of black respondents say, “America’s best times are yet to come,” while a majority (53 percent) of white respondents take the alternative view, “America’s best years are behind us.” Overall, ratings on this measure have been surprisingly stable for the last 10 years, with just one noticeable shift shortly after the stock market crash at the end of 2008, with more people than ever (57 percent) saying that the “best times are yet to come.” Sixty percent of black respondents believe their child’s standard of living will be better than theirs, while just 36 percent of white respondents agree. (Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University, 2011)

Finally, according to the Pew Research Center’s 2009 report, “Racial Attitudes in America,” people   may see socioeconomic status as more relevant than race when it comes to dictating shared values. Both black and white respondents see values between the races as converging, while values between classes may be diverging. Majorities of both white (70 percent) and black (60 percent) respondents say “the values held by black people and the values held by white people have become more similar.” But as black respondents consider class, a majority (53 percent) say the “values held by middle class black people and the values held by poor black people have become…more different.” Only 22 percent of black respondents say, “Middle class blacks and poor blacks have a lot in common.”

Download Full Report

Issues of race and race policy are understood by most Americans as being about individuals and relationships, not systems and structures, and that means the explanation for gaps in achievement are often understood as resulting from personal successes or failures rather than external influences.

Therefore, even if people recognize that disparities exist, they often blame disparities on individual failures alone, not systemic influences. Furthermore, if people recognize that discrimination exists, many think it is solely due to personal prejudice and do not see the influence of institutional racism. Overcoming this dynamic will be a central challenge for those who seek policy solutions.

Knowledge of disparities

White survey respondents recognize that disparities, such as economic disparities, exist between black and white Americans. However, research suggests that respondents, particularly white respondents, underestimate the size of the gaps. In an analysis by Kaplowitz, Fisher, and Broman entitled “How Accurate are Perceptions of Social Statistics about Blacks and Whites” (2003), in rating statistics, black respondents offered larger gap estimates than white respondents in three of four areas (excepting family income).4

Furthermore, white respondents tend to believe things are getting better for black men as a group (according to 58 percent of white men and 50 percent of white women surveyed), while black men are far more mixed in their views. Only 29 percent of black men believe things are getting better for black men as a group, while 34 percent believe things are getting worse, and 36 percent say things are staying about the same. (Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University, 2006)

But would more accurate knowledge help or hurt efforts to address disparities? If people had more accurate knowledge of the disparities that exist, would it inspire them to address them? Or would it just feed negative stereotypes?

The answer to this question depends in large part on people’s reasoning for why disparities exist. Even   if there is widespread agreement that there are inequities between white and black Americans, there is a fundamental disagreement about the cause of inequities. According to Nicholas Winter (2008), some attribute disparities to individual factors, such as individual effort, while others attribute disparities to structural factors.

The General Social Survey (GSS), a survey conducted periodically since 1972 by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago that tracks opinions of Americans on a large range of issues, routinely asks questions designed to measure people’s understanding of structural vs. individual influences on disparities, such as economic disparities. Asked to explain why on average blacks “have worse jobs, income, and housing than white people,” respondents choose responses rooted in both individual and structural explanations. Equal percentages choose a measure grounded in individual responsibility (“motivation to pull themselves up”) and structural obstacles (“have the chance for education”). Few choose the blatantly prejudiced belief that black people have less ability to learn. One-third point to discrimination, a measure that white and black people may understand very differently. (GSS, 2010, NORC; see table)

More accuracy in pinpointing the breadth and depth of disparities is unlikely to matter if people continue to hold onto explanations for disparities that absolve government or other structures from responsibility. The next section discusses three different types of responsibility for disparities that are addressed in survey data, and whether or not each leads to public support for collective action.

Who’s responsible?

This section discusses three perspectives regarding responsibility for disparities and   solutions:

Interpersonal responsibility — Disparities exist because of those who demonstrate prejudice in their interpersonal relationships; therefore, prejudiced individuals are responsible for disparities and attitude change is the solution.

Structural responsibility — We all share responsibility in creating systems that allow disparities; therefore, institutions and structures continue to perpetuate disparities, and policy change is the solution.

Personal responsibility — Responsibility for achieving their own success belongs to individuals; therefore, it is up to individuals to create their own solutions.

Before further discussion of responsibility, it is important to describe people’s understanding of discrimination, and how it shapes their views of disparities and responsibility for action.

“Discrimination” is an issue that can be understood as “interpersonal” (meaning how individuals treat each other, or “individual racism”) or “structural” (meaning racism that is embedded in systems and institutions, or “institutional racism”). These marked differences in understanding often go unstated in public opinion surveys. In fact, surveys frequently ask questions that imply the existence of individual racism only, and obscure the role of structures.

Discrimination — widely divergent views

While Americans of differing races agree that discrimination continues in the United States, they assess the prevalence and consequences of discrimination differently. Black respondents are far more likely than white respondents to assert there is “a lot” of discrimination, that racism is “widespread,” and that it leads to a number of consequences.

