The First Amendment; Boston Indian Council

The First Amendment and a free people. A weekly examination of civil liberties in the media and the 1970s. Produced by WGBH radio Boston in cooperation with the Institute for a Democratic Communication at Boston University. The host of the program is the institute's director, Dr. Bernard Gruber. How fair is the press of this country to Native Americans? What are the goals of Native Americans that they want publicized? And just how much interest should we start applying to the people who were here first. To join me on this discussion I have two representatives of the Boston Indian Council, an organization which was started in 1970 and represents American- Native American, interests in this country. The two guests are Steve Charleston, who is a Choctaw from Oklahoma and is the Communications Director for the Boston Indian Council. And Cliff Saunders of the Standing Rock Sioux, who is the Executive Director of the Boston Indian Council.

Gentlemen, let me start out with this. Recently we had a little example of your concern here in Boston, Massachusetts when one of our newspapers, which used to be called an alternate paper, now is part of the mainstream, in many, many ways, The Real Paper carried two articles on American Indian life as they saw it. The first one dealt with Mick Mack Indians from Cape Breton, Nova Scotia who came to this- this part of the world. There are about 5,000 Indians in this area. And it relates the story of their fall in terms of being unable to make it successfully economically, and then their- their use of a lot of alcohol and- and loss of life in one case, and so on. And the other one deals with the Navajo. And again, tells the story of how bad it is on the reservation in that case, and also has some elements of

the effects of the- of the attempt at escape through alcohol. Just what caused you to feel so concerned about those two articles? We didn't think it was an accurate portrayal of Indian people in Boston. We were concerned about the content of the article. We're also concern- concerned about some steps to when- to went into putting the article together. There was a damaging article done by the same newspaper back in 1974 that was very critical of Indian people and showed us- or showed Micmac people being- in a very negative light. And then perhaps five or six months ago, a reporter from The Real Paper came to the center stating that he felt that we were unfairly treated at that time. That he wanted to do an article that would- that would show Indians in a fair light. Not necessarily favorable, but just fair. So for that reason we took him in. Introduced him to some people so he'd- he'd find out a little bit about us, and then he promised later that he would have Steve

take a look at the article. Not- not to censor it all but just take a look at it. He did come up with an article which we thought was fair. He mentioned some of the problems that we had, but he mentioned some of the positive things that were going on in the community. And then we didn't hear anything from him. And then a couple of weeks later, we were told that- he called and said the article was not accepted by the editor and that he was doing another article. And that- there was nothing heard from- for a while after that. Then he came back later and said, "We- I finished this other article, but I'm not going to let you see it because you're not going to like it." And then, you know, a week later the article- the article was published and for sure, we didn't like it. He took three individuals who had a particular- had a particular background, had a particular set of problems in your life, and he tried to generalize, implying that just the- the plight of these three individuals was common to Indian people, you know, throughout the city. We don't argue with the fact that those three individuals had particular problems, but our concern was, you know, one: we don't we don't get access to the news medium. So that when there is an article printed, I say it's important to us that there is a fair portrayal

because whatever is taken from that is what the people- is how people view us. So the way people viewed us was all Indian people drink a lot. We're crushed, we're totally depressed. And we have no hope or future, which isn't- which isn't accurate. We wanted something which- which something which would outline- maybe talk about our problems but talk about the positive things, you know, which Indian people are doing. And, you know, a second thing is- is to show how little concern the media has for- for our feelings or our concerns. You know, there was some racially damaging statements made there, and I don't- I don't think the Real Paper would have made those statements about perhaps black people or Hispanic people or some other people. But I think the idea was, "Who cares if the Indians don't- don't like this?" You know. "I've- We've got this article. It sort of fits into the mold- of the way we want to portray Indian people. And if they don't like it, they're gonna take it anyways because Indian people have been taking it for 200 years, and they're not gonna speak up." Well, that is your reaction. In all fairness, I invited the editor of The Real Paper to- to discuss this with us, and he found it inconvenient to come,

