RASHOMON AND REPRESSION: A MULTI-SOURCE ANALYSIS OF CONTENTIOUS EVENTS

by

CHRISTIAN DAVENPORT Center for International Development and Conflict Management University of Maryland 0145b Tydings Hall College Park, MD 20742-7231 Email: cdavenport@cidcm.umd.edu Webpage: www.cdavenport.com MARIKA F. X. LITRAS Bureau of Justice Statistics U.S. Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 20531 Email: marika.litras@usdoj.gov

The research itself was supported by the National Science Foundation (SBR# 9617900). We have benefited from comments from numerous individuals: Charles Tilly, Ron Francisco, Mark Lichbach, John McCarthy, Kelly Moore, Will Moore, Lisa Baldez, Carol Mueller, Ted Gurr, Diana Mutz, and Darren Davis (MEoS). While not guilty of any of mistakes or limitations contained within the paper, these individuals have pushed us to improve the research in several ways and thus we owe them a large debt. There is still some work to be done with the paper however and any comments would be welcome.

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION RASHOMON AND REPRESSION: A MULTI-SOURCE ANALYSIS OF CONTENTIOUS EVENTS

Abstract Current approaches to events-based data collection ignore the different perspectives that exist across different data sources, which in statistical analysis can lead to measurement bias, invalid causal inferences, and a limited understanding of why events occur. To investigate this problem, we analyze event coverage of repression directed against the Black Panther Party (BPP) in Oakland, California from 1967-73, as reported in five different newspapers. Results demonstrate that each source provides a different understanding about how and why repression was used against the Black Panther Party and that the range of this coverage (i.e., perspective itself) varies in a systematic manner.

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION INTRODUCTION The information that we rely upon to identify and understand political events often is compiled from a variety of sources.1 At the same time, however, the content of each individual source is likely to be influenced by the sources values, focus, or underlying agenda. As a result, it is common to find conflicting interpretations of the same events across sources when chronologies are compiled for empirical analysis. This phenomenon has been popularized in social science literature as the Rashomon effect (e.g., Scott 1985, xviii; Mazur 1998).2 Rashomon has important implications for the way researchers gather, analyze and interpret data, for many of the approaches currently applied do not attempt to understand the mosaic of perspectives embedded in data compiled from multiple sources. For example, in the empirical study of contentious politics (the subje ct of this investigation), individuals generally use one newspaper (e.g., McAdam 1982; Tarrow 1989; Davis et al. 1998) or they combine multiple newspapers (e.g., Tilly et al. 1975; Beissinger 1998; Francisco 2000) to construct event sequences overlooking the issue of Rashomon. When investigation across sources is made, they involve comparing: 1) two or more newspapers of a similar type against one another (e.g, Jackman and Boyd 1979; Mueller 1997), or 2) multiple newspapers (aggregated as a group) against some other kind of source (e.g., police records in the case of McCarthy et al. 1996). Upon reflection, it is clear that neither approach allows us to investigate the differences and similarities of alternative historical accounts recorded by distinct observers. Neither approach allows us to examine different types of newspapers that might be predisposed to cover events in diverse ways. We thus end up unable to understand the full mosaic of observation available at any one point, and unable to identify the very structure underlying perspective itself. Our objective is to provide such an analysis. In line with the suggestions of numerous scholars from a variety of theoretical and methodological orientations (e.g., Scott 1985; Goodman 1994; King et al. 1994; Lustick 1996; Mazur 1998), we argue that to address the Rashomon problem, each consulted source should be viewed as potentially identifying a

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION unique event-sequence, resulting in data that measure alternative accounts of history. Based on our theory of Situationally Motivated Observation (SitMO), we propose that accounts of contentious events vary in accordance to the focus of the source on authorities relative to dissidents (e.g., Sigal 1973; 1987; Wolfsfeld 1997). Sources that focus on authorities le ad information-providers to report and researchers to find: 1) a greater number of events involving authorities relative to challengers, 2) attention to the more bizarre, less commonplace authority and dissident activity, as well as 3) more robust relationships between dissident and repressive behavior. Sources that focus on challengers, on the other hand, lead informationproviders to report and researchers to find: 1) a greater number of events involving dissidents relative to authorities; 2) attention to more everyday/routine authority and dissident events; as well as 3) less robust relationships between dissident and repressive behavior. We empirically examine our theory and hypotheses through the analysis of five different news sources and their coverage of weekly sanctions enacted by various police and court agencies against the Black Panther Party (BPP) in Oakland, California from 1967 to 1973. These sources include: the Berkeley Barb, the Black Panther Intercommunal News Service, the New York Times, Oakland Tribune, and the Sun Reporter. The results of our analysis demonstrate support for the SitMO argument and reinforce the importance of examining multiple perspectives in the collection and analysis of event data. The issues addressed above are developed across five sections of this paper. We begin with an outline of alternative analytical approaches to events-based data collection as well as a discussion of the different ways that researchers have dealt with the issue of multiple sources. In the second section we put forth our theory of Situationally Motivated Observation. Third, we present the various sources of data used for the analysis, followed by the results of the empirical investigation. We conclude with a discussion of how the Rashomon effect challenges existing research and offer suggestions to develop further the line of inquiry initiated here.

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION THE EMPIRICAL STUDY OF EVENTS Those of us who seek to understand discrete occurrences of political phenomenon (i.e., events) in a rigorous fashion normally sift through various sources to collect information about these instances as well as information that assists us in explaining them. What we do with these data, after it is assembled, varies depending upon our assumptions about history (whether it is singular or multiple) as well as the intentions of those who record it (whether they are objective or subjective).3 A history that is believed to be both unidimensional and objective, we refer to as the conventional tradition (e.g., Collingwood [1946] 1961; Carr 1964); a history that is multidimensional and subjective, we refer to as the historiographical (e.g., Kruger and Mariani 1989; Trouillot 1995; Guha 1998).4 Both are discussed below. Within the conventional tradition, it is assumed for purposes of analysis and interpretation that history is of a singular configuration, representing one reality. Here, the past is treated as a fixed entity that can be reconstructed piece-by-piece using a variety of sources. Though information-providers may vary in quality and capacity, they are assumed to depict a common historical trajectory and a common event-sequence. In the area of contentious politics, this treatment of history includes numerous examples: Rummel (1964; 1996), Tilly et al. (1975), Tarrow (1989), Kriesi et al. (1992), Gurr (1993), Koopmans (1995), Tilly (1995), Beissinger (1998), Francisco (2000), and Hocke (1998). While those working within the conventional framework implicitly assume there is one history to be told, they differ widely in the types, scope and providers of information they rely upon to examine events. Some scholars, for example, maintain that there is usually only one information-provider that covers a particular time period most comprehensively, eschewing the necessity for consulting multiple sources (e.g., Jackman and Boyd 1979; McAdam 1982; Taylor and Jodice 1983; Davies 1989; Olzak 1992; Schrodt et al. 1994; Bond 1994; Jenkins 1998; Davis et al. 1998). Others argue for the use of multiple information-providers combined into one database so that they may maximize coverage of events (e.g., Feirabend et al. 1966; Tilly et al. 1975; Azar 1980; Taylor and Jodice 1983; Rummel 1996; Francisco

