“’Policing’ Race” by Valle and Torres and Dávila’s “Don’t Panic, I’m Hispanic” focus on the state of Latinos in the USA. Even though the topic is the same, the authors consider it differently and draw specific attention to various aspects of this phenomenon. On the one hand, Valle and Torres indicate that Latinos are underestimated and even neglected in American society. On the other hand, Dávila stipulates that the US Hispanic marketing industry is an integral part of the whole nation. Thus, further analysis is required to determine identity issues for the given group of people.
To begin with, the authors present general information on the topic. In her chapter “Don’t Panic, I’m Hispanic,” Dávila mentions that the Hispanic marketing industry is vast and essential in the US. It comprises many people from Europe and Latin America who speak Spanish and who have come to the United States to achieve something in their lives. Dávila points out that many of them have coped with the task because “Hispanic marketing is now a multibillion dollar industry” (p. 23).
Based on this information, I can suppose that the representatives of this group are fully-fledged members of American society. At the same time, Valle and Torres’ “’Policing’ Race” explains that the situation with Hispanics is controversial. The researchers exemplify their idea with the Los Angeles riots and their media coverage. According to the researchers, “nearly 51 percent of the arrested were Latinos” (p. 52). However, representatives of this minority group constituted only a quarter of riot participants in the media field. These two approaches demonstrate that it is impossible to define the life of Latinos in the United States categorically and without possible controversies.
Furthermore, the authors of the two works stipulate that there are various relationships between Latinos and society. As has been described, Valle and Torres indicate that Latinos are ignored. To a greater extent, it is because of specific trends found in the media space, which refers to framing. The researchers describe that term as “themes or story lines that organize facts to give them meaning” (p. 48). In other words, numerous people believed that Latinos did not participate in the Los Angeles riots because representatives of this group were not regular participants of news reports. At the same time, Dávila argues that society is in a close and productive relationship with the given minority group.
She mentions that the Hispanic marketing industry helped “promote pride and reverse racism with regards to the Spanish language and Hispanic cultures” (p. 44). It denotes that people of Hispanic origin are becoming more integrated into American society and that they experience fewer ethnicity challenges in their lives. Thus, the information above proves that representatives of the same group can feel differently in the same society.
This comparison conveys a significant meaning of mass media for shaping a public opinion concerning some issues. If news agencies want something to be considered valid, they are free to select specific people and comment on events in a particular manner. The example above demonstrates that it is only necessary not to interview Latinos to make society believe that people of this origin do not actively participate in important events. As is clear, the given strategy can result in negative consequences for both Latinos and the whole society.
There is no doubt that the differences above could not but influence the Latinos’ self-awareness. Valle and Torres stipulate that “there is a low level of knowledge and ethnic solidarity among Latinos of different ancestries” (p. 65). Thus, I can suppose that selective media coverage makes Latinos question their own identity and be skeptical of that of other minority groups. It is not useful because this phenomenon can result in racism and its adverse consequences.
On the contrary, Dávila says that the marketing industry has been “constituted as a key arena of advocacy and support for the totality of the Hispanic population” (p. 42). One can suppose that this phenomenon serves to unite and consolidate people of a particular origin, and specific marketing objects are used for this purpose. This information points out that external conditions significantly influence the way how people perceive themselves. Thus, a positive environment makes people develop a sense of their ethnicity, while worse conditions contribute to the fact that people start neglecting and losing their identity.
In conclusion, the two readings present different and even opposite points of view concerning the fact of how people of Latin origin feel in American society. Various aspects can have an impact on it, including relationships with a majority group and media coverage. It is not a surprise that the phenomena above lead to the situation that Latinos question and reconsider their identity. Thus, the given analysis makes me think that it is impossible to describe the state of this minority group in the USA unambiguously. Latinos are influenced by American society, but they should do their best to preserve their identity irrespective of external conditions.