Language & Class.
W
Written by Andrew Bottomley to
The New York Times, April 27, 2007

To the Editor:

Re: Sarah Lyall, “Why Can’t the English Just Give Up That Class Folderol?” (April 26, 2007)

The news that Prince William may have broken up with his girlfriend because of her mother’s so-called middle-class behavior and language perhaps seems shocking, but language has long designated the differences between people of different classes and cultures. The use of language as an indicator of inferiority in British society goes back at least as far as the 1840s when Henry Mayhew studied the slang of London’s street people. He considered such slang vulgar and a sign of their moral and intellectual ineptitude.

Sarah Lyall suggests that these class issues are particular to England, but the United States is hardly any different, even today. Though we may be a society that predominantly wishes to view ourselves as middle-class (although the middle-class is in actuality disappearing), we regularly defend against perceived abuses of the American English language.

Take, for instance, the heated debate over Ebonics in the 1990s. Or more recently, witness the blame that was shifted onto hip-hop music following Don Imus’ racist rant. The sometimes crude, explicit language of this culture, which is principally associated with the (African-American) urban lower-class, has come to represent not just vulgarity but inherent criminality.

Rappers may earn millions but social class is more than just financial wealth and their vernacular is a stigma that the traditional middle- and upper-classes associate with inferiority. The same could be said, however, of any number of American vernaculars. The U.S., much like Britain, is hardly a classless society today – and language is perhaps one of the greatest markers of that segregation.

—Andrew Bottomley
—Mamaroneck, NY

Comments will be reviewed and
posted on a daily basis.

Undercounting Viewers.

Written Robert R. Rose to
The New York Times,
May 15, 2007.

To the Editor:

A New York Times “Arts and Entertainment” writer (See NYT A& E Blog 5/15/07) recently wrote about the “Help! Change TV” (www.HelpChangeTV.com) protest at the ABC television network’s “Upfront” presentations, where network-programming decisions are publicly announced.

The writer received a flyer while attending “ABC Upfront” and she assumed the campaign was simply protesting the cancellation of The George Lopez Show. Had the writer taken the time to go to the site and properly research the issue, she would have seen that Help! Change TV's (HCTV) specific purpose at Upfront was not simply as protesting the cancellation of one show on English language TV.

HCTV attacks the root and cause of the cancellation, which of course, is money and which is directly tied to ratings and Nielsen Media Research's role in the under-representation and stereotyping of Latinos on English TV (a result of Nielsen’s under-sampling of young, U.S. born Latinos or those most likely to watch "The George Lopez Show"). Most U.S. born Latinos do not watch Spanish language TV.

It is puzzling that no one has mentioned the outrageousness of the recent low ratings of The George Lopez Show, which Nielsen, defying all logic, reported attracts more African American viewers than Hispanic viewers. Preposterous!

If Nielsen was correctly counting U.S. born Latino viewers (those most likely to watch Latino shows in English according to mounds of research), who knows what the George Lopez Show's ratings would be? Enough to save the show for another season? Possibly.

The point is, who knows? Since Nielsen Media Research does not track nativity, they cannot tell you how many U.S. born Latinos are watching anything.

The New York Times reaction came across like so many in today's corporate media world: simplistic, a bit lazy and elitist. The Times writer pointed to the one remaining successful Latino show on network TV (Ugly Betty, also on ABC) and hinted that George Lopez is jealous or "disappointed" at this success. The blog suggested that since Latinos have Spanish language TV, one Latin show on English language, prime-time network TV is fine; as if two or three would simply be too many (despite that fact that in many major markets like Los Angeles, young Latinos are 50% of key demographics).

The writer doesn't acknowledge (or know) the fact that U.S. born Latinos make up over 60% of all U.S. Latinos and represent a market that is 25 million strong, making up a much larger percentage of the network and advertiser-coveted youth demographics (persons aged 18-34 and persons 12-34). The New York Times writer would have found this information on www.HelpChangeTV.com site.

The writer does refer back to a couple or three recent failures by the English language networks to woo Hispanic audiences, suggesting, the networks tried and failed once, so they shouldn't try it again.

Approximately 80% of all new TV series fail. Are Latin themed shows on English TV supposed to be held to a higher standard of success? The suggestion is that if the networks are generous enough to try a Latin themed show and are not blessed with an immediate, surefire hit (as in the case of "Ugly Betty"), then there is no need to try again for another five or six seasons.

I wonder if the New York Times writers would be happy with just a single network show that didn't make fun of or misrepresent them in some way. If all TV network shows but that one presented New York Times writers as intellectually lazy, out of touch, media elites, do you think then they might understand and empathize a little more with U.S. born Latinos?
Then again, maybe that wouldn't be such an inaccurate stereotype after all.

—Robert Rose
—New York

EDITOR’S NOTE:
Robert Rose is CEO of AIM Tell-A-Vision Group (a division of Artist and Idea Management, Ltd.) and American Latino TV, LLC, and is the founder of www.HelpChangeTV.com as well as Executive Producer of American Latino TV and LatiNation. The opinions expressed above are those of the author alone, and not of the companies with which he is affiliated.

Comments will be reviewed and
posted on a daily basis.