Latinos Under Siege? A Look At CNN’s Latino In America
By Special Correspondent Arturo R. García
Soledad O’Brien says she wants Latino In America to “start a conversation.” Unfortunately for viewers, the series’ message seems to be, what? Woe is us? Abandon ship? What did Brown ever do to you?
Grounded in depressing case studies and missed questions, the series’ first installment was less “Latinos In America” and more like “Latinos For Lou Dobbs’ Audience.” Most of the people featured were not “changing” their communities – they were being victimized in or by them. They were pregnant, suicidal (or pregnant and suicidal), caught in an immigration raid, losing their cultural roots, facing an uphill job struggle or isolated in their churches. The premiere’s first profile, of Univision TV chef Lorena García, was the only one that focused on somebody doing something positive – in her case, building her own brand in spite of skepticism over her “accent.”
Most of the rest of the Garcías profiled – a disparate group “united” by having the 8th most popular surname in the U.S.; take that, Velazcos! – were, to put it mildly, in very bad places in their lives. And more damning from a journalistic perspective, we never got to see O’Brien ask crucial follow-up questions: how responsible does Cindy García’s mother feel for her inability/unwillingness to learn English obstructing Cindy’s studies? How did Cindy (pictured above) figure unprotected sex was a sensible idea in the face of a 70% failure-to-graduate rate and a sister who was also a teen mother? And what in the blue hell was her boyfriend thinking having sex without a condom?
Similar questions came to mind in the feature on Araceli Torres, the young woman facing impending deportation despite living here more than two decades. Was there something preventing her from seeking citizenship once she turned 18 years old, or was her story nothing more than an excuse for CNN to hype the grand-standing Anderson Cooper, who saw fit to follow the show by giving a platform to anti-immigrant sheriff Joe Arpaio.
The feature on Latinos in Hollywood was also clumsy: sure, it’s sad to see Lupe Ontiveros still doing the (NSFW) Hollywood Shuffle after 30 years, but Eva Longoria-Parker’s blithe dismissal of the issue (Latinos need to get behind the camera? Thanks, CNN, for the breaking news) didn’t help the segment as much as, say, asking Screen Actors’ Guild president Ken Howard how he feels about his POC members working in an industry bent on excluding them would have.
O’Brien’s best moment came during the feature on the St. Louis church struggling to integrate an increasingly Spanish-speaking membership into its’ ranks, when she got both the English-speaking and Spanish-speaking factions to admit neither will hang out with the other. That acknowledgement boosted the segment’s finale, with members from each community awkwardly attempting to communicate at a church fundraiser – and made the earlier omissions all the more glaring.
In fact, the most compelling discussion of the “Latino condition” of the evening wasn’t even part of the documentary: on Campbell Brown, John Leguizamo told L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigoza that visiting Los Angeles felt “like traveling into South Africa,” leading to this exchange:
Villarigoza: We have the biggest Latino middle class in America. We have the biggest Black middle class in America.
Leguizamo: Where are they?
Unfortunately, their face-off was cut short. Part 2 of Latino airs tonight, and as it moves to cover the murder of Luis Ramírez, you have to wonder: will it acknowledge not just anti-Latino and anti-immigrant sentiment on American airwaves, but on its’ own network?
Recommended: Brown Is The New Green
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
gatamala wrote:
Another CNN hit piece!!!
Does Soledad think she is being clinically detached with this? Did she talk about herself? Her mama?
I’ve got to look up Leguizamo’s vid.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 10:20 am ¶
malted_tea wrote:
Feather me and call me ostrich but I’ve decided to stick my head in the ground for all things “X in America” by CNN. I didn’t even finish reading the 3rd paragraph of this post.
What exactly are we expecting?
Their incessant trailers for both parts of the series left me cold (I saw the church trailer yesterday afternoon and was bowled over by…by…oh vay there was too much to go into. And that trailer was only about 5 minutes long).
Brown Is The New Green, on the other hand, looks promising…if only for this snippet:
“Latino image is stage-managed by marketers and media companies.”