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION 2000).5 Some engage in the competitive assessment of many sources to identify the best representation of historical reality (e.g., Doran et al. 1973; Shaw and Anglin 1979; Gerner and Schrodt 1996; Huxtable and Pevehouse 1996; White 1993; Sommer and Scarritt 1998).6 Finally, others perform bias

assessments of different information providers, demonstrating that discrepancies across sources are so prevalent that efforts at data collection are nave (Dangzer 1975; Snyder and Kelly 1977; Jackman and Boyd 1979; McCarthy et al. 1996; Mueller 1997; Hocke 1998) or, at worst, a waste of time (Brockett 1992). One of the most recent efforts in this tradition has taken the largest step by investigating the selection of contentious events not only against other contentious events but also against all recorded events (Oliver and Myers 1999). Though the dominant position within the literature, the conventional approach does not stand alone. The historiographical approach also concerns itself with understanding events through the analysis of historical data principally of a qualitative variety (e.g., Said 1978; Scott 1985; Duffy 1994; Guha 1998; Rosenau 1992; Goodman 1994; Trouillot 1995; Cohen 1997; Mazur 1998). In contrast to the conventional tradition, the historiographical approach maintains that there are a multitude of perspectives that one could bring to bear on any historical event. In turn, there are many histories and, therefore, multiple realities that exist at any one time and place. Not only are the assumptions underlying the data collection different from the conventional traditional but so are the objectives of research. Within this area, as opposed to addressing a tightly drawn research question and answer, much of the research seeks to emphasize the complexity and diversity in event-sequences that underlie human experience and historical recollections of these experiences. To this end, multiple sources are consulted but each is kept independent from one another for analysis and interpretation. Simply, each history is discussed without referencing the others. Again, there is some variation here. Guided by the principles identified above, some authors discuss merely one perspective

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION alluding to another (e.g., the subaltern juxtaposed against the dominant [e.g., Guha 1998]); others discuss multiple perspectives simultaneously (e.g., Scott 1985; Goodman 1994; Mazur 1998). This brief discussion of the study of events demonstrates the various ways researchers have dealt with the multiple source issue. As one can discern, some homogenize differences while others celebrate and reify them. While each tradition addresses particular research questions and concerns, neither (viewed individually) assists us with the Rashomon problem since neither approach facilitates substantive and rigorous comparison of individual sources. In order to move in this direction, we suggest that both analytic traditions should be used together. If possible, analysts should try to combine the conventional and historiographical approaches by examining multiple sources separately, followed by a systematic comparison of outcomes (Lustick 1996). According to Rashomon this seems to be the only way to understand events. The logic behind such an endeavor is addressed below. UNDERSTANDING THE MOTIVATIONS FOR OBSERVING REPRESSIVE EVENTS Few would argue with the point that different types of newspapers describe contentious political events in different ways. These differences, we suggest, are likely to vary according to the focus placed by the newspaper on authorities relative to dissidents. Simply, the reporters vantage point likely influences what they pursue, what they observe, what they write, and inevitably what we as researchers use within our investigations. In the case of a mass arrest at a protest, for example, news sources focused on authorities are likely to report more about police activity relative to protest behavior. News sources focused on challengers, on the other hand, are likely to give less attention to police activity and more to detailing what the protestors engaged in. For news sources equally interested or disinterested in both actors (the idealized situation of the impartial or objective news organization), one might expect relative balance between authority and dissident coverage. All of these responses could be made to the same event stimulus.

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION It is within this context that we can understand the principle of Situationally Motivated Observation (SitMO). SitMO is grounded in the theory that all social actors, including the media, are situated within an authority pattern ranging from being affiliated/interested with those in power (i.e., superordinates) to being affiliated/interested with those subject to power (i.e., subordinates).7 Viewed here, social actors perceive contentious political events in ways that are consistent with their position on this continuum as this reflects who they come to see as newsworthy as well as who they develop contacts with (Sigal 1973; 1987; Oliver and Myers 1999), and what the audience and sponsors (very frequently advertisers) expect them to discuss (Schudson 1995). These perceptions are then reinforced through time pressures and habit (Tuchman 1978). Compelled by all of these factors, news organizations tend to simplify how they collect information as well as the way in which they write stories, principally highlighting one actor that they deem to be most important (e.g., authorities or challengers). In this context, the other actor (e.g., challengers or authorities) is merely used in a juxtapositional manner within the narrative construct in order to provide an explanation for the principle actors behavior, e.g., conveying that they are merely responding to the other (e.g., Barkin 1984).8 The narrative style in which contentious politics is discussed thus influences the data that social scientists can use. This view of newspapers as cultural products significantly deviates from the older perspective where newspapers are believed to reflect what actually takes place in the world. Operative within these older conceptions of how information comes to newspapers (which were quite influential on the earlier studies that relied upon these data), there is an opinion that more reporting moves toward greater comprehensiveness. Within more recent work, however, there is an acknowledgement that more reporting may move toward greater variation in what is reported. Within this view, certain actors and events within society are visible to those who seek them and, by the very nature of the process; others are made to disappear (Trouillot 1995). This view of newspaper coverage is important for it diminishes

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION the scope of information likely to be reported by any one news organization. Consequently, the reported information emerging from the array of situated observers influences the ways in which authority and dissident events can be covered as well as the inferences that can be drawn from these sources. A more detailed discussion of the spectrum of observation is described below. THE MEDIA MOSAIC Within the communication literature there are at least four different types of newspapers: mainstream, alternative, community and dissident (e.g., Zubrzycki 1958-9; Rivers and Rubin 1971; Spates and Levin 1972; Spates 1976; House of Commons 1977; Kessler 1984; Stansfield and Lemert 1987; Lee and Solomon 1992; Wachsberger 1993).9 These presses can be differentiated from one another according to the objectives pursued, the audience sought, the principle content of the papers distributed information, and the division of labor within the organization. By far, the most familiar type of newspaper is the mainstream press. These organizations attempt to distribute general information of an entertaining and eye-catching variety to an audience which can vary significantly in their demographic characteristics, but that is generally composed of the average citizen or above this categorical designation. The purpose of the distribution is to inform the reading audience as well as deliver them over to the sponsors of the news organization (i.e., advertisers) so that they may sell their products. Within these organizations, there is a high degree of compartmentalization across different functions. For example, here one will likely find individuals that uniquely handle news collection, editing, distribution, management, advertising and so forth. The sheer size of the organization likely varies in accordance to the size of the targeted market and amount of sponsorship received from advertising dollars; generally they will tend to be larger than the other organizations we discuss. The second category of newspaper is referred to as the alternative or underground press. The main objective of this newspaper is to distribute specific political, economic and cultural information

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION relevant to improving the condition of a broadly defined group of individuals. The audience here generally falls outside of the economic and political demographic targeted by more mainstream organizations as they tend to be poorer, less active in conventional political behavior, and (in the American context) inclined towards beliefs of the political left (e.g., the hippies, the underclass, the disenfranchised). The messages distributed here are explicitly more critical of the status-quo, less entertainment oriented, aimed to raise awareness, facilitate activism and bring forth some form of social change broadly defined. Within alternative presses there is less of a division of labor. The primary reason for this is that they tend to have smaller staff sizes than that found within more mainstream newspapers. The community or grassroots press is similar in many respects to the alternative press in that these organizations are concerned with distributing specific political, economic and cultural information relevant to improving the condition of a defined group of individuals. Their division of labor also tends to be less sophisticated. The community press, however, is different than the alternative press in that the groups they target are smaller in nature and they are less concerned with challenging authorities than with providing information that meets the needs and interests of their community. In contrast to the others, the radical press is distinctive by its sense of militancy and direct affiliation with a challenger to the status quo, i.e., a social movement. These newspapers do not simply exist to distribute information, but to convey a message from those who lead to those who follow. In many ways, radical presses are full service operations. The dissident press is the mouthpiece for social change; it provides an organizations objectives, their assessment of relevant problems the diagnostic function, their remedy for the problems identified a prognostic function, and is a device for recruitment as well as retention within the social movement organization itself. In almost all circumstances, the division of labor within these organizations is not clear, though frequently social movement members jointly serve as the news collectors, editors, distributors, and primary audience.10 MEDIA COVERAGE THEMES