Overall, 69 percent say there is “a lot” or “some” discrimination against African Americans. Black respondents are more likely to say there is discrimination (82 percent, 43 percent “a lot”) than white respondents (70 percent, 13 percent “a lot”) or Latino respondents (54 percent, 19 percent “a lot”). (Pew, 2009) Similarly, black respondents believe racism against blacks is widespread in the United States (72 percent), but whites are divided (49 percent widespread, 48 percent not widespread). (Gallup, October 2009)

The marked difference between black and white respondents occurs even among the youngest age groups. While 61 percent of black youth agree with the statement, “it is hard for young Black people to get ahead because they face so much discrimination,” just 43 percent of white youth agree. (Black Youth Project, University of Chicago, 2005)

At the same time, the Pew Research Center found in its 2008 “Political and Economic Survey” that a majority (53 percent) of Americans believe the country is making progress in addressing discrimination against minorities. Among a number of challenges, this is the one area in which people think the country is making progress. Even so, young people are skeptical that discrimination will be eliminated — just 11 percent of black youth and 4 percent of white youth say that it is very likely racism will be eliminated during their lifetime. (Black Youth Project, University of Chicago, 2005)

For black respondents, discrimination matters in part because it leads to serious consequences — such as gaps in income and education (see Figure 7). Far fewer white respondents believe racial discrimination is a major factor leading to these gaps.

Responsibility — interpersonal relationships

As noted above, one way of understanding what racial bias is “about” is grounded in interpersonal relationships. In this view, the problem is seen through the lens of how individuals treat each other; therefore, the solution is attitude change and stripping culture of stereotypes on an individual level.

A main focus in public opinion research has been the investigation of “relationships” between people of different races. In these types of questions, the focus is interpersonal: do people of different races get along, have people been treated unfairly by other individuals due to race, etc. The unstated assumption is that discrimination is based on interpersonal relationships and if people would treat each other fairly, disparities would close.

Most Americans believe that race relations are good, that problems will be worked out, and that more dialogue will help.

According to a Hart/McInturff survey for NBC/Wall Street Journal (2010), majorities across races believe relationships between the races are “good,” with white respondents rating race relations slightly more positively than black respondents — 72 percent of white respondents and 66 percent of black respondents say relations between whites and blacks are “very” or “fairly good.” These ratings jumped in the January 2009 Hart/McInturff survey, just prior to Barack Obama’s inauguration as president. In fact, at that time significant percentages of both white and black respondents believed race relations had gotten better since Barack Obama’s election (46 percent and 40 percent, respectively), but numbers dropped one year later (19 percent and 22 percent, respectively, said “better”).

A Gallup poll from October 2009 showed that a majority (56 percent) believe relations between the races will eventually be worked out. Overall, the ratings have improved since the early 1990s, hitting a high of 67 percent in November 2008.

In looking at the issue from the “interpersonal” perspective, conversation is viewed as a valid solution. Most people believe greater dialogue about race would bring the races together (56 percent overall). Black respondents in particular believe this is true (70 percent). (Gallup, 2009)

Personal slights (being treated with less respect, receiving poor service, etc.) are often the focus of survey questions that purport to measure discrimination. Many black Americans, particularly black men, report that they have experienced this kind of behavior.

Between one-quarter and one-third of black men say they have experienced mistreatment by others due to their race very or somewhat often in their “day-to-day life” including: “people act as if they think you are not smart” (35 percent of black men experience this “very” or “somewhat often”), “people act as if they are afraid of you” (34 percent), “you receive poor service” (29 percent), “you are treated with less respect” (28 percent) and “people act as if they think you are dishonest” (28 percent) (see Figure 9). As a point of comparison, responses among white respondents are in the single digits in each category.

Perceptions of discriminatory treatment vary widely by race. Many black respondents believe that blacks in their community are treated less fairly than whites are, while far fewer white respondents have a similar perception. Note the wide discrepancy in responses between white and black respondents on every measure of discrimination tested. (Gallup, June 2007) Unfair treatment by police is the only category with a considerable percentage of white respondents seeing a problem. Fully 73 percent of black respondents say they see blacks in their community treated less fairly “in dealing with police, such as traffic incidents” while 31 percent of white respondents say blacks in their community are treated less fairly in dealing with police — a 42 percentage point gap. There are similar gaps between the races in their observation of unfair treatment on the job (53 percent and 12 percent, respectively), in downtown stores (47 percent, 13 percent), in neighborhood shops (42 percent, 9 percent) and in places of entertainment (40 percent, 11 percent). (Gallup, 2007) Note: This series of questions straddles both the “interpersonal” and “structural” understandings of the issue of discriminatory treatment, since some examples, such as treatment by police, concern institutions.

The prevalence of the “interpersonal” understanding of this issue embedded throughout public opinion research is troubling for those who care about changing culture and policy. When something as serious as discrimination is commonly trivialized in surveys as being mainly about personal interactions, it obscures the widespread, systemic obstacles and prevents people from seeing the role of collective action and policy change.

Responsibility — structural

Though experts and advocates understand the influence of institutional racism, surveys rarely explore this dynamic. Public understanding of the influence of structures or systems in leading to gaps in achievement is a very limited area of inquiry. Like the questions about relationships and unfair treatment, the few questions that explore some aspect of systemic influences demonstrate opposing views between racial groups.

For example, black Americans see the need for the country to make more changes to achieve equal rights (which implies national policy change), while white Americans disagree. A majority (54 percent) of white respondents believe “our country has made the changes needed to give Blacks equal rights with whites” while just 36 percent believe “our country needs to continue making changes to give Blacks equal rights with whites.” Black respondents feel very differently, with 81 percent believing more changes need to be made. (Pew, 2009) On the economy, most black people said that the economic system is “stacked against Blacks/Black men” while white Americans said that “the system is fair to everyone.”

