“Want Respect? VOTE Tuesday April 5 2011” (sic) was all the sign said in large black letters on a white background yet they signaled a political revolution of sorts in the City of Champaign this month. A few days before the April municipal elections, these signs (about 200 of them according to the Champaign News Gazette) suddenly appeared all over Champaign’s north end, which is historically predominantly African American. I noticed them on nearly every corner as I drove up Prospect, one of the busier thoroughfares in Champaign.
The signs obviously did not endorse a particular candidate or party (although Champaign’s municipal elections are technically non-partisan). However, it is a good example of how a simple message can have a much deeper meaning for many. My main question was who paid for them and put them up.
If you follow local politics in Champaign at all, you would know that there has historically been a lot of animosity between the City of Champaign (mostly the police department) and the black community. This issue really came to a head sometime in the fall of 2009 when a young teenage African American male was shot and killed by a Champaign police officer while he and the chief of police were responding to a call of a possible burglary in progress. It was a real tragedy for everyone concerned and really drove an even deeper wedge between the police department and the black community.
So, what does this have to with a political yard sign a year and a half later? At the time of the shooting, the current mayor, himself a long-retired Champaign police officer himself, was perceived as being less than sympathetic toward the victim and his family. The City did make an effort to have some dialogue with members of the community, old and young. I was asked to facilitate a small group session at a large gathering discussing police-community relations at one point.
After serving as mayor for twelve years and running unopposed for the previous two elections, this time he was faced with a completely unknown challenger who had never been much involved in the community at all. Most people that followed such things assumed that the incumbent was an absolute shoe-in. It was widely assumed that the incumbent would likely not fare well in the north end precincts, but the voter turnout was typically fairly low anyway in those precincts.
Enter the signs……… Now that you know a little bit of history of the community and a very small snippet of issues facing the community, you probably have a better idea of the sign’s meaning and why they may have made a big difference in the election outcome. When all was said and done, the incumbent lost by a relatively small margin (about 250 or fewer votes) and the political newcomer will take office this week. The turnout in the north end precincts was much higher than usual and may well have made the difference in the election. (To be fair, there were other issues with the incumbent being perceived as being anti-labor and is also a birther and Tea Partier.)
The other issue that the signs may have been raising awareness for (again, without explicitly saying it) was the fact that there was an African American candidate on the ballot for the Champaign School Board, a school district that is 35% African American and has an all-white school board. The issues between the school district and the black community are so extensive that a book could be written. Literally. That candidate won too, by the way.
My question about where the signs came from and who paid for them was answered a few days after the election in the Champaign News Gazette. I tried in vain for about a half hour to find the article online and never could find it. It was part of their editorial page, as I recall, so they may not have posted it. Anyway, the signs were bought and distributed by a small group of leaders and business people within Champaign’s black community who were somewhat fed up with the way the mayor had responded to issues that affected the black community. Even though the sign, “Want Respect? VOTE Tuesday April 5 2011," did not say who to vote for or not vote for, the message was clear for many voters.
So, how does this long-winded account relate to media literacy? Obviously no one will ever really know to what extent the yard signs made a difference, but I am certain that they were effective in ensuring that people knew about the election. What struck me, among other things, was that in this media-filled world of online ads, social networking, television and radio and a variety of other outlets, the good old-fashioned yard sign with a simple and succinct message may well have carried the day, or at least helped carry it.
No comments:
Post a Comment