10

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Newspapers not only vary along the characteristics identified above, but also with regard to the focus and frequency with which they cover contentious politics (the specific news items with which we are concerned). The focus of coverage, as discussed above, refers to the emphasis placed on authorities relative to challengers in the reporting of contentious politics. The frequency of coverage refers to the absolute number of contentious political events reported, which we assume will vary with the scope of newspaper content (in terms of geography, number of social movements covered, or topics addressed). We suggest that there are basically four themes that describe these two dimensions: Statewatch, Advocacy, Balance, and Accidental Tourist. As one might decipher from the label, information sources that fall into the Statewatch category present event-sequences that focus more on the behavior of authorities involved in contentious political events than on challengers. Authority behavior may include raids, arrests, court sanctions and the like. The second coverage theme, Advocacy, occurs where sources focus more on the actions of dissidents than authorities. Dissident actions may include statements, protests, organizational change, and so forth. Differing from the previous two coverage patterns, the Balance theme represents a situation where coverage of authority and dissident behavior is relatively equal. The focus of this coverage theme is less about disposition toward authorities or challengers in the number of events reported than it is about covering both societal actors equitably. 11 Finally, the Accidental Tourist coverage theme is found in sources where attention to contentious political events is minimal relative to other sources. In essence, if the scope of the paper is too broad in geography and/or subject matter, then it will be unable to devote special attention to authority and dissident events with any high degree of frequency (e.g., McCarthy et al. 1996; Mueller 1997; Hocke 1998). Accidental Tourism is thus noted by a principle of infrequent and sporadic. (Insert Figure 1 About Here)

11

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Figure 1 summarizes our placement of how the four types of news sources might correspond with the four themes of contentious news reporting. Here, the proportional coverage between dissidents and authorities (along the x-axis) is plotted against the overall frequency with which events are reported (along the y-axis). Upon observing the figure, the overlays should not be controversial. Mainstream newspapers are generally expected to focus on the contentious behavior of governments at a relatively low frequency. For these papers, governments are commonly viewed as their primary subject and source for news (e.g., Sigal 1973; 1987) and it is not expected that they would pay too much attention to their dark side (Chomsky 1989).12 By contrast, an alternative press is expected to highlight protest activity in order to cultivate social change and a dissident paper is expected to focus either on themselves or the enemy (the political authorities) both would be observed at relatively high levels for this is basically all that these information-providers cover. Finally, a community press is expected to highlight both actions equally as they attempt to fathom what is going on, how it relates to them, and what they should do without having a particular focal point during the struggle.13 While the overlay above is not particularly provocative, controversy appears to lie within the measurement error that these different overlays introduce into the analysis and how the interpretation of events is expected to vary. Researchers typically maintain that combining information derived from different data sources is favorable because more observations increase precision of the estimates, and bias within component sources cancels out. This approach is the dominant position that governs current uses of data within events-based research. 14 What we are arguing, however, is that perspective within individual sources should not be cancelled out. Borrowing from the historiographical approach to studying events, events should be examined and understood from the perspective of the informationprovider (Duffy 1994; Lustick 1996). According to their degree of focus on authority behavior, the analysis of individual sources should result in coefficients that vary in significance, direction, and magnitude, each source telling a different empirical story but a story with an intelligible underlying

12

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION structure one that can only be detected when time-series are examined one at a time. On the other hand, if all sources tell the same empirical story and do not vary according to SitMO, this bodes well for the conventional approach to studying events and the methodological soundness of combining data sources for analysis and interpretation. RESEARCH DESIGN Having identified our theoretical orientation, below we identify the particular case that we investigate, the specific newspapers whose content is analyzed and the operationalization of dependent as well as independent variables.

CONTENTION AND THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY Coverage of the Black Panther Party (BPP) and its interaction with political authorities in the Bay area during the 1967-1973 period provides an ideal case through which to demonstrate the importance of exploring source perspectives in data collection and empirical analyses. The BPP was a dissident group established in 1966, beginning in the Bay area (i.e., Berkeley, Oakland, Palo Alto, Richmond, San Francisco, San Jose, and San Mateo) and later expanding to chapters throughout the nation up into the mid-1970s (e.g., Jones 1998).15 The groups founders, Huey P. Newton, Bobby Seale and other predominantly African-American women and men sought to address various problems in their community: police brutality and economic inequality, first and foremost.16 The broad outline of the BPP-authority relationship is simple enough. The BPP used numerous strategie s to achieve their objectives: e.g., carrying weapons, boycotting opponents, running educational facilities, as well as using symbols of defiance and revolution. The authorities responded to this organization from almost its inception. By the time Hoover had classified them as the greatest threat to the internal security of the country (U.S. Congress 1976, 188) in 1968, a large number of organizations at the local, state and federal levels seemed to direct some attention to the organization. Police and court

13

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION officials within as well as outside of the Bay area positioned themselves against the BPP and certain aspects of their agenda, in defense (or offense) of existing organizational structures, priorities and practices. These authority agents employed numerous means toward their end: e.g., raids, arrests, court orders, special grand jury investigations, etc. This situation possessed all the elements of a typical statedissident interaction (e.g., Franks 1989; Della Porta 1995; Davenport 2000). Equally as important, the group as well the actions undertaken by authorities against them received local, national, and in some cases international media attention across a broad array of news organizations. Indeed, in many respects, the organization was adopted as the poster child for Black nationalism, radical thought and the victim of state repression (respectively). This is one explanation for the continued interest in and parodying of the organization. NEWSPAPER SELECTION To examine source perspectives in reporting during 1967-73 period, we coded authority and BPP event coverage in five newspapers selected to represent a range of news organizations and press styles varying in ethnic, ideological, and geographic dimensions. As one survey of the Bay-area media identifies (i)n overview, the nine-county bay area (Alameda, Contra Cosa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma) seems to be awash in newspapers. It is served by 28 dailies (10 morning, 18 evening a total daily circulation of 1.6 million), plus 96 weeklies and over a dozen papers that are published monthly or two or three times a week, a few of them in exotic languages: Chinese, Portuguese, Spanish and Radical. Since many of these papers appear far (and profitable), one could easily assume that the nearly 5 million Bay Area residents are being informed up to their eyeballs. But news coverage is not neatly geographic, with each paper covering its own ground. Nearly every newspaper pushes its circulation range as far as it considers it financially feasible and then attempts to cover the news in the circulation area. In many

14

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION cases, the result is thin coverage nearly everywhere. Not even the home city is reported thoroughly (Rivers and Rubin 1971, 9-10). Faced with such a prolific newspaper environment, our selection of news sources was based on the following criteria: 1) the newspaper had to be published in English, 2) it had to be at least a weekly publication, guaranteeing some consistent news coverage of Bay-area events (especially in Alameda and San Francisco counties),17 3) the newspaper had to be published for the full time period of interest (i.e., from 1967 to 1973), 4) it had to be available either in microfiche or some archive, and 5) the newspaper had to be mentioned by historians of the time period or the media, activists or authorities from the Bay indicating that it was not some obscure publication that no one had ever heard of (at the time or since). With these criteria five newspapers were identified: the Berkeley Barb, the Black Panther Intercommunal News Service, the New York Times, Oakland Tribune, and the Sun Reporter. A major component of the SitMO argument lies in the positioning of these papers within the organizational categories identified above. Much of the analysis is invalidated if this is done poorly or in a way that cannot be replicated elsewhere. For this task, we used the papers comments on their own objectives/markets in conjunction with historical analyses about the U.S. news media to guide these assignments. This proves to be extremely informative as the papers themselves and researchers generally identify to which audience and sponsors the paper attempted to serve, the message that they wished to cultivate in distributed information, as well as the division of labor structuring their organizational personnel. From existing literature, one can easily determine that the Berkeley Barb was an alternative newspaper published weekly in Berkeley, California.18 It was founded in 1965 by Max Scheer, a longterm Bay-area radical, and discussed events relevant to counter-cultural attacks on America (e.g., instances of draft card burning, boycotts, rallies, and demonstrations). The paper (principally directed by the personality of Scheer himself), espoused an interest in the little movements that are divergent from the mainstream of society (Peck 1985, 30). Indeed, labeled the Hefner of the underground, the Barb