A split sample experiment demonstrates that some groups may be more willing to see the system as “stacked against Black men” than against black people generally. A majority of black respondents believed America’s economic system is stacked against black men (56 percent of black men and 62 percent of black women agree) while white respondents think the system is fair to everyone (57 percent of white men and 47 percent of white women agree). Responses by black men and white women are consistent across both versions of the question. Black women, however, are more willing to say the system is stacked against black men (62 percent) than it is against blacks as a group (49 percent), and white men become less willing to assert the system is fair to everyone when asked whether the system is stacked specifically against black men rather than blacks as a group (dropping from 69 percent to 57 percent, a 12 percentage point decline). (Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University, 2006)

Even though most white respondents believe “the system is fair,” most also recognize that black men face more obstacles advancing in the workplace than white people or black women. While black men are particularly likely to assert this is true (79 percent of black men say they face more obstacles than whites), even white men, the group least likely to acknowledge discrimination, agree black men face more obstacles than whites (59 percent). (Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University, 2006)

These limited findings may indicate a foundation on which to build. It may be possible, indeed necessary, to highlight in our conversations the structures that impede black male achievement, so that people more readily recognize the systemic causes of disparities.

Responsibility — personal

With the influence of systems and policies invisible to many, all people, including black men, look to personal responsibility to explain success or failure. In this view, racial disparities exist because individuals of different races are not trying as hard as necessary to achieve. Black respondents have shifted toward a personal responsibility perspective to explain gaps in black achievement since the mid-1990s.

As a general stance, Americans overwhelmingly believe in personal empowerment and self-determination. Given two choices, 82 percent of Americans side with the view that “everyone has it in their own power to succeed” while only 12 percent side with the view “success in life is pretty much determined by forces outside of our control.” Fully 77 percent of blacks believe in self-determination, a far higher percentage than in the mid-1990s when it stood at 66 percent. (Pew, 2009)

Majorities of blacks (61 percent) and whites (58 percent) agree that “Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they’re willing to work hard,” while fewer choose the alternate view, “Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people” (36 percent of black respondents and 41 percent of white respondents). (Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University, 2011) Two thirds of all respondents (69 percent) side with the view, “people get ahead by their own hard work,” while the remainder say “lucky breaks or help from other people” are equally important (20 percent) or more important (10 percent). (National Opinion Research Center, 2010)

When race is added to the consideration, most assert that people are responsible for their own fate and place little fault on discrimination.

Given two choices, most Americans side with the view, “Blacks who can’t get ahead in this country are mostly responsible for their own condition” over the alternate view, “Racial discrimination is the main reason why many Black people can’t get ahead these days” (67 percent and 18 percent, respectively). White respondents are particularly likely to side with individual responsibility (70 percent), but even a majority of black respondents agree (52 percent). A majority of white respondents have pointed to individual responsibility since Pew started asking this question in the mid-1990s, and this view has gained traction among black respondents in recent years. (Pew Research Center for the People and the Press and Pew Sociological and Demographic Trends Project, 2009)

A majority (56 percent) of Americans believe the problems facing black men are more a result “of what Black men have failed to do for themselves” than “of what white people have done to Blacks.” White men are most likely to point to individual failure (63 percent), as do 59 percent of black men, 56 percent of black women, and 51 percent of white women. (Washington Post/KFF/Harvard, 2006) Finally, in a series of interviews conducted by Yankelovich/Radio One in 2007, fully 84 percent of black respondents agreed that “Blacks need to be more responsible for themselves as individuals.”

What is unclear, however, is whether “be more responsible for themselves” has the same narrow interpretation across the black community as it would in American culture more broadly. For example, the last statement, “Blacks need to be more responsible for themselves as individuals” might be interpreted as a call for collective action by the black community, for the black community, by at least some people. The same study found 71 percent of blacks saying it is important “to stick together to achieve gains for the community” and that the black “New Middle Class”5 segment was the “most likely to believe that problems in the Black community can best be solved by Blacks and that Blacks need to be more responsible for themselves.” (Yankelovich, 2007) So it may be that in some instances and for some segments of the black community, “personal responsibility” includes collective action.

Generally, the “personal responsibility” approach undermines a role for government in addressing disparities. On a scale of 1-7, where 1 indicates “the government in Washington should make every effort to improve the social and economic position of blacks” and 7 means “the government should not make any special effort to help blacks because they should help themselves” a plurality of black respondents side with the statement that government “should make every effort to improve” their lives (44 percent choose 1-3) over the government making no “special effort … because they should help themselves” (23 percent 5-7). White respondents answer in the reverse (12 percent government help, 54 percent help themselves). (American National Election Studies, 2008)

The rise in the perception that personal responsibility explains success or failure among black Americans has not yet replaced belief that prejudice hinders achievement.

In 2007, 82 percent of black respondents said that it was “important for parents to prepare their children for prejudice.” (Yankelovich) Black men assert that black parents need to both encourage their children that anyone can be successful with hard work, and warn them that they will have to work harder to get credit and that unfairness exists. Few, however, go so far as to say that most white people aren’t trustworthy (see table).

As communicators consider approaches to discrimination, disparities, and stereotypes, these largely invisible tectonics of “who’s responsible?” underlie public understanding and need to be taken into account. If a person believes discrimination is largely a thing of the past, or that discrimination is solely about interpersonal slights and personal racism, or that success is due solely to personal pluck, then a policy conversation seems irrelevant.

The Obama effect

The election of the nation’s first black president had a beneficial effect on people’s assessment of race relations. However, research suggests that Barack Obama’s administration has not ushered in a new era of support for racial policies.

