Rashad Robinson: So I’m sort of kin­da last here this ses­sion, and I’m sort of stand­ing in between every­one and drinks and food. So I want to inject a lit­tle cul­ture into this con­ver­sa­tion. And as we talk about the rea­sons that we make inter­ven­tions in this work, the rea­son why we advo­cate for truth in the media, and the rea­son why orga­ni­za­tions like mine do that work is for our com­mu­ni­ty, for the folks that we rep­re­sent.

This is my niece and my nephew Camden and Elon. And we do the work because we want the world to look bet­ter for them five years, or ten years, or twen­ty years down the line. And the work that we do at Color of Change—I’m also going to actu­al­ly spend some time talk­ing about the work I did pri­or to Color of Change—is about the truth in how do we— Who gets to iden­ti­fy who we are? Who gets to talk about our voice? Who gets to define us as peo­ple in the media and deter­mine the names that we’re called, the labels that are used to define us?

Two and a half years ago, Glenn Beck went on Fox News and called President Obama a racist with a deep-seated hatred for white peo­ple and white cul­ture. Color of Change at that point mobi­lized over the course of two and a half years over 285,000 of its mem­bers to get over 300 adver­tis­ers to remove its spon­sor­ship, mak­ing Glenn Beck no longer prof­itable to Fox News. And it was a vic­to­ry. It sent a mes­sage. But it was­n’t nec­es­sar­i­ly a sys­temic change, right. So short­ly after Glenn Beck leave the air, Eric Bolling replaces him and starts talk­ing about why Obama is you know, drink­ing for­ties in Ireland.

And so I’m going to talk about a lit­tle bit of work I did when I was the senior direc­tor of pro­grams at the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. I’ve been gone from GLAAD for about a year now. But we did a lot of work in terms of ter­mi­nol­o­gy, and work­ing specif­i­cal­ly with the Associated Press in how they define gay and les­bian peo­ple. The work start­ed before I got to GLAAD but it was sort of work that took place before GLAAD exist­ed, and then that’s cur­rent­ly being done even today.

And it real­ly cen­ters around the word homo­sex­u­al.” In 1973, the American Psychological Association removed it from its list of dis­or­ders. It still car­ried a lot of pathol­o­gy to it. It was a clin­i­cal term, and it was con­sis­tent­ly used by folks who opposed free­dom for gay and les­bian peo­ple. It’s been used over and over and over again by by oppo­nents to equal­i­ty for gay and les­bian peo­ple, or laws that were being advanced around the coun­try. The Washington Post, AP Style Guide, Reuters, and The New York Times all sort of list­ed homo­sex­u­al as a word that could be used.

And the work real­ly start­ed in the 80s, by get­ting The New York Times to just start using the word gay.” To just say start using the word gay” along with using the word homo­sex­u­al.” You know, that was a vic­to­ry. Over time the com­mu­ni­ty start­ed advo­cat­ing and push­ing the Associated Press to start fig­ur­ing out how they were going to remove the word homo­sex­u­al from its style guide, list­ed as a pejo­ra­tive term. The AP, as they do with sort of a num­ber of terms, says that, We don’t make that deci­sion at the nation­al lev­el. We real­ly fol­low the trends that are hap­pen­ing all across the coun­try.”

And so that’s when the com­mu­ni­ty was engaged. Community mem­bers all around the coun­try were engaged every time homo­sex­u­al” appeared in a local AP sto­ry, in a state AP wire, that they would start get­ting phone calls to change that. And over the course of about four to five years, it got to a point where vir­tu­al­ly the word homo­sex­u­al, you did not see it in any paper sort of across the coun­try. Where I got to the point where the Associated Press had to make a deci­sion about what it was going to do next.

And so we had a meet­ing with the Associated Press to sort of look at what we were going to do next about were they going to keep the word homo­sex­u­al” and just add gay?” Whether they were going to say you prob­a­bly should­n’t use the word but if you want to use it as a syn­onym it’s okay. There was a lot of back and forth over the course of a year, a lot of research was brought in. And they even­tu­al­ly removed the word homo­sex­u­al” and list­ed it as a pejo­ra­tive.

The work did­n’t end there. It actu­al­ly sort of inten­si­fied at that point. That’s when we had to make phone calls every time we saw it come up. That’s also when a lot of work was done by our oppo­nents to start mak­ing sure that any time they saw the word gay” they would switch it to the word homo­sex­u­al.” So I have a fun­ny exam­ple here of a track run­ner named Thomas Gay.

This comes from the American Family Association’s news wire. They take AP sto­ries and they change—every time the word gay” appears and they change it to homo­sex­u­al.” And so thanks to some great staff at GLAAD and some fan­tas­tic gay blog­gers, we were able to catch this and get a num­ber of screen shots across the Internet. Not just of Thomas Gay but of the Boston Celtics NBA play­er Rudy Gay, who some of you may fol­low here, who’s also been Rudy Homosexual as well. Probably much to the sur­prise of their fam­i­ly and friends and close asso­ciates. It kind of makes for real­ly inter­est­ing titles like Homosexual Eases into 100 meter Final at Olympic Trials.” Probably not what the American Family Association real­ly intend­ed, but real­ly shows sort of the pow­er of words and the pow­er that words have in sort of defin­ing a com­mu­ni­ty.

We worked after that with Gallup in try­ing to get them to change how they were using the word homo­sex­u­al” in their polling. And they said, We need lon­gi­tu­di­nal integri­ty, so we don’t want to change the ter­mi­nol­o­gy that we’re using. We want to be able to com­pare how folks feel about the homo­sex­u­al com­mu­ni­ty in 2008 to how they feel about the homo­sex­u­al com­mu­ni­ty back in you know, 1986.” And so we found some polling that they did in the 70s around, If all things were equal would you vote for a Negro for pres­i­dent?” And they cer­tain­ly were not using that polling dur­ing that Hillary Clinton/Barack Obama pri­ma­ry. And they had made some changes around lon­gi­tu­di­nal integri­ty at that point to sort of suit cul­tur­al changes and the changes around how we deter­mine how com­mu­ni­ty has agency around who they are and [how] they’re defined. What’s actu­al­ly their truth in the media. And so those changes were made.

You know, this is about truth. It’s about how folks are defined. It’s also about— You know, I know that we’re hav­ing these con­ver­sa­tions around is this a left or right con­ver­sa­tion. And so I will be com­plete­ly trans­par­ent. Would you be okay with homo­sex­u­als teach­ing your chil­dren?” ver­sus Would you be okay with gays and les­bians teach­ing your chil­dren?” is ten point. It’s ten points. But it’s also about how the com­mu­ni­ty wants to define how they see them­selves, how they should be rep­re­sent­ed.

And so when think about inter­ven­tions and as orga­ni­za­tions like Color of Change, or GLAAD, or orga­ni­za­tions that rep­re­sent community—everyday peo­ple that want to think about how their chil­dren are going to expe­ri­ence the world ten years or five years down the line, it real­ly is about how do we sort of define and engage media to not just look at sort of what we con­sid­er as basic facts, but sort of how do our lives, how is our dig­ni­ty, and how the labels that are used about us rep­re­sent who we are and who we should be in the press.

Further Reference

Truthiness in Digital Media event site


Help Support Open Transcripts

If you found this useful or interesting, please consider supporting the project monthly at Patreon or once via Square Cash, or even just sharing the link. Thanks.