Co-sign and add in all the rest of us POCs.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 10:30 am ¶
aimerrouge wrote:
In no particular in order…
- I watched last night.
-Just like “Black in America” this will not address everything (or in some cases anything) that makes people happy, but I’m of the mindset that anything that starts discussion is good. I don’t expect a few hours of television to accurately capture anything ever.
- Just like with “Black in America” I’ve already seen people complain Soledad is not the right person to host the show. Apparently she failed not only the Reverse Paper Bag Test but also the Fluent Spanish Speaker Test. I didn’t even know they were required.
- ” Most of the people featured were not “changing” their communities – they were being victimized in or by them. ” As a POC of color I understand where you coming from, but sometimes I think many POCs are an overly pessimistic bunch. The attitude seems to be that whenever, ONE thing comes out (in this case a television program), it must be perfect. The wrong perspective must tempered with the right perspective or not shown at all because there will never be another THING (again, in this case a television program) after this one.
Really, I’m just a Pollyanna, because I believe even if Latino is America is craptastic, someone watching will be inspired to tell the story or their story of being Latino in America their own way.
- As far as the lack of crucial follow up questions, Arturo, me thinks you’re a little harsh. I’m scared of you.
- How responsible does Cindy García’s mother feel for her inability/unwillingness to learn English obstructing Cindy’s studies? If Soledad asked she’d be viewed as a witch. If Cindy responded, she would be viewed as disresptful.
- How did Cindy (pictured above) figure unprotected sex was a sensible idea in the face of a 70% failure-to-graduate rate and a sister who was also a teen mother? I’m willing to bet like many other teen girls who get pregnant, she didn’t figure it would happen to her. What else is new?
- And what in the blue hell was her boyfriend thinking having sex without a condom? He wasn’t thinking either – though I don’t recall a discussion on condoms, I may have missed that.
- Was there something preventing Araceli Torresfrom seeking citizenship once she turned 18 years old, or was her story nothing more than an excuse for CNN to hype the grand-standing Anderson Cooper, who saw fit to follow the show by giving a platform to anti-immigrant sheriff Joe Arpaio. Completely, justifable cynicism there, though I hope that wasn’t the case.
- The feature on Latinos in Hollywood was also clumsy: Lupe Ontiveros and Eva Longoria-Parker. I think these types of Hollywood segments on monorities are always weak, because of the predictability of the content – a hard-working actor who hasn ‘t made it big yet and a star whose hot now as opposed to someone whose been around a long time who could offer some real wisdom on the subject.
- Will it acknowledge not just anti-Latino and anti-immigrant sentiment on American airwaves, but on its’ own network? No.
- I will be watching tonight.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 10:54 am ¶
aimerrouge wrote:
Cont’d-
O’Brien’s best moment came during the feature on the St. Louis church. As POC Catholic and the Speaker of Another Language Catholic, there was sadly nothing surprising in this segment.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 10:58 am ¶
yolanda wrote:
i haven’t had the opportunity to watch this yet, as i don’t have a tv. but after black in america pt. 1 & 2, i didn’t have high hopes the CNN would suddenly change it’s less than stellar coverage of POC for this “documentary”, either. and why does soledad get to cover these topics just because she identifies as a POC? i’m sure there are far more qualified, PASSIONATE, and INVOLVED journalists who’d love the opportunity to do these stories justice.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 11:13 am ¶
yolanda wrote:
oh and i’m front stl, it’s a pretty segregated and racist city in general.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 11:15 am ¶
Kara wrote:
Also from St. Louis. Yep, I agree with yolanda.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 1:18 pm ¶
Bubbles wrote:
Soledad O’Brien is NOT qualified to do this documentary. I wish CNN would stop making her the point person on all minorities.