While Americans may have many critiques of Barack Obama, the idea that he is providing preferential treatment to the black community is not typically one of them (though there are some conflicting notions in the research). Only 12 percent overall, and only 13 percent of white respondents, believe that he is “paying too much attention” to blacks. In comparison, more people think he pays too much attention to banks and financial institutions (33 percent), business corporations (25 percent), gays and lesbians (21 percent), and labor unions (17 percent). Black respondents report satisfaction with the level of attention the President is giving to “the concerns of Blacks”: 80 percent say he is giving the right amount of attention, 13 percent say “not enough,” and just 1 percent say “too much.” (Pew, 2009)

In “Change or More of the Same: Evaluating Racial Attitudes in the Obama Era” by Vincent Hutchings (2009), there is little proof that the election of a black president indicates increased support for policies   to address racial gaps. Some research suggests that the racial divide on racial policy matters is as wide as ever.

Furthermore, recent research warns that one consequence of Barack Obama’s election may be that people are less likely to believe discrimination is a problem. In pre- and post-election surveys, one researcher noted an 11-percentage point decline in the view that there is “a lot” or “some” discrimination against blacks. More than one in four, or 27 percent, of those surveyed revised their assessment of discrimination downward, and this shift occurred across a range of demographic groups. Declines in ratings of discrimination are associated with an increase in negative views of blacks and increased opposition to affirmative action and immigration. (Valentino, 2011) While it is too soon to know if this portends future obstacles in building public support for policies, advocates should be attentive.

Finally, President Obama’s real influence on the electorate may be more about mood than policy — he lifted black Americans’ assessment of race relations and progress. Americans overall are more likely to believe that Obama’s election made race relations better rather than worse (41 percent better, 22 percent worse), and this view is even more prevalent among black Americans (53 percent better, 20 percent worse). Americans are optimistic that Obama’s presidency will make race relations better (61 percent), a view that is especially held by black Americans (79 percent). (Gallup, October 2009) In fact, just prior to his inauguration, surveys showed a jump in the percentage saying relations between the races are “good.” (Hart/McInturff, 2010)

Download Full Report

In some respects, there has been a significant amount of research recommending message directions  on issues of race. However, much of this research is limited in its utility, either because it was designed  to accomplish a narrow goal (and therefore is ineffective or even harmful for broader goals), or  because its focus is so broad it can be difficult to demonstrate effectiveness in advancing specific policy objectives. Most important, even those who have studied and recommended framing directions on these issues for some time are struggling to refine their recommendations and prove they can have an impact in policy debates. Much work still needs to be done.

A consistent question in communications strategies to build support for policies that will address racial disparities is whether to deliver messages that are explicitly “about” race, knowing that some explicit racial messages reduce support for equitable policies. Should advocates focus on race or class, or on race or place?

Highlighting or avoiding race

In a paper prepared for Ohio State University’s Kirwin Institute, “The Dangers of Not Speaking About Race,” Philip Mazzocco (2006) suggests that highlighting race, a color-conscious approach, can be effective in reducing discrimination and lead to support for racial policies. Though this particular research is limited to college students and should be viewed with caution, the general perspective is shared among some social scientists who suggest race consciousness is a necessary precursor to problem solving. (For more on this see Social Science Literature Review: Media Representations and Impact on the Lives of Black Men and Boys by Topos for The Opportunity Agenda, October 2011.)

From a communications perspective, much of the research sponsored by the FrameWorks Institute has cautioned about framing the conversation as being about “race” or “racism.” Strategists often promote messages that avoid race and instead focus on a broader value or connection (e.g., opportunity for all; disparities in place, not race). Using a series of frame experiments, some explicitly referring to race, some not, Gilliam and Manuel (in The Illogic of Literalness: Narrative Lessons in the Presentation of Race Policies, 2009) conclude that communicators should start with core values, not race:

…while it is true that racism as a value did have some positive effects, they were, in the main, about half as effective as exposing people to core American values that did not cite historical discrimination as an explanation for disparities in society. The fact that more generalized treatments were able to elevate support for policies that were specifically targeted to racial and ethnic minorities makes these effects even more compelling. It suggests a kind of disjunctive irony – in order to garner support for race-based policies, advocates need to begin the conversation by invoking broader core American values. Being literal about racism in the public dialogue about race is not the most effective way to build public will for progressive race policy reforms.

While starting the conversation in a different place may have utility, avoiding race completely is unlikely to achieve targeted racial equity policies. For example, based on research designed to develop effective communications for affirmative action, Westen Strategies, in “Neutralizing the  Affirmative Action Debate” (2009), recommends the following as the top-performing message against the opposition message in dial testing. This message avoids a focus on race (instead highlighting gender and age discrimination), denounces discrimination in all its forms, and positions the issue as being about “flexibility to ensure fair treatment” rather than “quotas.” It is easy to see how the following text would score well on a dial test — it is hard to disagree with. But it is unclear whether it builds support for affirmative action more broadly.

In this country, we don’t believe in discriminating against people, regardless of their color, ethnic background, sex, or age, and government shouldn’t tie the hands of employers or colleges with inflexible rules that prevent them from making sure every qualified candidate gets a fair chance. We all know that women don’t get hired or promoted in a lot of companies the same way as men, particularly if they took time off to raise their kids, [and all of us should care about that] whether we’re women, fathers, or husbands. We all know that employers look differently at older workers than younger ones, and we shouldn’t be telling a 55-year-old guy, [“Sorry, there’s no place for you here,”] when he got laid off from a job. And we all know that underfunded rural or urban schools with crumbling walls and 1980s textbooks put kids at a disadvantage, whether they’re black, white, or brown. We need to let business and educational leaders act responsibly and flexibly to make sure everyone is treated fairly, without resorting to quotas or one-size-fits-all programs that don’t do right by anyone.

Avoiding race may be an attractive short-term strategy, but over the long term it may also avoid the central issues and lead to no significant change in public understanding or culture.

