Feature
Media Smears: One Man’s Experiences
A noted economist fires back.
(Page 3 of 3)
I have not been the only target of such unsupported innuendoes or such double standards. Various black writers have emerged in recent years to challenge some of the prevailing assumptions of the civil rights establishment and have encountered personal attacks rather than substantive criticism of their work. Sociologist William Julius Wilson of the University of Chicago produced a widely read study that questioned whether racial economic differences today were nearly as much due to racial discrimination as in the past. Economist Walter Williams of George Mason University wrote a prize-winning article on numerous government programs that harm minorities — including some programs, such as the minimum wage law, that are ostensibly intended to be beneficial. Former civil rights attorney Derrick Bell, now dean of the law school at the University of Oregon, questioned whether massive busing was really in the interest of black children. Professor of psychiatry Gloria Powell of UCLA published a massive study which failed to show any clear pattern of psychological gains by black children who had been “integrated” in the public schools, despite what was widely expected, promised, or claimed.
Several things are remarkable about this group of people. They arrived at their conclusions by research, independently of each other, and without a common social or political position. They are academics with neither a financial nor a political stake in one conclusion rather than another. Yet they have all been accused of seeking personal gain or political advancement, or of being too affluent to understand the ghetto. Yet the press has seldom used the same standards when judging their critics. The New York Times, for example, asked NAACP Executive Director Benjamin Hooks whether Walter Williams’s middleclass status and income did not undermine Williams’s positions on racial issues, without ever considering whether Hooks’s own background was not far more middle class than Williams’s or his current income far higher — and dependent on the very programs he advocated. Carl Rowan’s innuendoes that people were taking certain public positions on issues to get political appointments for themselves centered on two academics (Williams and myself) who have never been politically appointed to any job — though Rowan himself has. Nathaniel Jones of the NAACP publicly questioned whether Derrick Bell was not trying for personal career gain by opposing busing, though in fact the real gains were to be made by taking Jones’s position — which gained him a federal judgeship through appointment by President Carter, while Bell remains an academic.
If facts about issues are to be subordinated to speculations about personal motives, then at least the standards can be the same for those on opposite sides of the issues.
“Real” Meanings
When there is nothing that can even be lifted out of context to
support a damaging interpretation, some writers resort to reporting
your “real” meaning. “Real” meanings require no evidence whatever,
and can never be disproved. They are ideal for smears.
According to book reviewer Paul Buhle in the Nation, the real purpose of Ethnic America was to offer “economic and historical justification” for “gutting social services.” Nowhere in the book is any social service mentioned as requiring reduction. According to St. Clair Drake in the Palo Alto Weekly, the real purpose is to “put forward a conservative agenda” — though no agenda at all is put forth in the book — a fact which other reviewers (including those in Time and Newsweek) complained about. In the same vein, David Herbert Donald declared in the New York Times that “Mr. Sowell is really less interested in the past than in the present and the future,” even though the book is a history, with almost no discussion of current policies.
Among the “real” meanings discerned was one presented by Carl Rowan in such a way that unwary readers might think it was a direct quote from me about my career: “I did all this on my own, with hard work, so I don’t want government to give any lazy bastard anything.” What I actually said about my own career was written a decade ago in Black Education: Myths and Tragedies:
It would be premature at best and presumptuous at worst to attempt to draw sweeping or definitive conclusions from my personal experiences. It would be especially unwarranted to draw Horatio Alger conclusions, that perseverance and/or ability “win out” despite obstacles. The fact is, I was losing in every way until my life was changed by the Korean War, the draft, and the GI Bill — none of which I can take credit for. I have no false modesty about having seized the opportunity and worked to make it pay off, but there is no way to avoid the fact that there first had to be an opportunity to seize.
Words lose a lot in translation when other people start reporting your “real” meaning. Lem Tucker on the CBS morning program had me claiming “that he alone, almost without bootstraps, pulled himself out of the ghetto through Harvard and the University of Chicago.” Others have depicted me as advising other blacks to emulate my example, though they could never seem to come up with any specific quote from when I had done so. It would of course be a ridiculous piece of advice, for luck was an important element, and there is no way to emulate luck. What I have urged is that other disadvantaged people be allowed more options — school vouchers as just one example — and less advice from “experts.”
Responsible Journalism
Any discussion of irresponsible or malicious statements in the
press is itself misleading if it does not mention that there are
fair, honest, and intelligent journalists as well. But it takes
relatively few individuals to keep a smear campaign going. And once
certain distortions are repeated often enough, they become “facts”
to many readers and even to other writers.
