Harvest of Shame

L
Harvest of Shame
Analysis of Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Social Identity Theory/Threat

By
Brenna Lofquist
WSU ID #11190549
Brenna.lofquist@email.wsu.edu

Term Paper submitted for COM471/CES404
Fall Semester 2013

Submitted to Dr. P.M. Wadleigh
The Edward R. Murrow College of Communication
Washington State University
Pullman, WA 99163

Edward R. Murrow once said “Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them up, at least a little bit.” This statement describes the root of a problem that has been prevalent for hundreds of years; racism. Depicted in the movie are the struggles that farmers went through in the mid 1900’s. The movie also does not only talk about black people, but white people as well. An analysis of the news segment Harvest of Shame reveals multiple problems discussing prejudice, stereotypes and social identity theory/threat. Stereotype is directly defined as a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing. In this case, stereotypes of the uneducated, under protected and “forgotten” people are formed and portrayed in this film. During this time period of the mid 1900’s there was a stereotype floating around. If one were uneducated, under fed or under clothed you worked in the fields or were a struggling farmer. This movie did not only depict the struggles of the black workers but that of white farmers and workers as well. Firstly, the discussion of the struggles African-Americans went through. Workers ranged from young children just learned to walk, to elderly that could barely walk. Families or individuals started their treacherous journey and were expected to work around 136 days out of the year only making approximately $900. Because these stereotypes existed and still partially do, blacks were forced to become underprivileged. During one scene in the movie, an African-American teacher commented on the responsibility felt to help further African-American children in school. Their parents are the reason the United States is considered to be the best fed country in the world. Due to finances and the size of families, black children to not receive the chance to attend school which sets them up to continue in the path of the stereotype. This also occurs with Caucasian farmers and migrant workers. They were also uneducated and could not afford to send their children to school because they needed more help in the fields to support their families. Without an education farmers and workers to not realize and understand why prices of crops fluctuate, which is what their income depends on. Everyone should have the equal opportunity to receive an education, even if the most basic form. When stereotypes start to become consistent and potentially even permanent people start to perceive the people as “just that way” as if there is nothing they can do and they will remain that way. Stereotypes become convenient. When is the line crossed pertaining to stereotypes? Steele defines it as “when a situation does not particularly require us to consciously think about or otherwise manage an identity, our traits are simply “characteristic”” (Lecture). This statement simply means that once a person does not have to think about whether a characteristic is associated with a person based off of shorthand- convenient symbols, this is where stereotypes is taken too far. The ultimate goal would be to eliminate stereotypes completely therefore every person would be accepted equally. However, everyone knows this will never fully occur. The best thing that could happen would be to not let oneself into the state of mind that Steele defines previously. Always give people the benefit of the doubt and just because they resemble certain characteristics of a stereotype that one has acknowledged in the past, do not allow oneself to conform. Stereotype also fits closely with prejudice, which is another prevalent subject depicted in this film. Although stereotyping and prejudice work together, they are different functions. Prejudice comes from a preconceived notion that is not based on reason or actual experience. Prejudice can come from adding a negative feeling to an otherwise neutral stereotype (Lecture). Cognitive stereotypical images are ideal for prejudiced people because they represent all the labels we have for people floating around in our minds. These images help to create the preconceived notions because they allow the prejudiced person to pull from them, instead of having to know anything else about said targeted person. People that partake in this act of prejudice have simply been misled. Prejudice has been such an enormous problem that could be fixed so easily. When one notices fewer differences in people, the more likely they are to become narrow-minded and prejudiced. “Research shows the more cognitive complex one is; the more tolerant that person is” (Lecture). Cognitive complexity indicates the simplicity or complexity of the frame and perceptual skill of a person. People that are more able to discriminate, able to discern genuine differences, can make more distinctions between people. This comes from being cognitively complex and mindful. Thus people who allow themselves to create this mind frame will start to appreciate what is actually present. These people will start to recognize the differences