he decided not to come. So we- we did want to have this argued out, but that is your impression. Steve, was that your impression as well? I think Cliff summarized the chronology of events leading up to this article very clearly. And then what- And then what would that view of the articles, whether somebody else would agree with it or not, you took that view of the articles, and then took what you considered to be appropriate action. And what was that? Well, the action that we took was generated on behalf of the whole Indian community. We had a community meeting once the initial article concerning the local Boston Indian community was printed by the newspaper. At that meeting, At that meeting, we decided that direct action would be our best bet if we were going to try and correct the negative images and stereotypes in the article. Consequently, we went down to The Real Paper offices, their headquarters in Cambridge, Massachusetts. And about one hundred twenty-five Native Americans staged a very peaceful and quiet stand in, if you- if you want to call it that,

in front of the offices of the paper. We played the drum and music, traditional songs. And at the same time the Native Americans were gathered outside, myself and Cliff, Millie Noble, who was an- a woman from our community, and attorney named Lou Gurlitz went in to talk to Martin Lensky, the Editor. And did you get satisfaction when you- I gather that he did make certain promises to you. His response was, "Well, I'm a little surprised by this. But let me do this for you at least." Well, I would- the thing that concerns me here, and it's very interesting, is that the problem with trying to make a response to a media established institution like a real paper- Real Paper or any newspaper in any city, is that even a community, much less an individual, but a community as small as...without economic resources as our community is in this city, has always- we always are put in the position of having to

respond after the fact. You cannot pre-guess what the media will say about you. And consequently, when they do say it, then the fact that Martin Linsky made his concession, his concession was after the fact, and it was for us to publish one small letter, in a letter to the editor's page. Let me ask you this. Obviously I'm not gonna evaluate the two articles. I read the two articles, and they do contain the elements that you described. It is up to the individual to decide whether this is an attempt to build sympathy for the Indians from the author's point of view, to explain the true case as he finds it. The truth is in the eye of the beholder here. I can well understand your view of these articles, but I- I don't want to condemn the articles, whole. Now, Now, statement is to ask you, if you say that you can only answer after the fact, isn't the only answer to write the truth, as you see it? Oh yes, the- obviously.

Oh yes, obviously, the answer...the ideal answer would be that every community would be equally to speak for itself on any number or variety of issues. But the sad reality of media in America is that a newspaper which has the economic capability to produce a widely circulated, widely distributed forum for its own opinions, is going to win, hands down, against a community that we could set at the Boston Indian Council and write articles all day long. We could have thousands of pages of articles about the truth of Indian life, and they would never see the light of day. They will not be accepted by established media outlets. So your- your complaint is that there is a stratified situation here and you're not in strata. the straight-A. Also, that it's very difficult for you in the way that the- the original story comes. Is there an answer to- that you can make? In other words, the demonstration is one thing. Is there- is there a creative suggestion

that you would make? Should- should- should the newspapers of the community hire Indians, per se, Native Americans simply because they exist in a community? Now, there are about- there are estimates of 4 to 5,000 estimates of 45,000 Native Americans in the greater Boston area most of whom, these articles, came in approximately after World War II. Is that true? Yeah, that is true. Yeah, that is true. Most of the people...75 percent of people probably Mick Mack, who come from in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and non-reservation communities in- in Maine. Um... 'Course we'd like- we'd like to train people working on newspaper staffs, but I think- I think it's the think I think it's the commitment of a of a newspaper to carry stories or within its area. You know, in Boston there's a- it's a- it's a multicultural, multi-ethnic community. And I think the underground papers, counterculture papers, the daily papers have a commitment to come in and- and give an accurate portrayal.

And we were- you know, we were attacked by- not attacked but- he since made a statement that we just wanted favorable coverage, and I- I want to repeat this: that's not what we're looking for. At the same time, you made a statement that perhaps these articles were sympathetic. And I think that the same kind of statement Mr. Linsky made. He said he received responses from non-Indian people and they were sympathetic. And what would- the point we're trying to make is that we don't want people's sympathy, anymore. For 200 years, 300 years, we've had people's sympathy. We've had liberal sympathy. No, I'm not- I didn't suggest that it was sympathetic in that way. I said in effect, one writer writes one impression. He sees it or she sees it one or another way. You don't have to agree. To look upon a particular article as encyclopedic would be wrong, especially when there's so few articles about American Indians. It seems to me that the dam will only be- be broken on- on these stories if somehow or other you say, "Well I didn't like that story. But it's a free press, they