I don’t like Soledad O”Brien or CNN.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 1:37 pm ¶
Andrea R. wrote:
I don’t have a tv either so I’m not sure if I’ll ever catch it but man, they make us all sound depressed and hopeless. One of the tough things I have about shoes like this (I didn’t see Black in America) is that I don’t quite see myself in any of the portraits. I’m a Mexican-American woman and my parents came here over 40 years ago. But it seems the only stories they are willing to highlight are the ones about recent immigrants and how bad they have it, and yes, I can sympathize, but what about the other half, the generational immigrants, the ones that have been here over 40 years and perhaps don’t even have a Latino friend? Just wondering. We all have stories, but it seems shows like this like to sensationalize the drama. My life and my families struggle here in the states is pretty boring, why? Because we’re doing pretty well. And its sad that that isn’t exciting. Not to get down on others that have gone through hardships, its just different circumstances and I respect that.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 2:01 pm ¶
Toni wrote:
Why is there so much focus on O’brien? I don’t watch CNN very often but when I do she seems to fall in line with the brand CNN promotes. Is she the person to blame?
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 4:01 pm ¶
Eva wrote:
I didn’t watch this because, well it’s not a documentary. It’s on a network, CNN, and like all network it’s all about the ratings, it’s a show. Like all shows they focus on the dysfunction, they focus on what’s wrong. It’s like most TV and reality TV especially. Who wants to watch a show where everybody’s happy and doing well (I’d like to), but I’m sure most TV execs don’t feel anybody would watch.
And sadly, they’d be somewhat right.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 4:26 pm ¶
Kjen wrote:
I think the point of these ‘in America’ series is to inform outsiders. So, while ‘Black in America’ held nothing new or enlightening for me, I had thought the other segments might.
But even with my shallow knowledge of Latino American history and contemporary issues, the coverage seemed stale and shallow. And way too familiar, its like a minority script the narrative must follow.
And as for that ‘it will lead to a discussion’ – eh. Talking about the same issues from the same angles doesn’t interest me becuase I wonder how productive it truly is – such diaglogue almost serves as entertainment rather than a path to understanding and enlightenment.
I do hope these series inspire others to actually research and look deeper into the issues they have concerning other minorities.
The best that can be said is that these series raise the visibility of groups – which can lead to them being seen as more human and American.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 5:55 pm ¶
April wrote:
@aimerrouge:
Sorry, but “it will get the discussion going” just isn’t good enough anymore. In fact, I’ve heard that same argument used for downright offensive things: sure, it stereotypes people of color, but “it will get the discussion going.”
I didn’t watch Latino in America part 1, and I’m not sure I’ll watch part 2. I’m sick of people of color being presented as America’s burden, entirely lacking agency.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 6:23 pm ¶
April wrote:
I should add that I did watch Black in America, both series, and that’s why I chose not to watch Latino in America. I might watch a “White in America” series, should CNN ever be bold enough to air one.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 6:26 pm ¶
Renee wrote:
I am not very familiar with the issues that Latin@’s face outside of immigration. I watched the first part of this documentary and was appalled. I suppose I should not have expected better considering the Black in America series. It seems as though CNN is intent on pushing negative stereotypes. I kept thinking about Sotomayor and why she didn’t factor into the discussion. This was more of an attack on the Latin@ community than anything else.
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 6:32 pm ¶
AnonymousArab wrote:
I was in the gym watching Top Chef instead. I’ve always found CNN’s “perspective” reporting shallow and ill-informed at best, lip-service to minorities at worst. This includes a lot of Christiane Amanpour’s stuff- which is so heavily couched in subtle neo-colonialist sentiment that it makes me feel physically ill.
Am I the only one who noticed the beginning of a lot more CNN reportage of color (POC anchors, and race-related reporting) when Obama became the person to beat in the election? I freely admit it might just be my imagination, and it’s not that I think that’s a bad thing, but I feel like CNN is going about it deliberately as some kind of ratings strategy.
(Here’s a ratings strategy- dump Dobbs.)
Posted 22 Oct 2009 at 8:58 pm ¶
maus wrote:
“the series’ first installment was less “Latinos In America” and more like “Latinos For Lou Dobbs’ Audience.””
