Richard Morin of the Washington Post has this article on, among other things, attitudes toward aid for Hurricane Katrina victims and how they vary by race. (Hat tip: James Taranto at opinionjournal.com) The study found that Republicans on average favored giving less aid to victims of Hurricane Katrina, but the amount they would give did not vary by race of the recipient. Democrats, on the other hand, favored more aid overall, but they "were willing to give whites about $1,500 more than they chose to give to a black or other minority." What is intriguing from the perspective of crime studies is this statement by the researcher:
[Shanto] Iyengar [of Stanford] said he's not surprised by the latest findings: "This pattern of results matches perfectly an earlier study I did on race and crime" with Franklin D. Gilliam Jr. of UCLA. "Republicans supported tough treatment of criminals no matter what they encountered in the news. Others were more elastic in their position, coming to support more harsh measures when the criminal suspect they encountered was non-white."
This is a fascinating and underreported result, if true. It runs contrary to the stereotyped assumptions we are faced with almost daily. In academia, a finding contrary to conventional wisdom is usually broadcast with gusto. That doesn't seem to be the case with this one. The prior research is reported in Gilliam, F. D. & Iyengar, S. (2000). Prime suspects: The influence of local television news on the viewing public. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 560-573. The effect mentioned above is not mentioned in the abstract. It does not seem to be in the full article, either, at least not in an obvious way. If anyone reading knows more about this, please leave a comment.
The headline on Morin's piece, BTW, is "Jon Stewart, Enemy of Democracy?" No comment.
Leave a comment