Playing a Different Race Card: Examining the Limits of Elite Influence on Perceptions of Racism

Abstract

There is much debate about the reach and seriousness of racial prejudice today. We ask: How do ordinary people come to view events as racist? Using an experiment, we investigate the effects of elite charges of racism on public perceptions of police conduct. We test several hypotheses, including discounting, expertise, and ingroup bias, pertaining to how public stereotypes moderate elite influence. We find that stereotypes matter, and that Democrats, Republicans, blacks, and whites cannot make claims about racism with equal success.

Race, partisanship, and perceptions of inter-minority commonality

“…Indeed, a number of studies from the 1990s explored the "different leadership cues" that might matter for African-Americans and found that messages from African-American elites, regardless of the partisanship of the elite in question, were more influential in shaping how blacks interpret events than messages from elites who did not share this racial identity (Domke et al 2000;Hurley 1994, 1996). More recently, Nelson, Sanbonmatsu, and McClerking (2007) looked for elite leadership effects on African-American opinion in an extensive study of attitudes towards police misconduct. Contrary to previous research on African-American opinion, Nelson et al found that partisanship did matter for how blacks responded to statements from black political leaders.…”

“…Specifically, the "expertise hypothesis" builds on Nelson et al's aforementioned work on opinion leadership by minority political leaders. According to Nelson, Sanbonmatsu, and McClerking (2007), most members of the public implicitly assume that African-American and Latino political leaders are, by virtue of their personal experience, more knowledgeable than white political leaders about issues of race and ethnicity. As a result of these assumed differences in expertise, members of the public should be very receptive to messages on intergroup relations delivered by black and Latino political elites.…”

“…As outlined above, a number of studies have found that messages from elites who share a respondent's racial identity are more influential in shaping opinion than messages from elites who do not share this identity (Domke et al 2000;Hurley 1994, 1996;Nelson, Sanbonmatsu, and McClerking 2007). Most notably, Hurley (1994, 1996) found that exposure to a fictional message concerning the black community delivered by Clarence Thomas or Jesse Jackson had a greater influence on black opinion than the same message delivered by Ted Kennedy or George Bush.…”

“I’m Not the President of Black America”: Rhetorical versus Policy Representation

“…African Americans governing majoritywhite electorates have strong incentives to represent that majority, and are electorally accountable to it. These representatives may face pressures to avoid focusing on race-to deracialize their governance (Clayton 2010;Gillespie 2012;Nelson, Sanbonmatsu, and McClerking 2007). In trying to avoid the perception of racial favoritism, these representatives may end up representing minorities no better (or perhaps even worse) than a comparable white representative (Hajnal 2006;Harris 2012).…”

“…Still, the findings are consistent with theories of minority incorporation: in order to enact policies that benefit a disadvantaged group, elected officials in majoritywhite jurisdictions may need to frame them as a universal benefit, to avoid a backlash (Browning, Marshall, and Tabb 1984;Nteta, Rhodes, and Tarsi 2016;Wilson 1987). The potential for backlash may be even stronger when descriptive representatives advocate for their own group, as their efforts are likely to be perceived as favoritism (Hajnal 2006;Nelson, Sanbonmatsu, and McClerking 2007;Tesler 2016). Thus, Obama may have eschewed racialized rhetoric to avoid activating the racial concerns of the majority-white electorate.…”