Two other promising directions that have received some limited attention are: begin with structures/ systems first and then connect to race; and emphasize positive connections and interdependence among racial groups rather than differences.

Structures/Systems

One promising approach is to highlight a broken or flawed system of which all Americans are part, and then bridge to the dynamics of race. For example, Americans value education, want to improve the education system, and recognize that urban, black communities often have the weakest schools. Problematically, without careful framing, this approach can lead to blaming the individual (thinking that parents are at fault) or toward highlighting another problematic dynamic (such as “class” or “poor people”), rather than focusing on weaknesses in the system.

One tool that has been identified that keeps attention focused on systems and resources rather than individuals is the “Prosperity Grid” simplifying model. The basic idea is to communicate   a

metaphorical grid that underscores the role of resources and institutions in creating opportunity and prosperity. Communities, including the black community, for example, can be characterized as having more or less access to the resources afforded by the Prosperity Grid. Aubrun, Brown, and Grady, in their 2006 work, Moving Beyond Entrenched Thinking About Race: The Homeowner/Stakeholder Effect, note that:

Experts say the most prosperous communities have thriving institutions that provide opportunity, like quality schools, community banks and so on. Think of it as a Prosperity Grid, where everyone, all parts of the community, can plug into and benefit from these institutions of opportunity…

Another approach that keeps attention focused on systems and resources, while advocating the value of opportunity, demonstrates an ability to lift support for policies:

Lately there has been a lot of talk about social conditions in America. Some people believe  that African-American communities still face many barriers to opportunity. They have more declining school budgets, restrictive lending practices, and fewer health professionals. The American Dream has always relied on creating an environment where everyone has an opportunity to achieve — including African Americans. According to this view, we need to devote more attention to ensuring that every community — including African American communities — provides an opportunity to succeed for all its residents. This will result in a better quality of life and future prosperity for the nation as a whole. Please tell us if you have heard this explanation of why we should allocate societal assets to improving conditions in African American communities. (Gilliam & Manuel, 2009)

It should be noted that while Gilliam and the FrameWorks Institute have recommended a number of frames to address issues of race, in their survey research, the message listed above was the only one of several messages tested that lifted policy support while also bridging to a conversation about race. Other messages that didn’t test well in the survey should still be considered promising approaches, but ones that need further development.

Connections and interdependence

A dynamic that hinders broad-based support for change is people’s inability to see their connections to others. Sixty percent of white respondents reject the idea that what happens generally to black men in this country will have something to do with what happens in their own life. (Washington Post/ Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University, 2006) Cueing zero-sum thinking increases the sense that members of other racial groups are competitive threats and is likely to undermine support for policies to address disparities. In “Perceptions of Racial Group Competition,” Bobo and Hutchings (1996) wrote:

Perceptions of competitive group threat thus involve genuinely social-psychological processes that are not reducible to a single cause nor to purely individual-level psychological dynamics… We find that perceptions of competition and threat from other racial groups can be reliably measured. Such perceptions, while not acute in our data, are fairly common. Substantial percentages (though typically less than 50 percent), of Whites, Blacks, Latinos, and Asians perceive members of other groups as zero-sum competitive threats for social resources… Perceptions of group competition tend to be based on a mix of racial alienation, prejudice, stratification beliefs, and self-interest. (Bobo & Hutchings, 1996)

Instead, can communications create a sense of shared fate, a sense that what happens to one segment of society affects all of society? Individualistic thinking leads to competition between the races:

However, rather than decreasing perceptions of threat, individualistic thinking tends to encourage Whites to view Asian Americans and Latinos as competitive threats, to encourage Asians to view Latinos as competitive threats, and to encourage Blacks and Latinos to view Asians as competitive threats. (Ibid.)

So can creating a sense of interdependence alleviate competition between the races? Survey experiments with affirmative action policy suggest that redefining the issue as one that affects society more broadly helps build support even for subgroups.

For example, with no priming, 63 percent support affirmative action programs for women and just 50 percent support affirmative action programs for racial minorities. When primed with a question about affirmative action for women first, support for affirmative action for minorities increased by 7 points. This occurs because people respond based on criteria for the first question they hear, then end up using the same lens to judge the subsequent question:

The theoretical explanation for this shift in views is what Schuman and Presser (1981, p. 28; also see Moore 2002, pp. 82–3, for an operational definition) term “consistency” effects. When asked first about either type of AA [affirmative action] program before being asked about the other type (what Moore termed a “non-comparative context”), people make their evaluations based on whatever criteria they bring to mind. But when asked about the second type of AA program after having been asked about the first type (a “comparative context”), many people will make their evaluation of the second type of AA program in comparison with their evaluation of the first. Thus, many respondents who first said they support AA programs for women then feel obligated (when asked the second question) to express support for AA programs targeted to racial minorities. Similarly, people who first said they oppose AA for racial minorities are then less inclined to turn around and support it for women (when the latter question is asked second). The comparative context thus elicits a “norm of reciprocity” (Schuman and Presser 1981, p. 28) leading to more consistent expressions of support for each type of AA program than are found in the noncomparative context. (Wilson, 2010)

Some suggest that people view gender inequality through a lens of shared interest (we are all affected by gender inequality), while racial inequality is not typically viewed through an interdependent lens (Winter, 2008), so perhaps the prime puts people in an interdependent mindset rather than a competitive mindset.