can publish it. I would like to submit to the Real Paper or the Boston Globe or the New York Times this story." How much of that work is actually going? Of the- of the getting people to say, "We've- we've been hit hard as we see it. Let's tell the story of the Micmacs in the metropolitan area of Boston as the story is." Well, there's a couple of points- related points, let's say, I'd like to make. One is the- the pool of potential Native American writers, journalists, photographers, media people with any media expertise at all is incredibly limited. For example, in the community of Boston, we have an un- educational lack within our community that means that the vast majority of our people have never completed high school, much less be capable of writing very scholarly area of things to defend themselves. Then there's the question of access to the media. There are- There are- there are no native Americans, very few, that actually are writing

for, about, and by the Indian community. Most of the things that you ever read about Indians are written by non-Indians. There are a few exceptions like Vine Deloria. That's right. There's, you know- but very few. There are- there- you can count the exceptions on one hand, really. Of nationally known Indian writers. There's extremely few. When you start to get into other areas of radio and television, you draw a complete blank. Who is the nationally known Indian television news broadcaster? There is none. I think you've made a very good point, one that I agree with because of the situation that many minorities find themselves in. In this case, especially Native Americans. The press should have a greater duty to inspect- in other words, the editorial judgment on stories should be much higher than on one that is part of a whole deluge of stories on the same subject. If we're going to do one story on Indians this year, it ought to be a good one. That's what you're saying. I'd like to make a criticism to the media in general which I find very disturbing, and that is that

very often, in the national media, forum you will find as recent cases of reporters refusing to divulge sources, and Daniel Schorr comes to mind. Media- large media representatives constantly raising hue and cry that they're going to be censored by some dark, shadowy federal agency or government, and they're defending themselves for the right to print the truth and to withhold delicate information sources. And yet, what the media never talks about is the fact that they, in turn, with their eyes cast toward this hypothetical government censorship on their- on their rights, they don't turn and look behind themselves, the media doesn't, over their shoulder and see the vast number of- I think it's Cliff was saying- ethnic communities in a multiracial, multi-ethnic culture who have absolutely no contact with their media sources at all. The hispanic, black and Native American communities in Boston do not regularly contribute to, read, or influence the major media outlets in this city. I've been

trying to find out- for example, you mentioned Hispanics. One of the major newspapers in town- I'm trying to find out how many minority people work for the newspaper, in this case the Boston Globe. Very difficult to- to get those details. I don't know whether there is one Hispanic or- or 70 or 700 of the approximately 1,600 employees. Um... One thing we know for sure that all minorities are in very bad straits when it comes to coverage. The smaller the minority is, the worse it seems to be. Now there- there- the Indian- the Indian or Native American community in the United States has been so decimated, it is comparatively small, something like- correct me if I'm wrong, Correct me if I'm wrong about 800,000. Yeah, about- about 1,000,000 people but- Or 1,000,000 people. What's strange is that- is that our population is the fastest growing population in the country. There's- see, there's a fact that

you- you really have to get out. There were- I guess, half 1,000,000 Indian people in the United States in 1960, and I think the census figures was 8 or 900,000 in 1970, and probably 1980, we'd be- we'd be well over a million. How- how is the situation in- in Oklahoma, Steve? [chuckles] You know, the number of Indians in Oklahoma, I presume, would be much greater than in Boston. Oh yeah. Is the treatment as bad? Yeah. It- it increases proportionally with the- you know, with the size of the Indian community. The more visible we come- become, the better targets we seem to become. Oklahoma has the largest Indian population in the country and probably one of the highest incidences of racism against Native Americans. Same thing can be said for New Mexico, and for South Dakota, and many other areas in this country where you have Indian people. Indian people take the place of blacks for racist mentality. If you don't have a black person, then you turn to whatever else is available. And yet one of the

things we want to protect in this country of our natural resources is the sequoia. And Sequoia was the, er- American- Native American whose father was white and his mother was Cherokee and who wrote the Cherokee alphabet in 1821, who devised the Cherokee alphabet. And yet, we- we do discriminate terribly against the people who are here first. How is it amongst the Standing Rock's Sioux? I would- I would challenge Steve's take about Oklahoma. I think South Dakota [chuckles] is a little more racist than- than Oklahoma. The- the governor who was just elected, William Janklow, was tried in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court for the rape of an Indian girl. And he was- he was convicted within tribal court, but he was outside- outside the jurisdiction of the court and, of course, the state courts never picked up the case. But that's the governor of- the governor of South Dakota. Russell Means, who was a well-known