15

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION served as a convening point for radical culture as it covered everybody from civil rights movements, to anti-war groups, to the new left, to anyone taking a position of any kind against the status quo. Given the focus on challengers, the dissatisfied and the marginalized more often than on authorities, this paper likely falls within the Advocacy coverage theme.19 In addition, we expect it to be identified as an Accidental Tourist since the broad scope of groups covered in the paper is likely to preclude extensive coverage of the Black Panther Party. The Black Panther Intercommunal News Service (BPINS ), founded in 1967 in Oakland, California, was published weekly by the Black Panthers (after 1968) for distribution to members as well as non-members in the Bay area and throughout the United States (Abron 1993).20 The paper clearly fits within what would be categorized as a dissident press as it was created by a social movement organization for the primary purpose of delivering the BPP message. With regard to the particular way in which BPINS covered contentious events, we suggest that it will fall within the Advocacy coverage theme because its primary objective was to establish and maintain its organizational identity, recruit members, provide information about political events, generate revenue, and most importantly, convey the organizational message 21 (Davenport 1998, 197). Such emphasis is expected to result in comprehensive coverage of BPP events in addition to some coverage of authority behavior taken against them. The next paper considered by this research is the New York Times (NYT). This source is designated as a daily, mainstream newspaper. It was founded in 1851 and since then has maintained a national as well as international circulation and an interest in local political behavior outside of New York. The NYT is characterized by several traits that identify its organizational structure and its likely position with regard to the most appropriate coverage theme. The paper was run by a family (made up of the Ochs and Sulzbergers [Tifft and Jones 1999]), which espoused a belief in political moderation. The family was generally zealous about maintaining a patriotic posture (Shephard 1996, 209) and frequently supportive of government in any way possible,

16

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION attempting not to embarrass it.22 In addition to pursuing businesspersons as readers and supporters (Dinsmore 1969, 22), the paper most clearly solicited that patronage of intelligent Americans, who desire information rather than entertainment, who want the facts unadorned and who placed first their country and the freedoms which it guarantees (Shephard 1996, 75). This practice frequently led to the neglect of more marginalized populations within American society. In following with these traits, we expect the paper to fall within the Statewatch category. The discussion in the literature also led us to conclude that the Times would likely fall within the Accidental Tourist categorization for after reading this material it becomes clear that the likelihood of poor, working class individuals, living in California, espousing leftist ideas, engaged in a wide variety of activities, decreased the likelihood of them receiving consistent NYT attention. Additionally, the NYT was oriented to the East Coast (being based in New York City) and it concerned itself with the largest number of topics relative to any of the newspapers discussed within this research. The fourth newspaper examined is the Oakland Tribune. From available information we have been able to discern that this source was a daily, mainstream paper run by one of the Bay areas wealthiest families, the Knowlands (Rivers and Rubin 1971). In the sixties and seventies, this paper normally espoused a pro-authority message, speaking out against free speech activism and most dissident activities in general. The level of hostility shown by the paper to participants in contentious political behavior as opposed to those who employed more acceptable tactics was well understood by movement participants across the spectrum as well as their general readership at the time. Indeed, the paper was frequently targeted for protest activities because of various positions taken within the paper itself (Pearson 1994, 701),23 and consequently, it was commonly identified as the Bay area mouthpiece for the status quo. In addition to its pro-authority, anti-movement orientation, the newspaper also was disposed to report government activities since many of the Tribunes staff were consistently assigned to cover activities occurring in the courts and other government agencies.24 This practice should significantly increase the

17

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION opportunity to generate news about authority-related behavior. Because of these characteristics, we anticipate that the Oakland Tribune will fit within our conception of Statewatch" coverage. The final newspaper used by this research is the Sun Reporter, a moderate,25 weekly, newspaper which served the greater Oakland-San Francisco Black population since its founding in 1944. Covering a variety of matters consistent with what has been labeled the Black press (e.g., Wolesley 1972),26 this source addressed numerous subjects regarding African-American cultural life (e.g., announcements of community activities), information about civil rights struggles related to improving the African-American condition, and legal/political issues such as Affirmative Action. Given the papers concern about general issues of African-American life rather than issues of contentious politics more exclusively, the classification of this newspaper seems to fit with the Balance coverage theme. The breadth of this community coverage, however, and the complexity that normally exists with a message being put forth by African-Americans within a contentious political context (Goodman 1994), leaves our expectation of frequency unclear. On the one hand, the paper might cover the BPP because it was an extremely important subject for African-Americans in the Bay and elsewhere. Alternatively, the paper may shy away from the BPP because it was too controversial. The depoliticization of African-American messages is also something of a historical pattern albeit one that is generally overlooked. CODING, MEASUREMENT AND MODEL SPECIFICATION The data used to investigate our hypotheses are drawn from a larger research effort undertaken by one of the authors of the current article [reference to author withheld].27 This effort is comparable to other human-coded,28 events-based data collection efforts (e.g., Tilly et al. 1975; McAdam 1982; Taylor and Jodice 1983; Tarrow 1989; Beissinger 1998; Davis et al. 1998; Oliver and Myers 1999), albeit somewhat more focused in terms of the number of groups and number of years being observed. The data collection proceeded as follows: all articles within the five newspapers between 1967 and 1973 were read and coded except editorials, sports pages, personal ads and advertisements. This information was

18

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION aggregated by the week for each newspaper (N=364 per paper).29 Coders30 identified all events31 which involved the BPP in the Bay Area32 as well as all actions that police agencies and courts at the local, state, and federal levels took against the Bay Area Panther organization. 33 Coders also recorded the date, time and place (street address and/or county) of each event, the name and estimated number of the actors involved, and the objectives of the events if available. In this analysis, authority behavior is operationalized by two separate dependent variables, 1) weekly coverage of police sanctions, and 2) weekly coverage of court sanctions used against the Black Panther Party between 1967-1973. Police sanctions refer to raids, physical searches, detentions and investigations, while court sanctions refer to trial appearances, court rulings regarding BPP motions and court sentences.34 The police and court indicators are analyzed separately in an effort to reflect the differences in police and court sanctions highlighted in the anecdotal literature concerning the BPP (e.g., Jones 1988; 1998; Seale 1991; Pearson 1994; Newton 1996). We examine, for example, whether the police were more likely to receive attention in the media over the courts, and how well BPP activities account for police sanctions relative to court sanctions across the five papers. Individuals within media/communication studies identify that news organizations, especially of the mainstream variety, frequently have personnel stationed at the courts and thus tend to routinely cover judicial activities at court locations compared to police activities which can occur anywhere in the city. By contrast, we do not expect dissident or alternative presses to station personnel in courts and other government agencies, but rather to focus their attention on challengers and authorities out in the Bay area. In addition, the qualitative literature on the Black Panthers identifies battles with the police and interactions with the court with varying degrees of emphasis (e.g., Churchill and Vander Wall 1990; Seale 1991; Pearson 1994; Newton 1996). At certain points, it appears that many of the BPP encounters with authority were police-related (e.g., the shooting of officer Frei by Huey P. Newton, the shooting of Bobby Hutton, and numerous raids on Black Panther