In addition, qualitative testing of an interconnectedness approach shows promise in helping people see that addressing racial disparities benefits all of society. In quantitative research that followed the qualitative study, however, analysis demonstrated that the following prime had effects on support for child and youth development policy, but not other policies:

Lately there has been a lot of talk about how we are all connected in our country. Some people believe that we will only succeed when all parts of the nation are in good shape. Problems of poor health and education that happen in one part of the nation end up affecting us all. For this reason, moving ahead as a country requires promoting programs and improving services everywhere so that we all benefit from our interconnection. According to this view, all communities must be able to realize their potential and contribute to the country. Have you heard this explanation of why we should allocate societal assets to recognize the connections among communities? (Gilliam & Manuel, 2009)

Note also that this prime included no racial cues, so it is unclear how it would perform in the context of a conversation about racial disparities. Interconnectedness is core to the progressive narrative and will be an important element of conversations on race. However, it is a direction that needs more development and testing before communicators can use it with confidence.

Communicators should be cautious about how they deploy a connectedness message. Sometimes strategists recommend messages that cue negative connections using fear, failure, or prevention (e.g., educate now or pay for prison later). Using racial problems as a threat to meet our short-term policy goals is likely to exacerbate the long-term problems in perception. Note the following examples from a series of framing experiments. The general prevention prime was effective in lifting policy support, but when it was translated to a prevention prime emphasizing race (with negative connections) it lost effectiveness:

Lately there has been a lot of talk about prevention in our country. Some people believe that we should prevent health and education problems before they occur. When we don’t address them, they eventually become worse and cost more to fix. For this reason, it is important to promote programs and improve services that keep problems from occurring in the first place. According to this view, we can save lives and money if we make good prevention programs easier for everyone to access. Have you heard this explanation of why we should allocate societal assets to prevention?

Lately there has been a lot of talk about social conditions in America. Some people believe   that preventing problems in African American communities is important because they will eventually become everyone’s problems. Preventing declining school budgets, restrictive lending practices, and a scarcity of health professionals in African American communities will prevent worse problems in the future. According to this view, we can prevent further damage to our nation by devoting more resources to addressing these problems in African American communities before they become more serious. Please tell us if you have heard this explanation of why we should allocate societal assets to preventing problems affecting African American communities. (Gilliam & Manuel,  2009)

Solutions orientation

Finally, a “best practice” that is often overlooked by communicators is the importance of highlighting solutions. Advocates can easily assume that if people just know how terrible a problem is, how much of a crisis is on the horizon, they will rise up to fix it. Instead, people can easily become paralyzed with inaction because they become overwhelmed by seemingly intractable problems. They cannot imagine what the solutions could be. Lynn Davey offered this idea in her 2009 FrameWorks Institute message brief, “Strategies for Framing Racial Disparities”:

One of the common mistakes made by advocates in all fields is the tendency to bury solutions messages deep in their communications material, while routinely according inordinate  attention to defining the problem. … When people are presented with effective solutions, they are able to more clearly understand where the system breaks down and how we might fix it.

Reorienting communications around solutions, rather than problems, will go a long way toward building support for public policies.

Download Full Report

There is a significant body of work exploring public opinion of race relations, experiences with discrimination, differences between races in how they understand this issue, and so on. Yet most research largely seeks to understand the “snapshot” of public opinion — where opinion currently stands and the variables that influence a particular view — rather than how to change opinion.

Still, this overview provides important insights about how people understand the nature of the problem. Implicitly, discrimination is often viewed as being about relationships and personal interactions, not systemic bias or policy. Disparities can easily be blamed on lack of personal ambition or hard work. The role of systems and structures has to become more apparent if we hope to spark broad-based support for policy change.

Importantly, issue conversations often trigger competition between races, as though success is zero-sum and what is “given” to one group is “taken” from another. Instead, we need to find communications strategies that join people in common purpose and shared fate, while not erasing race in the process.

Specifically, communicators should consider the following  recommendations.

Conduct new research and message testing, designed with precise, short-, mid-, and long-term goals in mind. The limited message development that has been done on these issues tends to lie at either end of a continuum. Either it is done in service of a narrow goal (e.g., pass “bill X”) or a vague, ill-defined goal (e.g., talk about race). Or,  it has not yet proven its ability to create change. We  need to define specific goals relevant to improving the achievement of black males to which we can hold our strategy accountable.

Sharpen objectives and strategies for different audiences. Clearly this research suggests different starting  points  for  the  conversation  with  different  racial  groups. Black Americans  are  far  more  likely to see the systemic flaws that lead to disparities and support government action (though the personal responsibility  perspective  is  gaining  ground),  while few white  Americans  even  recognize  the  breadth and severity of traditional  discrimination,  let  alone  institutional  racism. What  is  the  call  to  action  for core, mobilizable audiences within communities of color? What call to action makes sense for opinion influencers in white communities? These and similar questions must be asked and focused on.

Develop frame flips and unifying narratives. The old storylines have limited ability to gain traction. This analysis points to the need for a frame  flip  and  a  unifying  narrative  to  break  through  deeply entrenched views on these issues. Specifically, new framing on this issue needs to:

• Mend the in-group/out-group cycle and establish a sense of “us.”
• Reinforce shared fate and interdependence.
• Avoid the competitive and zero-sum assumptions that are so prevalent in public perceptions of these issues.
• Look for ways to characterize the unique challenges facing black men and solutions to the challenges without inadvertently implying that other groups will have less opportunity, e.g., “breaking down obstacles” instead of “addressing disparities.”

• Emphasize effective solutions. Focus on structures, systems, and policies, not personal offenses.
• Do not lose sight of or avoid race and racial disparities in the conversation.

Engage audiences around specific issue categories. Harmonize the broad overarching narrative about black male achievement with specific issue categories that most matter to black men – jobs and income, education, and criminal justice. Gains in image and perceptions matter  most when they lead to real gains in closing disparities in these areas.