political activist, was incarcerated in San- in South Dakota state prison, I guess in July or August. Was there exactly one month before he was stabbed, mysteriously by an inmate who just happened to be admitted that day and somehow had access to a knife and stabbed him. Now your facts on the first case about the governor, you're prepared to- to substantiate those, right. You're- The fact that he was charged by the tribal councilmens, right? Yes, but was he guilty in your opinion or was he guilty in fact? The tribal council- the tribal court found him guilty. But not in a- not in a court of civil jurisdiction. Not in Anglo jurisdiction. See- see- In Native American civil jurisdiction, yes. Yeah, with the tribal- tribal courts just have jurisdiction over the- over that reservation. You- you realize I'm not trying to disparage your remark nor to encourage your remark, but I am trying to establish its locale. It's clarification. So that somebody could say what was said on this program. So it's the Rosebud Sioux Reservation, and- you know, outside the Rosebud Sioux Reservation, the tribal court has no jurisdiction. Why I-

you mentioned Russell Means. I- I gather that you went to say that there's been very little progress since Wounded Knee 1890 and Wounded Knee 1973, or '73 till today. Well- I wouldn't say very little progress. I don't think so, I think- one of the major events that occurred last summer, summer of '78, was the Longest Walk in July of that year. And not to get too far afield from our discussion of media, there's a prime example of one of the- one of the most promising efforts of total Indian unity, harmony, cooperation, and also the cooperation and assistance of other ethnic groups- white, black, Oriental, Hispanic- all coming together for one cause: rallying behind Native American people. It was a wonderful moment in Indian history, I think, when that occurred. And yet the vast majority of the American public heard absolutely nothing about the Longest Walk,

what it meant, what it was all about. Was this- was this deliberately or is this because it was an Indian subject and the- and it wasn't felt to be of concern to editors who were not used to covering Indian stories? Why- what was the reason for that? I think it was- I think the reason that- that activities like the Longest Walk are never covered in the media is that they don't fit into the one of the two criteria that all- or the vast majority of media outlets insist on when you talk about Indian news to them. One, is that they want to see the plight of the Indian. The pathetic, sad, sympathetic Indian. Or they want to see the militant, angry, gun-toting Indian. And if you don't give them one or the other, it somehow- an event like the Longest Walk, which is totally peaceful and sophisticated occurs, it's not news. It also means argument with his own tribal council. That was depicted widely on the press, especially in television, with the head of the tribal council arguing with Russell Means and arguing that there should be no change in the composition of the tribal council

as recognized by the federal government and so on. Was that fairly covered? Uh, I don't think so. You have to remember that Dick Wilson was a tribal chairman, and Dick Wilson was a BIA stooge. He was a- he- his- his bunch of henchmen were known as goons on the reservation, and they were well- Do you want to tell us reservation that was? Oh, I'm sorry. Pine- Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, and that's where- that's where the Wounded Knee demonstration took place. And what tribe is that? Oglala Sioux, right. But Mr. Wilson is well known for a number of things there are. There's one particular instance where there was some lawyers, I guess, for AIM who- who were on the reservation. That's the American Indian Movement. I'm trying to fill in the Anglos on this. [chuckles] Oh, okay. [chuckles] BIA is Bureau of Indian Affairs. Right, okay. Thank you. There were some lawyers, you know, supporting AIM efforts. And on the way to the airport, there was some- some of Mr. Wilson's men stop- stop the

car at the road and fired some bullets into the car. Luckily, no- nobody was killed but these are- these weren't just AIM people, these were- these were white people, right? I'm going to put in the caveat it is alleged here by Cliff that this happened. Okay, all right. Fine. But this here- when you talk about, you know, the improvement of things since 1973, since Wounded Knee, there's been probably over 100 killings at Pine Ridge Reservation after that fact. Most- most of those victims were AIM supporters. AIM members. No convictions, no arrests. But there was- there have been a couple- there have been 4 arrests for the 2 FBI agents who were killed in Pine Ridge- Pine Ridge Reservation in 1975, which- which you saw splattered all over the media. You know, I just- I remember the local paper that, you know, "FBI Agent- FBI Agents Massacred" or "Slain at an Indian Reservation." There was all kinds of stories of how they were executed, you know, and gagged- bullet and guns. You know, point it to their head and then done in a cold-blooded manner. But when the facts came out, it wasn't- it wasn't