19

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION schools and educational facilities). At others, however, it appears that much discussion is directed toward interactions with the court system (e.g., the extradition of Bobby Seale in March of 1970; the conviction of David Hilliard to 6 months in December of 1969). Although occasionally these two acts of repression overlap, they were generally held as distinct when discussed in the literature. The independent variables coded to account for police and court sanctions used against the BPP include several indicators of dissident behavior as well as lagged repressive activity. This orientation is consistent with existing literature. Much investigation exploring the importance of various structural factors in models of state repression consistently point to the behavior of challenges and prior repressive activity as the most important explanatory variables (e.g., Hibbs 1973; Ziegenhagen 1986; Henderson 1991; Alfatooni and Allen 1991; Poe and Tate 1994; Davenport 1995; 2000). This finding has held across time, space and context. Indeed, it is one of the most invariable statistical findings in the literatures of political science and sociology. 35 The nature of domestic challenges, however, is the subject of much debate. Many conceive of domestic threats as strictly behavioral phenomena, where government officials monitor overt contentious activity (e.g., Franks 1989; Davenport 2000). Others conceive of challenges as rhetorical phenomena (e.g., Bowers et al. 1971), where government officials monitor what dissidents say. In both situations, if behavior and/or pronouncements exceed specified parameters, then challenges are perceived and repression is applied. We operationalize both behavioral and rhetorical dissident events as independent variables in our model. Black Panther behavior is measured by newspaper coverage of BBP events, which were classified into five categories: 1) dissent, 2) statements, 3) criminal activity, 4) shootings, and 5) organizational cohesion. The first category, Dissent, is in line with previous research and measures the frequency of Black Panther Party demonstrations, rallies, and boycotts. Statements refer to rhetorical activities by the Panthers about different issues and/or actions, Criminal Activity to events such as

20

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION robberies and hijaking, and Shootings to firearm altercations with the police.36 We also include in the model, types of dissident behavior where the effect on protest policing is less certain but were an intricate part of the BPP repertoire of activity. Specifically this considers instances Organizational Cohesion such as meetings, parties, and other events at which members gather.37 Two additional independent variables included in the model are lagged measures of police and court sanctions. These variables are used consistently within the human rights and repression literature (e.g., Hibbs 1973; Poe and Tate 1994; Davenport 1995; 1999; Moore 1998) and are deemed important because they capture the influence of bureaucratic inertia. This principle stipulates that once agents of repression become accustomed to its application, they continue its use out of sheer habit, a means of protecting previous gains, and/or because they become desensitized to its negative aftereffects. Though the use of different types of lagged repression within the same equation is not standard (i.e., lagged court repression in an equation explaining police repression), anecdotal accounts of repressive behavior directed against dissidents do suggest that there might be an impact (Goldstein 1978; Donner 1990). INVESTIGATING REPRESSION OF THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY THROUGH THE RASHOMON KALEIDOSCOPE Based on the media coverage concepts of focus and frequency discussed above, our analysis is twofold. We first examine the distribution and frequency of event coverage concerning authority and BPP events in each of the five newspapers to examine how each paper conforms to the media coverage themes. Second, we examine whether and to what extent the differences in coverage matter for our model about why police and/or court sanctions varied during the time period. To estimate the causal effects of challenger behavior on repressive activity, Poisson and Negative Binomial regression models are used (Long 1997, chapter 8), the specific approach being determined by a likelihood ratio test.38 The methodological techniques are employed in order to estimate a maximumlikelihood regression where the dependent variable is a non-negative count indicator. Research by Krain (1997), drawing on the work of King (1989), has identified that previous investigations of repression have

21

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION not well addressed the problem of left censoring and that improper specification might be the result. To address these issues, Poisson and Negative Binomial regressions were deemed the more appropriate strategy of estimation. To examine the focus of authority relative to dissident events, indicators of BPP activity (statements, organizational change, dissent, etc.) and the two repression measures (police and court sanctions) are summarized in Figure 2. (Insert Figure 2 about here) What is immediately discernable is the skew in the distribution across each of the five sources; simply, contentiousness tends to be polarizing in its observation. 39 One can see that we faired quite well in our expectations. The mainstream presses (the New York Times [NYT] and Oakland Tribune [OT]), for instance, provide more coverage of authority behavior relative to BPP activity. These newspapers are characteristic of the Statewatch coverage theme, as predicted. We did not expect however the wide range in the frequency of coverage. Relative to the Oakland Tribune, which reported a total of 610 state and BPP events combined, the New York Times reported only 219 events, suggesting that the NYT, with its national rather than local scope, presents a combination of the Statewatch and Accidental Tourist coverage themes. The Tribune clearly is not an Accidental Tourist, in fact one might refer to them as an Obsessive Local. By contrast, event coverage in the Berkeley Barb (which advocated support for all dissident organizations) and the Black Panther Intercommunal News Service (the actual voice of the Black Panther Party) is skewed towards BPP over state coverage the Advocacy theme.40 Regardless of specific orientation, both provide information about dissidents in excess of the attention given to authorities. In terms of coverage frequency, we were further correct in our expectation that the Berkeley Barb, an

22

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION alternative press, would fall into the Accidental Tourist coverage theme since it paid less attention to the protest behavior of any one social movement organization. Finally, the Sun Reporter provided authority and dissident coverage most evenly, but with a small (231) absolute number of events. It falls into the Balance, Accidental Tourist coverage theme. This paper covered contention in a relatively fair manner, but paid little attention to authority and BPP events overall relative to the local, mainstream newspaper or the dissident press.41 Having identified that differences exist in the coverage themes generated by diverse news sources, quantifying Rashomon, we next examine whether and to what extent these reporting practices influence our understanding of 1) why repression used against the Black Panther Party varied over the time period, and 2) the magnitude at which it was used. To investigate the issue of source specific variance with regard to causal inferences, each measure of applied sanctions is regressed on lagged repression and different aspects of BPP activity, across each of the five time-series. We first discuss the causes and magnitude of police repression followed by court sanctions. ANALYZING THE HISTORIES OF PROTEST POLICING According to the results presented in Table 1, and similar to what was discussed above, it is clear from the intercepts that different papers varied in the amount of attention they paid to repression. All variables held at 0, police repression is least likely to appear in the New York Times followed by the Berkeley Barb, the Oakland Tribune, and the Sun Reporter. Repression is most likely to be identified in the Black Panther newspaper. Interestingly, the only dissident activity that predicts police repression against the Panthers, regardless of source, is shootings with authorities. Clearly this is an event not overlooked by anyone and it transcends the situational motivations of information sources. The magnitude at which repressive events are reported in response to a shooting, however, varies across papers; Rashomon does have substantive influences. For example, the Oakland Tribune equation reveals that every shooting provokes about 1 repressive events.42 The New York Times predicts nearly 1 instances

23

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION of police repression for every shooting and the Berkeley Barb nearly 1 event. The Sun Reporter reports that nearly an event of police repression will occur for every shooting and the Black Panther 1 full event. These significant differences in magnitude across papers are important, for they reflect the attention to certain aspects of dissident-state interactions by some papers more than others. (Table 1 about here) The findings in Table 1 demonstrate that the authority and/or dissident events that a source pays attention to drives what it reports, and what it reports determines what we as researchers examine. For example, we suggested earlier that the New York Times covers contentious political events that are large and/or bizarre in nature. We find support for this claim in Table 1, where shootings and BPP dissent (which led to nearly a repressive event for every protest event) are the only significant predictors of police repression. According to this source, other forms of BPP activity in the organization itself or out in the community take place without repressive consequence. The implications of BPP activity, according to the New York Times reporting of events, are that as long as the organization refrained from shootings and dissident behavior, its members were free to propagate, assemble, organize, and participate in the political process as they pleased. Even BPP criminal activity as reported in the Times did not significantly predict police sanctions. One could conclude from this that criminals are criminals, BPP members or not (a finding at odds with more anecdotal research on the subject). Apart from shootings, the Oakland Tribune reveals that lagged political repression was an important determinant of later repressive activity. Here, in line with arguments about news routines, once the media has covered police repression they are more incline to highlight this behavior afterwards. This leads researchers to identify bureaucratic inertia as an important influence. The Berkeley Barb, with its attention to the social movements and groups of the New Left provides still another version of history concerning authority-BPP events. According to this source, events related to the organizational cohesion of the BPP, in addition to shootings with authorities led to protest