Works Cited

Allstate/National Journal (2011). Heartland Monitor Poll IX, N=1000 telephone interviews with adults nationally, with oversamples of African-Americans (n=305), Hispanics (n=304), and Asians (n=110). May 18-22, 2011. http://www.allstate.com/Allstate/content/refresh-attachments/Heartland_IX_data. pdf.

American National Election Studies (2008). Time Series Study, N= 2,099 – 2,312 adults nationally.

Amodio, David M. (2009). Intergroup anxiety effects on the control of racial stereotypes: A psychoneuroendocrine analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45,  60-67.

Aubrun, Axel, Andrew Brown and Joseph Grady (2006). Moving Beyond Entrenched Thinking About Race: The Homeowner/Stakeholder Effect. The FrameWorks  Institute.

Black Youth Project, Center for the Study of Race, Politics, and Culture at the University of Chicago (2005). “The Attitudes and Behavior of Young Black Americans: Research Summary.” http://www- news.uchicago.edu/releases/07/070201.blackyouthproject.pdf.

Bobo, Lawrence, and Vincent L. Hutchings (1996). Perceptions of Racial Group Competition: Extending Blumer’s Theory of Group Position to a Multiracial Social Context. 61 American Sociological Review, 951, 956.  http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/soc/faculty/bobo/pdf percent20documents/ PRacial.pdf.

Davey, Lynn (2009). “Strategies for Framing Racial Disparities: A FrameWorks Institute Message Brief.” Washington, DC: FrameWorks Institute. http://www.frameworksinstitute.org/toolkits/race/ resources/pdf/disparitiesmessagebrief.pdf.

Diuguid, Lewis and Adrienne Rivers (2000). “The media and the black response.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 569, 120-134.

Dyck, Joshua J., Laura S. Hussey (2008). The End of Welfare as We Know It? Durable Attitudes in a Changing Information Environment. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 72:589–618.

Gallup Organization trends, with particular attention to surveys fielded Oct. 16-19, 2009 and June 5– July  6,  2008. http://www.gallup.com/poll/1687/Race-Relations.aspx.

Gallup Organization (2007). Survey of 2,388 interviews with national adults, aged 18 and older, was conducted June 4-24, 2007, including oversamples of blacks and Hispanics. http://www.gallup.com/ poll/28417/most-americans-approve-interracial-marriages.aspx.

Gallup Organization for Phi Delta Kappa (2006). June 11–July 5, 2006, n = 1,007 telephone interviews with adults nationally. From the iPOLL Databank, The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University  of  Connecticut. http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/data_access/ipoll/ipoll.html.

Gilens, Martin. (1999) Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gilliam Jr., Franklin and Manuel, Tiffany (2009). The Illogic of Literalness: Narrative Lessons in the Presentation of Race Policies. Washington, D.C.: FrameWorks  Institute.

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (2009). Pew Economic Mobility Survey. January 27-February 8, 2009, n=1000 Respondents (2119 Unweighted), 400 African American Oversample (517 total cases, unweighted), 400 Hispanic Oversample (520 total cases, unweighted), 300 Youth (under age 40) Oversample (497 total cases, unweighted). http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/Poll_ Questionnaire.pdf.

Harris Interactive (2009). Committee of 100. January 5 – 30, 2009. N = 1,221 telephone interviews with adults nationally, with an oversample of 206 Chinese Americans. Full Report: http://survey. committee100.org/2009/files/FullReportfinal.pdf Topline Results: http://survey.committee100.org/2009/ files/ToplineResultsfinal.pdf.

Hart/McInturff (2010). The NBC/Wall Street Journal Survey. January 10-14, 2010, n=1,002 adults. http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/Politics_Today_Stories_Teases/ FI9500.pdf.

Hart/McInturff (2009). The NBC/Wall Street Journal Survey. June 12-15, 2009, n=1,008 adults. http:// msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/090617_NBC-WSJ_poll_Full.pdf.

Hutchings, Vincent L. (2009). Change or More of the Same? Evaluating Racial Attitudes in the Obama Era. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 73, No. 5 2009, pp. 917-942.

Jost, John T., Jaime L. Napier, Huida Thorisdottir, Samuel D. Gosling, Tibor P. Palfai, & Brian Ostafin, (2007). “Are needs to manage uncertainty and threat associated with political conservatism or ideological extremity?” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 989-1007.

Kaplowitz, Stan A., Bradley J. Fisher, Clifford L. Broman (2003). How Accurate are Perceptions of Social Statistics About Blacks and Whites? Effects of Race and Education. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 67:237–243.

Katz, Irwin, and R. Glen Hass (1988). “Racial Ambivalence and American Value Conflict: Correlational and Priming Studies of Dual Cognitive Structures.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55:893–905.

Link, Michael, and Robert Oldendick (1996). ‘‘Social Construction and White Attitudes toward Equal Opportunity and Multiculturalism.’’ Journal of Politics 58:149–68.

Lipset, Seymour M., and William Schneider (1978). “The Bakke Case: How Would It Be Decided at the Bar of Public Opinion?” Public Opinion 1:38–44.

Mazzocco, Philip (2006). “The Dangers of Not Speaking About Race.” Prepared for the Kirwin Institute, Ohio State University, May 2006. http://www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/mazzocco.pdf.

National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago (2010). March 15 – August 12, 2010, 2,043 personal interviews with adults nationally. From the iPOLL Databank, The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University of Connecticut. http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/data_access/ipoll/ipoll.html.

