2008-07-14 16:52:05 - After 16 long years of attacking the word "redskins" by trying to cancel the trademark, American Indians have once again lost, leaving some to wonder whether using the FCC to attack the broadcast license of stations which use this racially disparaging word might be more effective and a far swifter route, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who helped use this tactic to get the first African Americans on TV in prominent roles.

Banzhaf -- whose legal actions at the FCC led to antismoking messages on the air, the ban on cigarette commercials, the ban on ads for "little cigars," and to the first appearance of Blacks in significant roles on TV stations -- has proposed that American Indian groups oppose the renewal of FCC broadcast licenses for stations which continually and unnecessarily

use the 'R-word' [like the N-word] on the grounds that their broadcasts are racially and ethnically offensive.

He notes a unanimous finding by three judges that the word "redskin" is "a derogatory term of reference for Native Americans" and tended to bring them "into contempt or disrepute" when used by a professional football team.

He also points to the findings of the California Dept. of Motor Vehicles that the word is an offensive disparaging term, the Utah State Tax Commission holding that the word is "derogatory" towards African Americans, the strong position against the use of the word by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and the official policy of the NCAA prohibiting the use of "hostile and abusive" Indian-related names in postseason championships. banzhaf.net/noredskins/

Banzhaf also cites evidence showing that almost half of all Americans regard the term "redskins" as "offensive"; testimony to the effect that using the "R-word" to refer to Native Americans is on a par with using the "N-word" to refer to African Americans; and a finding that the media frequently play on the "redskins" team name in a manner "that often portrays Native Americans as either aggressive, savages or buffoons.'

Stations are very concerned about offensive conduct and language, especially since the FCC has started to crack down, impose fines, and consider even more serious sanctions.

Indeed, even the threat of the loss of a broadcast license -- however unlikely -- hanging over the head of a radio and TV station is like a sword of Damocles which can affect the owner's ability to get and keep insurance, harm its credit rating, hinder its ability to enter into contracts, including mergers, etc.

No station would date use the N-word even if it were chosen by the group's members, says Banzhaf, noting that the Black musical group is always referred to on the air as "N.W.A rather than by its proper name: 'N* with Attitude.'

He suggests that broadcasters would also never use other common ethnic slurs as part of a team name such as the "Washington Wetbacks," "Chicago Chinks," "Jersey Japs" or "Jersey Junglebunnies," "Kansas Kikes," etc.

A legal precedent could be established by opposing the renewal of broadcast licenses in areas where American Indians make up a significant percentage of the population and where, coincidentally, the stations have little need and little interest to talk about DC's football team.

Once established - something which might be done quickly and easily since such stations have little incentive to fight - the precedent could be applied to larger DC-based TV and radio stations, says Banzhaf.

"There appears to be no more disparaging word referring to Native American Indians - i.e., comparable to 'nigger,' 'kike,' 'jap,' 'chink,' etc. for other groups - than 'redskin" suggests Banzhaf, citing an editorial which also likened "redskin" to "nigger" and "kike."

He therefore suggests that the legal obligation TV stations have to broadcast in the "public interest, convenience, and necessity" requires them to refrain from unnecessary routine use of the word 'redskin' in sports reporting, since they can just as easily report that 'Washington Beat Dallas,' 'DC Lost to Indianapolis,' etc.

PROFESSOR JOHN F. BANZHAF III
Professor of Public Interest Law
George Washington University Law School
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor
FELLOW, World Technology Network
2013 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006, USA
(202) 659-4312 // (703) 527-8418
banzhaf.net