between people in a unique way instead of a prejudiced way. Although, instant harmony and equality cannot be reached, the more one can distinguish between people, the more tolerant and accepting they will be. By simply changing one’s mind frame, this could be the answer to less prejudice. Relating this theory to the movie, if people did not just instantly associate characteristics such as uneducated and under fed, with migrant workers, than these prejudiced ideas could be reduced. Lastly, eliminating or reducing prejudice needs to be a goal amongst a large group of people; it cannot be done by one individual. Stereotypes and prejudiced people form a person into a group which causes the feeling of Social Identity Theory. Social Identity Theory was created by Henri Tajfel. SIT gives a person a sense of who they are based on the groups they choose to become a part of. This theory is especially present when there is an in-group and out-group. Social identity is an explanation for competition, which closely relates to this film because everyone is competing to improve the quality of their life and living situation. In this case the out-group would be the migrant workers and the in-group would be the farmers they are working for. A family of workers that were interviewed mentioned that the farmers they work for do not care about their problems, they just want their money. Migrant workers envy this because they wish it was as simple for them. The in-group feels a sense of pride and self-esteem because they are seen as higher class, the migrants work for them and they just own the farm and reap the benefits. This group also increases their image by putting down the out-group, which is easily done. The migrant workers are all working towards the same goal; to achieve positive distinctiveness. This means that their sense of self is determined by “we” instead of “I”. How can “they” as an out-group, become more alike the in-group. Although this is not easily obtained, it is the ultimate goal of any out-group. Social identity theory creates the outcome of social identity threat. This especially occurs within an out-group because they are often put down by the in-group so as to look superior. People feel social identity threat when they have been judged negatively due to a stereotype. Although, there are ways to reduce social identity threat which then eliminates social identity theory, the solution does not come easy. The ultimate strategy to reduce social identity theory is to eliminate or reduce the real contingencies. Contingency as defined in lecture is those conditions in a setting that reward some behavior and punish others. One can do this by changing their cues that trigger contingencies. If the migrant workers had the ability to dress better and could act more a like an educated person by using language and mannerisms they could eliminate a contingency. Although, contingencies are closely related to stereotypes, one cannot change a stereotype but one can change a contingency. Once contingencies have at least been attempted to be reduced the only thing left to do is try to help people understand. If people with contingencies have a feeling of safety in a situation and you can communicate how valuable that is, they are more likely to understand. Overall, if executed properly this strategy can immensely help to reduce social identity theory and threat. Although I have discussed individuals ways to reduce stereotyping, prejudice and social identity theory, I believe there is one solution that could help to improve all of these issues; mindfulness. Mindfulness correlates with cognitive complexity in the way that the more open minded one is the more likely they are able to see differences and accept those differences amongst people. Being mindful implies that one is able to see others in terms of stereotypes but that one does not stop there, they move past the initial impression and discover what is really there. Being mindful allows one to acknowledge stereotypes or contingencies, especially when viewed in a negative light, and to not let those characteristics influence their perceptions of people. Ultimately, one still may not like the person however; happiness will be greater in one’s life. With that said, in terms of migrant workers, if more people were mindful the problem could be reduced. People would not just assume characteristics of one person relates to an entire group, and would allow everyone an equal chance. In conclusion, Harvest of Shame is clearly a great example of showcasing stereotyping, prejudice and social identity theory/threat. The film portrays examples of each of these topics displaying the struggles of migrant workers in America during the mid-1900’s. Looking under fed, under clothed, and uneducated resulted in characteristics associated with migrant workers, which in turn resulted in stereotyping. Prejudice then followed because people were not allowing themselves to think anything different and just pulling from what they know. Social identity theory/threat becomes a result because the migrant workers are seen as one group and the farm owners, along with any other person believed to be better than a worker was the other group. Given solutions to help solve these problems, I hope that someday in the near future we can rid of these issues.