24

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION policing. Compared to the previous two papers, the Berkeley Barb paid more attention to the social life of the Panthers breaking the public -private divide. As a result of this observation, one gets a richer understanding of the importance of the internal dynamics of the organization as well as police attention to these dynamics. From this newspaper, we know that one meeting, or member gathering resulted in about .10 police sanctions. This finding becomes interesting to the extent that it complicates our conception of what authorities find threatening. As it stands, much literature suggests that authorities respond to overt manifestations of political behavior used by challengers (e.g., Hibbs 1973; Davenport 1995; Francisco 1996; Moore 1998). In fact, all empirical studies of state-dissident events lead to this conclusion as the types of behavior identified outside of the overt, protest realm are never examined for causal impacts. Our findings demonstrate, rather, that authorities might respond to a wide variety of activities, only some of which fall into the conventional category generally highlighted by researchers (e.g., Franks 1989) and news organizations. Again, lag police repression is found to have an impact on repressive behavior. Likely responding to the tempo of state activity and the perceived relevance of this activity as a news item after it has initially taken place, this information-provider highlights prior activity of repressive agents as an important determinant. Revealing the complexity inherent to a message targeting politically moderate African-Americans in a situation of high black-white tension, the Sun Reporter ends up telling yet another different story of authority-BPP interactions. Similar to the other papers, the Sun Reporter highlights that shootings with authorities are an important predictor of police sanctions used against the Panthers at about an event per shooting. Similar to the New York Times, one reading the newspaper would conclude that police activity was likely enacted during weeks when protest was present (at .17 per event). In contrast to the other papers, however, the Sun Reporter shows BPP criminal activity to be an important predictor of police sanctions (at about an event per criminal act). Here, the intersection of African-American criminality, the criminal justice system, and individuals engaged in challenging the political system in some manner,

25

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION represented a topic that would resonate well with their audience. Simultaneously, one captures issues that have historically been relevant to urban African-Americans. Finally, the Black Panther Party Intercommunal News Service (BPINS ) focused almost exclusively on the activities of the BPP. As the mouthpiece of the dissident organization, the paper concerned itself less with authority-BPP events than it did with the ideologies, positions, and activities of the movement itself. From the perspective of the BPINS , only coverage of authority shootings and lagged police activity significantly influenced coverage of police sanctions, as one police shooting and prior repressive activity resulted in approximately one and police sanctions, respectively; in this case, police repression is merely the result of a reactive and habituated police organization caught within the dynamics of a highly contentious interaction with the BPP organization. Overall, one should put these findings in perspective for the model applied to data generated from the BPINS did poorly in predicting police sanctions with an R2 of .05, the lowest of all the data sources considered. Consequently, the Panther source would provide a great deal of information about what the BPP engaged in but it would provide very little insight into why they were sanctioned by the police at least with the explanatory model considered in this study. EXPLORING THE HISTORIES OF COURT SANCTIONS An analysis of repressive behavior enacted by the Bay-area courts against the Black Panther Party clarifies further how the situational motivations across different information sources drive empirical results. Court sanctions are unlike protest policing that are often the immediate reaction to some perceived threat to public safety and/or illegal behavior. Rather, court sanctions are the pre-scheduled judicial response to an already known (although not necessarily reported) event, civil or criminal, and the person(s) involved in that event. Unlike police sanctions that often take place in private view, court sanctions tend to be aired in public as they take place in an environment frequently observed by reporters looking for news. The ability to predict court sanctions from event based information sources depends

26

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION largely upon whether these sources routinely pay attention to authority-dissident interactions in the judicial arena, or whether a particular event gains enough public interest to warrant special coverage by the media. Table 2 demonstrates these patterns in varying degrees across the five information sources used in this study. (Table 2 about here) Again, observing intercepts one can gain a general sense of the distributions identified in Table 2. All variables held at 0, court repression is least likely to be observed in the Berkeley Barb followed by the BPINS , the Sun Reporter, and the New York Times. The most consistent observation of court-initiated sanctions is observed in the Oakland Tribune. With reference to causal effects, the most consistent finding across equations (in two out of three models) is the impact of lagged court activity in the New York Times (at .38 court sanctions per prior event) and the Oakland Tribune (at approximately 1 court sanction per prior event). This finding makes sense for it is expected that information-providers focused on state organizations would identify this behavior as an important determinant. What we might not have expected is the importance of BPP rhetoric in the NYT and Oakland Tribune in predicting court sanctions (at about 1 events per statement). It would be difficult to infer from these results that BPP dissent directly influences judicial decision making, but we imagine that BPP rhetoric, which often took place outside and around courts, influenced newspaper coverage of judicial decisions concerning Black Panther members. The role of rhetoric in these models is important, for it suggests that BPP activity brought additional attention to authority-BPP events in the judicial context that was already subject to public observation and scrutiny within the mainstream news media. The final pattern that strikes us from these results is how poorly the models perform using data generated from the Sun Reporter and the BPINS , accounting for 3% and 1% of the variance respectively. According to these models nothing accounted for court sanctions. These findings are intriguing for unlike the models estimated for police behavior when one consulted the BPP and the Sun

27

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Reporter regarding insight into what courts were doing against the Panther organization, the sources were simply left in the dark again, at least from the model estimated here. CONCLUSION Within the case of political repression directed against the Black Panther Party, this article set out to examine whether or not the selection of a data source influenced what was reported by that information-provider and what was concluded when these data were examined for causal relationships. The article further attempted to provide some understanding into how information-providers varied across both observation and inferences by discussing what we referred to as Situationally Motivated Observation. Empirical results suggest that source selection does matter. In accordance to a newspapers focus on authorities relative to challengers, different types of events are emphasized. Sources that focus on the status quo tend to highlight the behavior of authorities, while sources favoring challengers tend to focus on dissident action; Simply put, focus breeds polarized observation which becomes manifest during periods of contention. Different newspapers also tend to vary in terms of derived causal influences across independent variables. In sources with disproportionate authority coverage, police sanctions against the BPP were the result of a narrow set of factors (e.g., dissident provocation in the form of shootings, protest, or lagged police activity). These activities, moreover, accounted for a good third of repressive events experienced by the Panthers during this time period. In sources with more balanced or disproportionate dissident coverage, we find that police and court sanctions were the result of a wider range of factors not only more contentious behavior (e.g., shootings, dissent and lagged police repression) but also of more routine, everyday activities such as party gatherings, funerals, and criminal activity. Similar to the findings of Oliver and Myers (1999), we find that there is different coverage allocated to private, non-message oriented events and that these coverage patterns have important implications for investigating behavior using these data. Court sanctions also reveal important differences. As found, within most dissident-oriented sources, there are no variables

28

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION consistently accounting for court repression. Within authority-oriented source, prior court activity leads to subsequent court behavior which is quite reasonable. With these findings, one could conclude that the insights provided by both conventional as well as historiographical analytic approaches to studying events are relevant, for there are certain aspects of contentious relations that are held in common across various social actors and certain aspects of these relations that are held uniquely. This sounds innately logical for many have argued that social conflict is fundamentally about consensus (or unity in perception) and deviance (diversity in perception). Indeed, this research presents us with a more pluralistic investigation of state-dissident interactions, where different authorities and challengers compete with one another in a context of multiple viewing publics each with varying takes on what is going on (Duffy 1994). These takes are unified in many ways. For example, all publics within the authority-BPP example found that police repression was increased when shootings took place and all identified that statements made by the BPP were irrelevant to the actions undertaken by authorities. Other aspects of the conflict are quite distinct. For example, instances of organizational cohesion increase police repression in the Berkeley Barb time-series, whereas in the case of the Oakland Tribune BPP statements increase court repressive behavior. Additionally, one can find even broader distinctions. For example, in this research ethnic affiliation appeared to be important in so far as the actions of the court were well documented within the white sources, but of little priority within the African-American sources. This finding was unexpected but may be important for further investigation as it reveals that different observers may focus on completely different aspects of a problem. These results challenge existing research to the extent that they compel us to disaggregate our sources/datasets and explore Rashomon directly. As suggested from this research, we must consciously pay attention to where we get information and attempt to explain what we observe, explicitly (King et al. 1994). Indeed, examining data generation is perhaps the best test of our theories of behavioral generation (Lustick 1996). These results also challenge existing research to the extent that they move us to address