Opinion Research Corporation for Cable News Network & Essence Magazine (2008). March 26- April 2, 2008. N = 2,184 telephone interviews with adults nationally including an oversample of blacks; a total of 1014 African-American respondents. From the iPOLL Databank, The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University of Connecticut. http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/data_access/ipoll/ipoll.html.

Patchen, Martin, James Davidson, Gerhard Hofmann, and William Brown (1977). “Determinants of Students’ Interracial Behavior and Opinion Change.” Sociology of Education 50:55–75.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2011). “A Tale of Two Fathers.” May 26-29 and June 2-5, 2011. N= 2,006 adults nationally. Includes a Pew Research Center analysis of the National Survey of Family Growth. http://pewsocialtrends.org/files/2011/06/fathers-FINAL-report.pdf.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2010). The 2010 Political Independents Survey, August 25 – September 6, 2010, n=3509. http://people-press.org/files/legacy-questionnaires/658.pdf.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press and Pew Social and Demographic Trends Project (2009). Racial Attitudes in America II, October 28 – November 30, 2009, whites n=1447, Blacks  n=812, Hispanics n=376. http://pewsocialtrends.org/files/2010/10/blacks-upbeat-about-black-progress- prospects.pdf.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2008). Political and Economic Survey, December 3-7,  2008, n=1,489. Topline: http://people-press.org/files/legacy-questionnaires/480.pdf.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (April 2007). No Child Left Behind Survey, April 18- 22,  2007, n=1508. Topline: http://people-press.org/files/legacy-questionnaires/337.pdf.

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (January 2007). The 2007 Values Update Survey, December 12, 2006 – January 9, 2007, n=2007. http://people-press.org/files/legacy-questionnaires/312.pdf.

Princeton Survey Research Associates International (PSRA) for Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2011). “January 2011 Political Survey.” January 5-9, 2011. N= 1,503 adults nationally.

Smith, Tom W. (1990). Ethnic Images. GSS Topical Report no. 19. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center.

Tesler, Michael and David O. Sears (2010). Is the Obama Presidency Post Racial? Evidence from his   First Year in Office, Prepared for presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April 22-25, 2010. (Much of this paper appears as Chapter 8 in Tesler, Michael and David O. Sears. 2010. Obama’s Race: The 2008 Election and the Dream of a Post-Racial America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.)  http://mst.michaeltesler.com/uploads/sample_4.pdf.

Tuch, Steven A., Lee Sigelman, Jason A. MacDonald (1999). The Poll – Trends Race Relations and American Youth, 1976 – 1995. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 63:109–148.

Valentino, Nicholas A. and Ted Brader (2011). The Sword’s Other Edge: Perceptions of Discrimination and Racial Policy Opinion after Obama. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 75, No. 2, Summer 2011, pp. 201-226.

Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University (2011). The Race and Recession Survey, January 27 to February 9, 2011, n=1,959, oversamples of 501 African Americans and 501 Hispanic Americans. http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/8159-T.pdf.

Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University (2006). African American Men Survey, March 20 to April 29, 2006, n=2,864. http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7526.pdf.

Westen Strategies/Lake Research (2009). “Neutralizing the Affirmative Action Debate.” June 26-30, 2009. Online dial test with 1,200 likely voters nationally.

Wilson, David C. (2010). Perceptions about the Amount of Interracial Prejudice Depend on Racial Group Membership and Question Order. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 74, No. 2, Summer 2010, pp. 344–356.

Wilson, David C., David W. Moore, Patrick F. McKay, and Derek R. Avery (2008). Affirmative Action Programs for Women and Minorities Expressed Support Affected by Question Order. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 72, No. 3, Fall 2008, pp. 514–522.

Winter, Nicholas J. G. (2008). Dangerous Frames: How Ideas about Race and Gender Shape Public Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Yankelovich/Radio One (2007). October – November 2007, N=3400 interviews (web and phone) with black Americans ages 13-74. http://blackamericastudy.com.

Notes:

1. Few surveys include enough interviews to analyze responses by African-American men in isolation, though we include these findings when possible. Further, very few of the surveys in this review offered subgroup analysis among other racial and ethnic groups. Our references to views of other ethnic groups are therefore limited.

2. American National Election Studies (2008); Allstate/National Journal, Heartland Monitor Poll IX (2011).

3. Researchers should have healthy skepticism about whether self-professed views of race and ethnicity tell the whole story. Several dynamics have been shown to influence survey response including social desirability, question wording and context, and perceived race of interviewer. In addition to the results reported on here, readers should look to the Topos social science literature   review for The Opportunity Agenda, October 2011, Social Science Literature Review: Media Representations and Impact on the Lives   of Black Men and  Boys.

4. Using data gathered in 1995, researchers found that white and black respondents dramatically underestimated the racial gap in “out-of-wedlock births” (actual gap in 1995 was 46.1 percent, white and black respondents averaged 16.1 percent and 23.1 percent, respectively); both groups underestimated the gap in “family income” (actual gap was $12,500, white and black respondents estimated $9,410 and $9,500, respectively); both groups underestimated the racial gap in the “average income of male college graduates” with white respondents underestimating the size of the gap more than black respondents (actual gap was $6,600, white and black respondents estimated $2,370 and $5,860, respectively); and finally, white respondents underestimated the racial gap in poverty rates while blacks who responded gave higher than the actual number. (According to Kaplowitz, the actual gap in percent in poverty was 22.3, white and black respondents estimated 17.9 and 25.3, respectively.)

5. The “Black New Middle Class” is defined in the study as follows: “the best educated, most employed and wealthiest segment  is mostly between the ages of 25 and 44 and is the most technologically forward segment” of the survey population.

Download Full Report