I expect no less from CNN. They’re terrible, plain and simple.
Posted 23 Oct 2009 at 12:18 am ¶
Jessica wrote:
I like Soledad and I’m always going to like her. The first Black in America was hella depressing so I was happy she went with a black female doctor trying to get answers about breast cancer but also depressing since black females have a higher chance of dying from it (in the second Black in America). She also took a look at black marriage (so sadly low in our comm.) and childhood obesity, schooling, after-school programs, literacy. I learned a lot from both of the Black in America’s so I didn’t have much of a problem with them especially the Black Women in America.
Didn’t get a chance to watch Latino in America but I could imagine this was going to be difficult to accomplish much of anything since it’s such a large spectrum (Mexicans, Cubans, etc. illegal immigrants, poor, upper-class, teen mothers, college students, language/name barriers etc. and so on and so forth) Maybe she wanted to start off with the problems in the Latino comm. and then do another one with the bright spots in the Latino comm.
Anyway, I love you Soledad keep doing you. You can’t please everybody.
Bring on ‘Asians in America’ I would LOVE to watch that.
Posted 23 Oct 2009 at 12:00 pm ¶
Montclair Mommy wrote:
I didn’t see the whole thing..only what was on prior to Top Chef (and during the commercials)…but I must agree that, from what I saw, if someone from Lou’s camp was to watch it–it would pretty much confirm all of their prejudices and stereotypes. I understand the need to talk about the struggle, but there are so so so many successful Latinos out there, I would really like to see them debunk some of the misconceptions about the community. Some of it was heartbreaking (which is what keeps people watching) and…predictable. Then again if they featured someone succeeding against the odds that would have been more of the Horatio Alger myth that we don’t necessarily need (we have Fox News for that).
Posted 23 Oct 2009 at 3:28 pm ¶
Juan wrote:
Hispanic/latino is not a race…Dont assume that every Latino has to be Brown or Black skinned because plenty of us are White. Myself im a White Cuban American, and there are plenty of us in Florida who at first glance you would think is a Anglo.
anyways, that whole CNN story should be retitled to Mexican in America. Ive yet to meet any person from Dominican Republic, Puerto rico or Cuba look like a Mexican person. Our histories are different, our looks are different and our cultures are different. And that show likes to harp on and on about racism to latinos…which latino is feeling the racism? The black latino from Dominican republic? The white cuban? Or only the Mestizo Mexican? im betting its the mexican since the show is only about that segment of the hispanic population and piss on the rest.
Posted 23 Oct 2009 at 3:49 pm ¶
Kelly wrote:
I have to take issue with John Leguizamo’s ridiculous statement that Los Angeles is like South Africa. Does he think that millions of poor immigrants, many of them undocumented, are going to be middle class in one generation? It takes several generations to become middle class and more.
That being said, there are Latinos here who are doctors, lawyers, scientists, CEOs, politicians, etc. There are more middle class and wealthy Latinos in Los Angeles and CA than in New York. The overall standard of living is higher too.
Posted 24 Oct 2009 at 5:32 pm ¶
Ruel wrote:
Latino is akin to going to Europe and saying your race is American…It might make sense in the states but its bogus outside of it. Its bogus to say theres a Latin race for the same reason – there isnt one. So who exactly are the “Latins” that this show is trying to target? Is it the Native-American ones [Mexicans] or the Carribean ones [Black hispanics] ? Im guessing its the Mexicans as the show showed virtually 0 Black Hispanics, and was filmed almost exclusively in California…
Posted 25 Oct 2009 at 4:00 am ¶
Pancho wrote:
Juan, Hispanic IS an ethnicity. If you don’t want anyone to know, just check the box marked “non-Hispanic White”.
You should have watched the show because it was just the opposite of your stated expectations. It was story after story about Hispanics who want you to know they aren’t Mexican.