People are constantly telling me how surprised they are at reading something I have written, because it is so different from what they have been led to believe by the media. But the problem is much bigger than me or my ideas. If I were going to let smears stop me, I would have stopped years ago. What is far more important is that an atmosphere of character assassination is not one in which there is a widespread clash of opposing views. It is not even a question of which view is right. No single individual or set of “leaders” has a monopoly on understanding. Even the truth may be an incomplete truth, and need additional perspectives that lie beyond one person’s vision. In short, the process of airing different perspectives is even more important than the question of which is closest to the truth.
Implicit in much that is said about the emotional subject of race and ethnicity is the presumption that no honest disagreement is possible on the orthodoxy promoted by the civil rights leaders and liberal politicians. “Lay not that flattering unction to your soul,” Hamlet warned. It is a warning that is as timely today as it was centuries ago.
Historically, people who have looked at things differently have always been seen as a threat — in science, religion, the military, and every other field of human concern and commitment. Even the most advanced nations in Western Civilization — including the United States — burned women alive as witches within the past three centuries. Where feelings run deep, rationality has often broken down. Moreover, the time pressures of the media and the need for excitement to attract readers and viewers promote the creation of stereotypes, bogeymen, and scapegoats. But surely it is time we learned from history that the particular victims and scapegoats are not the only losers in an atmosphere of witch-hunting. We all lose when we stifle the diversities of opinion which alone give us some hope of understanding complex and difficult social issues.
About the Author
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is www.tsowell.com. To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (29) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Thomas Sowell
More Articles From Feature
http://spectator.org/archives/1982/05/01/media-smears-one-mans-experien
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The End of the Castros?
- What’s in a Name?
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
OregonBuzz| 5.18.12 @ 9:51AM
As always, good deeds rarely go unpunished.
Alan Brooks| 5.18.12 @ 6:46PM
If Sowell is so good, why can't the GOP run him for POTUS? Because he is too old?
Abu Nudnik| 5.20.12 @ 12:26PM
Because he is an academic, not a politician. As stated in the article above which you didn't read, he has rejected more than one offer to be in government. He has, as stated above in the article you didn't read, opted to be an academic.
Dave Bowman| 5.28.12 @ 11:09AM
In light of your awesome debating skills have they considered next year letting you skip the 4th grade?
A. C. Santore| 5.18.12 @ 10:01AM
In a way, Professor Sowell, you might take a bow.
The more hysterical, ferocious, and blatantly false the left's attacks become, the more they fear you, your values, and your ideas.
You're in good company.
Alan Brooks| 5.19.12 @ 10:13AM
He'll be in good company at Forest Lawn too, in a few years.
Butch| 5.19.12 @ 6:43PM
So will we all, my friend, including you.
Abu Nudnik| 5.20.12 @ 12:31PM
Perhaps not the super-moral, who distinguish themselves by wishing for the deaths of men with whom they disagree. The jury is out. Wink.
Alan Brooks| 5.20.12 @ 6:10PM
Obama's death would not cause you to shed hot tears on your pillow.
One point on which Sowell is right is his saying if Germany and Japan could be defeated in '45, so can America. But I don't want America defeated, I want the GOP defeated, and if such should mean Sowell's death then so be it. I'll write this over 'n over: if Romney should be elected president-- and he has got a 50- 50 chance-- he will be treated as badly as Obama is being treated today; which is a guarantee not a promise.
Jay Dee| 5.20.12 @ 7:03PM
How odd you somehow work GOP defeat and the death of Dr. Sowell into one sentence.
We are also well aware Romney will be treated the same way Obama has been treated - you cut your teeth by making mincemeat of Bush.
Alan Brooks you really are a nasty man.
Alan Brooks| 5.21.12 @ 2:49AM
"you cut your teeth by making mincemeat of Bush."
no, after 9-11,
I got caught up in the anti-Arab, anti-Shiite frenzy; it wasn't until '08 I realized his administration (Bush was a figurehead) was a nothingburger.
Alan Brooks| 5.21.12 @ 2:51AM
...
"Obama's death would not cause you to shed hot tears on your pillow."
BTW, you didn't deny the above- it was totally predictable. You hate Obama and would not mind his death.
Lawrence| 5.21.12 @ 9:44AM
"But I don't want America defeated, I want the GOP defeated, and if such should mean Sowell's death then so be it."
And what if the GOP's defeat and our nation's salvation depends on your death? Maybe you should drop dead, just in case.
Or would you argue that the party's defeat and your demise are wholly unrelated events? So too is Sowell's eventual passing, and it takes a morbid and even a murderous mind to think that the death of an academic like Sowell is a necessary precondition for anything good.