that sort of situation. Is- is there- now that we have really discussed what it is like down in the valley, is there hope? I mean, are there- are there things- you said that there were some hope- things are getting a little better. Is there an Indian leadership that is appearing that- that offer some hope? Are there incidents that- that would- would take us all out of the valley? I would say that there are indications, yes. And I'm- I'm perfectly optimistic about the future for Native people. You must remember that 50 percent of our population is under the age of 30. As Cliff has said, we're the fastest growing of all the ethnic or racial groups in the United States. This means that there is a vast reservoir of young Native people who are coming up right now, growing up. And more than ever before, these are young people who have learned to respect themselves as Indian people. Not to bow down to any attempts at racism on them. And at the same

time they are gaining the expertise and the technical knowhow that has always made them slaves rather than- than masters. Is there- is there an encouraging development amongst any particular tribe or in any particular region of the country that- that you see? We know that most Indians are very, very poor and don't have much of the physical resources of life. But some Indians- some very few are quite wealthy. Does it matter if you are wealthy or poor in terms of the progress that is being made? Well, the question of wealthy or poor Indian people. The number of wealthy Indians- Is very small. It's a moot point, it's so tiny. Positive steps forward are glowing examples of particular tribes- I must in- in all humility say that the organization I work for, personally, The Boston Indian Council, right here in the city of Boston, is probably one of the leading urban Indian centers in the United States today. It is- it's- it's phenomenal in its growth and in

its development. Offers thirty three major assistance programs. Employs over 100 Native American people, and its staff provides- So where does it get its money? Variety of places. Does it get enough to carry on? Never. No, because there's so much more always to be done. Tell me, in the few moments that we have left: do you have much, by way of liaison with other groups, do you think that- do you consider yourself part of the Third World movement? Do you work with the NAACP, the Urban League, the- the Latino councils? That sort of thing? Yes, we do work with them. I talked to the NAACP today, as a matter of fact. So there are informal ties in that way. Obviously our primary concern and motivation is toward our- our particular community just as theirs would be toward either Puerto Rican people or black people or whoever they serve. But corporately, we share common interest and common inspirations. I've got to ask you this question and maybe you could answer it.

The name- the term Native American, the term that I prefer, the other word is Indian. Is this something disparaging about the use of the word Indian? Not if you're from Bombay. [chuckles] That's a good answer. So that American Indians don't want to hear that word. Well, no. I mean, it's- it's- it's the idea that- You- you know, people- people know words it's derived from. It's a way of just communicating with each other. Everybody knows somebody else is an Indian. It's- it's taken on a- a connotation different from its original derivation. Native American sounds very formal. Yes, I- it has an artificiality to it. It does, yeah, yeah. Yeah, but you know you talk, you know, the name. It ain't anything more than that. You know, it's- it's sort of recognition and it's- like I said, it's taken on a different- it's a different definition. One thing I would like to say is that you talk about wealth or whatever in sort of economic terms, and I think one thing we're concerned about is sort of a spiritual, a sort of psychological wealth, which

Indian people have and perhaps it should be shared with- with other cultures. Well, I don't know whether I heard this on television in a program which I thought was [microphone hit] one of the few that was sympathetic- or understanding is a better weird. But one Indian said on that program, "Why aren't the white men human beings? We are the human beings? Why- why don't they act like human beings?" And I wish that we could, and I think we've made a step forward in that direction just by hearing about the Boston Indian Council, and I want to thank Cliff Saunders, its executive director, and Steve Charleston for coming and discussing this with us. For this edition, Bernie Rubin. [outro music] The First Amendment and A Free People, a weekly examination of civil liberties in the media in the 1970s. The program is produced in cooperation with the Institute for Democratic Communication at Boston University by WGBH Radio Boston, which is solely

responsible for its content. [outro music] This is the station Program Exchange. [silence]