In fact, I felt the program disparaged Mexicans and Chicanos by trying to detach and distance Mexicans from other Latinos. Many of the Mexicans highlighted were field laborers fresh off the Rio Bravo and the Chicanos featured have tried very hard to shed their Mexican heritage. “Ugly Betty” was touched on – WHERE WAS SALMA HAYEK?
Posted 26 Oct 2009 at 10:49 am ¶
Terry wrote:
There are lots of Mexican-Americans who are more successful than Salma Hayek. People need to stop thinking that actors and entertainers are the epitome of success. They’re not.
Ever heard of Nobel Prize winner in chemistry dr. Mario Molina? He teaches at UC San Diego. How about astronauts Jose Hernandez and John D. Olivas? Those are the Latinos I would like to see interviewed on CNN, but I won’t hold my breath. I thought it was so sad when Soledad O’brien said that Latino children should use as a role model the fictional captain on Battlestar Galactica. She’s lost her mind…
Posted 28 Oct 2009 at 2:53 am ¶
Rio wrote:
Technically Juan is correct, as Latino/hispanic is not a race. Ethnicity can be tied to race but it’s not the same thing as race. Ethnicity is tied more to a person’s cultural background–the same way someone may trace their ethnicity to being Italian or Irish. While people do obviously identify as Latino, it’s kind of a general catchall term like Asian and if it’s broken down further to what a person culturally identifies with/traces their ethnic origin to, then he/she would say I’m Mexican/Cuban/Chinese/Korean/etc. because as any non-Chinese Asian who has ever been called Chinese or any non-Mexican Latino who’s been called Mexican know, culturally they’re different. But even though the term Latino used to represent race, it doesn’t classify a race of people because if you look at the history of how Latin America as we know it today came into being, they’re was a lot of mixture going on due to European colonists (Spaniards mainly, but also Portuguese obviously, significant number of Germans to Cuba area, etc.), the slaves they brought over, and of course the native population already inhabiting those areas. That’s where Latinos differ from other catchall ethnic terms in that the hispanic/Latino population arose because of colonization and the resulting mixtures that came out of it, which is not the case for Europeans or Asians for the most part (if most of the native population still managed to thrive and be the majority in many Latin American countries the way Indians for example have done despite being colonized by the British then the case might be very different today). My father’s side of the family are black Latinos; if they’re ancestors had been brought over to Georgia for example instead of Central America, they wouldn’t be considered nor would they identify as Latinos. So just to be clear here, there isn’t any specific Latino race, but racially whether black/white/ indigenous or some mixture out of that a person can identify as Latino and to a greater extent, their ethnicity whether it be Colombian or Dominican or what have you.
Posted 28 Oct 2009 at 11:53 pm ¶
kathy wrote:
Perhaps I am mistaken but Juan’s comment came off as a bit hateful towards Mexicans. Anyway, I have seen plenty of Cubans and Puerto Ricans who look like a Mexican would as some are also Mestizos and not Black OR White as yours truly. There are also plenty of White Mexicans. In my family there are both dark and light skinned people my dad’s mother is very light skinned with green eyes while my mom’s dad is very dark with practically black eyes and yet had a blonde brother with blue eyes (suspicious =p). If you actually watched the series you would see that the focus was hardly on Mexicans. I think Isabel was one of the only one’s given a full feature. Cindy was Guatemalan and they did a feature about a black Dominican family. The chef was Venezuelan or Chilean, I forget. Anyway, I understand your point that most Americans seem to label every Latino as Mexican but look on the bright side, at least when they say all of the horrible things they say Mexicans and not Cubans or Colombians. No, us Mexicans are given That beautiful honor. I also backup your statement that Latino is not a race. Yes we speak the same language but it is just like in the US where there are people from all different races. It bothered me when people in school would say, “No, so and so isn’t black he’s Dominican”. Truth is that person WAS indeed black and happened to be from the Dominican Republican. That is as if I said, “Oh, so and so isn’t black, he’s American”. Sounds pretty stupid doesn’t it?
Posted 31 Oct 2009 at 3:03 am ¶