29

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION different questions about political repression. Specifically, we are led to ask: what explains repressive behavior for the challengers (in this case the BPP)? Neither court or police behavior was well predicted. What would/did this organization suggest was the reason for their repression and how does this alter the model utilized here as well as elsewhere in the literature? What events are viewed comparably across all actors? What events are seen in completely different ways? Which are ignored? More broadly, we are also led to ask: what are the implications of source specific variance for social conflict itself? Does greater variance in repressive coverage lead to more repression (in line with the view that authorities apply sanctions to unify society) or is repressive behavior associated with less variance in repressive coverage (in line with a view that authorities apply sanctions to divide society)? Such a line of questioning brings us back to and provides a mechanism for rigorously investigating the conflict-consensus debate long ignored by social science. Such a line of questioning also brings us back to democratic theory as it allows us to examine the relative importance given to alternative historical accounts within the application of one public policy output applied negative sanctions. Indeed, this research becomes important for it would allow us to explore which source is most important in influencing the application and understanding of state repression as well as the behavior of those challenging authorities. Clearly, investigations of Rashomon can (and should) be extended beyond the one case provided here in order to explore these issues further. It is our belief that the relevance of source specific variance will withstand comparative investigation. We are confident that most would expect interactions between the East Timorese and Indonesian authorities, Tamil Tiger and Sri Lankan authorities would be covered in accordance with the SitMO model. The question remains, what does this variance mean for us theoretically? In what manner will sources vary across these different cases? Are violent conflicts or those that involve larger parts of the population subject to greater variance in the relative balance of observed authority to dissident behavior? These questions will only be answered by changing the manner in which we collect and analyze information. In many cases all that is needed can already be found in

30

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION existing data sets (e.g., the identification of sources which are used for information). Before we can get to the point where Rashomon can be examined, however, we will first need to develop a willingness to reflect about what might exist within as well as beyond our existing data collection efforts. Indeed, using Hawthorn (1991) somewhat out of context, after reading our work one appropriately can conclude that possibilities (still) haunt the human sciences. We merely seek to reverse the process and let the human sciences haunt the possibilities for a while.

31

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION References Abron, J. 1993. "Raising the Consciousness of the People": The Black Panther Intercommunal News Service, 1967-1980." In K. Wachsberger, ed., Voices from the Underground: Volume 1. Insider Histories of the Vietnam Era Underground Press. Mica Press: Ann Arbor. Alfatooni, Afra, and Michael Allen. 1991. "Government Sanction and Collective Political Protest in Perifery and Semiperifery States: A Time Series Analysis." Journal of Political and Military Sociology 19: 29-45. Azar, Edward. 1980. The Conflict and Peace Data Bank (COPDAB). The Journal of Conflict Resolution 24(1): 143-152. Barkin, S.M. 1984. The Journalist as Storyteller: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. American Journalism 1(2): 27-33. Beissinger, Mark. 1998. Event Analysis in Transitional Societies: Protest Mobilization in the Former Soviet Union. In Rucht, Dieter, Ruud Koopmans, and Friedhelm Neidhardt, eds., Acts of Dissent: New Developments in the Study of Protest. Berlin, Germany: WZB. Black Panther Party. 1970. The Black Panther. Oakland: The Black Panther Party. Brockett, Charles. 1992. "Measuring Political Violence and Land Inequality in Central America." American Political Science Review 86(1): 169-76. Bond, Doug. 1994. Protocol for the Assessment of Nonviolent Direct Action Codebook. http://data.fas.harvard.edu/cfia/pnscs/DOCS/contents.htm. Bowers, J., D. Ochs, and R. Jensen. 1971. The Rhetoric of Agitation and Control. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Carr, E. H. 1964. What is History? Harmondsworth: Penguin. Chomsky, Noam. 1989. Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies. Boston: South End Press.

32

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Churchill, Ward, and Jim Vander Wall. 1990. Agents of Repression: The FBI's Secret Wars Against the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement. Boston: South End Press. Cohen, Paul. 1997. History in Three Keys: The Boxers as Event, Experience, and Myth . New York: Columbia University Press. Collingwood, R.G. [1946] 1961. The Idea of History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Danzger, Herbert. 1975. "Validating Conflict Data." American Sociological Review 40: 570-584. Davenport, Christian. 1995. "Multi-Dimensional Threat Perception and State Repression: An Inquiry Into Why States Apply Negative Sanctions." American Journal of Political Science 39(3): 683-713. Davenport, Christian. 1998. Reading the Voice of the Vanguard: A Content Analysis of the Black Panther Intercommunal News Service, 1969-1973. In Charles Jones, ed., The Black Panther Party Reconsidered: Reflections and Scholarship . Baltimore: Black Classic Press. Davenport, Christia n. 1999. Human Rights and the Democratic Proposition. Journal of Conflict Resolution 43(1): 92-116. Davenport, Christian, ed. 2000a. Paths to State Repression: Human Rights Violations and Contentious Politics. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield . Davies, John. 1989. Global Event Data System Codebook. University of Maryland: http://geds.umd.edu/geds/. Davis, Darren. 1997. The Direction of Race of Interviewer Effects among African-Americans: Donning the Black Mask. American Journal of Political Science 41(1): 309-22. Davis, David R., Brett Ashley Leeds and Will H. Moore. 1998. Measuring Dissident and State Behavior: The Intranational Political Interactions (IPI) Project," paper presented at the Workshop on CrossNational Data Collection, Texas A&M University. Della Porta, Donatella. 1995. Social Movements, Political Violence and the State: A Comparative Analysis of Italy and Germany. New York: Cambridge University Press.

33

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Diamond, Edwin. 1994. Behind the Times: Inside the New York Times. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Dinsmore, Herman H. 1969. All the News That Fits; A Critical Analysis of the News and Editorial Content of the New York Times. New Rochelle: Arlington House. Donner, Frank. 1990. Protectors of Privilege: Red Squads and Police Repression in Urban America. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Doran, Charles, Robert Pendley, and George Antunes. 1973. A Test of Cross-National Event Reliability. International Studies Quarterly 17: 175-203. Duffy, Gavan. 1994. Events and Versions: Reconstructing Event Data Analysis. International Interactions 20(1-2): 147-167. Feirabend, Ivo, Rosalind Feirabend, and Betty Nesvold. 1966. Systemic Conditions of Political Aggression (SCOPA). Ann Arbor: ICPSR. Franks, C.E.S. 1989. Dissent and the State . New York: Oxford University Press. Francisco, Ron. 1996. "Coercion and Protest: An Empirical Test in Two Democratic States." American Journal of Political Science 40(4): 1179-1204. Francisco, Ron. 2000. European Protest and Coercion Data Codebook. University of Kansas: http://lark.cc.ukans.edu/~ronfran/data/index.html. Fox-Genovese, Elizabeth, and Elizabeth Lasch-Quinn. 1999. Reconstructing History: The Emergence of a New Historical Society . New York: Routledge. Gerner, Deborah, and Phillip Schrodt. 1996. The Kansas Event Data System: A Beginners Guide with an Application to the Study of Media Fatigue in the Palestinian Intifada. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. Goldstein, Robert. 1978. Political Repression in Modern America: From 1870 to the Present. Boston: Schenckman/G.K. Hall. Goodman, James. 1994. Stories of Scottsboro. New York: Pantheon Books.