Von Mises Jr| 5.18.12 @ 10:34AM
I have read two-dozen tomes by Dr. Sowell and wish to thank him for being the most influential person in my thinking after the Bible and my family. I have learned more from his diverse books than any other writer by far.
Great men such as Dr. Sowell always enrage socialist. Von Mises and Hayek both fled the Nazi's for their lives. It speaks to the greatness of America that both found refuge in America to continue their brilliant economic work. America also made it possible for the world to know and love Dr. Thomas Sowell. God blesses you good Doctor.
spike59| 5.18.12 @ 12:13PM
30 years later, the MSM has, if anything, become even more brazen
Dropping By| 5.18.12 @ 2:23PM
I have a signed copy of one of Dr. Sowell's books, and have read 4 of them. He is a national treasure.
podbaydoors| 5.18.12 @ 3:12PM
Dr. Sowell's Basic Economics remains a most treasured book of mine. I have greatly admired his steadfast commitment to intellectual rigor in the face of such vile hatred. Interesting how the attack dogs have never changed. The yapping has become somewhat more hysterical, though.
Mike| 5.19.12 @ 1:18AM
I worked with a black man who refused to discuss any writings of Dr. Sowell. His justification was that Dr. Sowell is not an "authentic black man" and did not understand black poverty. This man had grown up the child of a corporate vice-president in the automotive business thus he had no first hand experience, yet he dismissed Dr. Sowell's background.
I pointed out to this black man that his bigotry toward Dr. Sowell had little to distinguish it from the white bigotry of the Ku Klux Klan. He became enraged that anyone would point out his bigotry since he was on the company's diversity committee.
In a fit of anger he later quit after being passed over for promotion since it was in his mind due to his color rather than his inability to work with people of differing opinions.
Suzyqpie | 5.19.12 @ 8:40AM
Dear Dr. Sowell, Make sure that you never remove the tags on a new mattress or pillow. Suddenly that infraction would become a felony. Seems the bullseye on your back is a permanent feature that you continue to manage with great skill.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 5.19.12 @ 9:43AM
Dr. Sowell's piece from 30 years ago tends to support the notion that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Concurrently, though, one also sees a significant shift in the position of the race industry in America. At the time of the 1982 article, Derrick Bell is listed as one of Dr. Sowell's fellow academics outside the accepted mainstream. He went on to Harvard, was embraced by Obama, and his critical race theory seems to be the mainstream of thought for many in the administration.
Dr. Sowell continues to put forth his wisdom, though, in a way that undermines the race baiters.
Abu Nudnik| 5.20.12 @ 12:24PM
It is wryly amusing that you have been accused of these things by people who call themselves "liberal," "tolerant" and "inclusive" when your words above are almost the definition of liberalism:
"No single individual or set of "leaders" has a monopoly on understanding. Even the truth may be an incomplete truth, and need additional perspectives that lie beyond one person's vision. In short, the process of airing different perspectives is even more important than the question of which is closest to the truth."
Pelleas| 5.20.12 @ 5:32PM
"Actually, I have not been hospitalized in more than a decade, and do not even know the location of a hospital in Palo Alto."
YOU ARE "A senior FLLOW at The Hoover Institute, (located at the CENTER of Stanford University, IN PALO ALTO.. and YET-- "You don't know the location" of ANY hospital, in a city that has more then its fair share of Medical Facilities?
That wins, hands down, for lamest statement , of the hour....!!
Jay Dee| 5.20.12 @ 7:07PM
Hey Ding Dong - the article was written in 1982. He wasn't at the Hoover Institute then.
Pelleas| 5.20.12 @ 7:13PM
Hey, cupcake-- he clearly states he was living on the WEST COAST, at the time...!!-HOW DO YOU KNOW WHERE HE WAS?, EH?
Pelleas| 5.20.12 @ 7:40PM
Sowell has also worked at The Hoover Institute SINCE 1980, BTW....
Peregrin Took| 5.21.12 @ 12:25PM
Wait wait. A three page article, and this is the only thing you find worthy of comment? Wow.
Pelleas| 5.21.12 @ 12:36PM
It is the ONLY thing of interest, that I could muster up, in this (Sowell) blow-hards horrible writing-- if this is the BEST the Right -Wing can produce-- the Left surely has no worries...!
Sacramento Observer staff| 5.28.12 @ 11:05AM
Hey, we were wondering whatever happened to you! How's your life been the past 3 decades?
Dave Bowman| 5.28.12 @ 11:03AM
The greatest thing about this column is that Sowell's still here, while these random careerists he puts on blast--Carter's HUD sorority sister, that hack in Pittsburgh--have all long since slipped into easy oblivion. In fact I just finished reading it now and already can't remember their names...