34

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Guha, Ranajit, ed. 1998. A Subaltern Studies Reader: 1986-1995 . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Gurr, Ted. 1993. Minorities at Risk: A Global View of Ethnopolitical Conflicts. U. S. Institute of Peace. Hawthorn, Geoffrey. 1991. Plausible Worlds: Possibility and Understanding in History and the Social Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press. Henderson, Conway. 1991. "Conditions Affecting the Use of Political Repression." Journal of Conflict Resolution 35: 120-42. Hibbs, Douglas. 1973. Mass Political Violence: A Cross-National Causal Analysis. New York: Wiley. Hocke, Peter. 1998. Determining the Selection Bias in Local and National Newspaper Reports on Protest Events. In Rucht, Dieter, Ruud Koopmans, and Friedhelm Neidhardt, eds., Acts of Dissent: New Developments in the Study of Protest. Berlin, Germany: WZB. House of Commons. 1977. Royal Commission on the Press: Final Report. London: HMSO Cmnd. 2621. Huxtable, Phillip, and Jon Pevehouse. 1996. Potential Validity Problems in Events Data Collection. International Studies Notes 21(2): 8-19. Iggers, Georg. 1997. Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to the Postmodern Challenge. London: Weslayan University Press. Jackman, Robert W. and William A. Boyd. 1979. "Multiple Sources in the Collection of Data on Political Conflict." American Journal of Political Science 23: 434-45. Jenkins, Craig. 1998. Mass Conflict and Civil Society in East Europe: A Codebook. ManuscriptCodebook.

35

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Jones, Charles. 1988. "The Political Repression of the Black Panther Party 1966-1971: The Case of the Oakland Bay Area." Journal of Black Studies 18(4): 415-434. Jones, Charles, ed. 1998. The Black Panther Party Reconsidered: Reflections and Scholarship . Baltimore: Black Classic Press. Kessler, L. 1984. The Dissident Press: Alternative Journalism in American History. Beverly Hills: Sage. King, Gary. 1989. Event Count Models for International Relations: Generalizations and Applications. International Studies Quarterly 33: 123-147. King, Gary, Robert Keohane, and Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Koopmans, Ruud. 1995. Democracy from Below: New Social Movements and the Political System in West Germany. Boulder: Westview Press. Krain, Mathew. 1997. State-Sponsored Mass Murder: A Study of the Onset and Severity of Genocides and Politicides. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(3): 331-360. Kriesi, H., Ruud Koopmans, J.W. Duyvendak, and M. Giugni. 1992. New Social Movements and Political Opportunities in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research 22: 219244. Kruger, Barbara, and Phil Mariani, eds. 1989. Remaking History. Seattle: Bay Press. Lee, Martin, and Norman Solomon. 1992. Unreliable Sources: A Guide to Detecting Bias in the News Media . New York: Carol Publishing Group. Lichbach, Mark. 1987. "Deterrence or Escalation?: The Puzzle of Aggregate Studies of Repression and Dissent." Journal of Conflict Resolution 31: 266-297.

36

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Lichbach, Mark I. 1997. Social Theory and Comparative Politics. In Mark Lichbach and Alan Zuckerman, eds., Comparative Politics: Rationality, Culture, and Structure. New York: Cambridge University Press. Long, J. Scott. 1997. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Lustick, Ian. 1996. History, Historiography, and Political Science: Multiple Historical Records and the Problem of Selection Bias. American Political Science Review 90(3): 605-618. Mazur, Allan. 1998. A Hazardous Inquiry: The Rashomon Effect at Love Canal. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. McAdam, Douglas. 1982. Political Process and the Development of the Black Insurgency, 19301970 . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. McCarthy, John Clark McPhail, and Jackie Smith. 1996. "Images of Protest: Dimensions of Selection Bias in Media Coverage of Washington Demonstrations, 1982, 1991." American Sociological Review 61: 468-499. Moore, Will. 1998. Repression and Dissent: Substitution, Context and Timing. American Journal of Political Science 42(3): 851-873. Mueller, Carol. 1997. "International Press Coverage of East German Protest Events, 1989." American Sociological Review 69: 820-832. Mungo, Ray. 1970. Famous Long Ago. Boston: Beacon Press. Nardin, Terry. 1971. Violence and the State . Beverly Hills: Sage. Newton, Huey. 1996. War Against the Panthers: A Study of Repression in America. New York: Harlem River Press.

37

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Oliver, Pam, and Daniel Myers. 1999. How Events Enter the Public Sphere: Conflict, Location, and Sponsorship in Local Newspaper Coverage of Public Events. American Journal of Sociology 105(1): 38-87. Olzak, Susan. 1992. The Dynamics of Ethnic Competition and Conflict. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Parsons, Talcott. 1937. The Structure of Social Action. New York: Free Press. Pearson, Hugh. 1994. The Shadow of a Panther: Huey Newton and the Price of Black Power in America. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Peck, Abe. 1985. Uncovering the Sixties: The Life and Times of the Underground Press. New York: Pantheon Books. Poe, Steven, and C. Neal Tate. 1994. "Repression of Personal Integrity in the 1980's: A Global Analysis." American Political Science Review 88: 853-72. Rivers, William, and David Rubin. 1971. A Regions Press: Anatomy of Newspapers in the San Francisco Bay Area. Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California. Rosenau, Pauline. 1992. Post-Modernism and the Social Sciences: Insights, Inroads, and Intrusions. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rummel, Rudolph J. 1964. Dimensions of Conflict Behavior Within and Between Nations. In L. Von Bertalanffy and A. Rapoport, eds., General Systems: Yearbook of the Society for General Systems Research. Ann Arbor: Society for General Systems Research. Rummel, Rudolph J. 1996. Death by Government. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Salmon, Lucy. 1976. The Newspaper and Authority . New York: Octagon Books. Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism. New York: Random House. Schrodt, Phillip, and Deborah Gerner. 1994. Validity Assessment of a Machine-coded Event Data Set for the Middle East, 1982-1992. American Journal of Political Science 38: 825-854.

38

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Schrodt, Philip, Shannon G. Davis and Judith L. Weddle. 1994. "Political Science: KEDS-A Program for the Machine Coding of Event Data." Social Science Computer Review 12(3): 561-588. Schudson, Michael. 1995. The Power of News. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Scott, James. 1985. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. New Haven: Yale University Press. Seale, Bobby. 1991. Seize the Time: The Story of the Black Panther Party . Baltimore: Black Classic Press. Shaw, Timothy, and Douglas Anglin. 1979. Global, Regional, and National Sources of Zambian Foreign Policy Event Data: A Content Validation Test. In Don Munton, ed., Measuring International Behavior: Public Sources, Events, and Validity . Halifax: Center for Foreign Policy Studies. Shepard, Richard F. 1996. The Paper's Papers: A Reporter's Journey Through the Archives of The New York Times. New York: Times Books. Sigal, Leon. 1973. Reporters and Officials: The Organization and Politics of Newsmaking. Lexington: D.C. Heath and Company. Sigal, Leon. 1987. Sources Make the News. In Robert Karl Manoff and Michael Schudson, eds., Reading the News: A Pantheon Guide to Popular Culture. New York: Pantheon Books. Snyder, David and William R. Kelly. 1977. "Conflict Intensity, Media Sensitivity and the Validity of Newspaper Data." American Sociological Review 42: 1105-1117. Sommer, Henrik, and James Scarritt. 1998. The Utility of Reuters for Events Analysis in Area Studies: The Case of Zambia -Zimbabwe Interactions, 1982-1993. International Interaction 25: 29-59. Southgate, Beverly. 1996. History: What and Why? Ancient, Modern and Postmodern Perspectives. New York: Routledge. Spates, J. 1976. "Counterculture and Dominant Values: A Cross-National Analysis of the Underground Press and Dominant Culture Magazines." American Sociological Review 41(October): 868-83.

39

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Spates, J. and J. Levin. 1972. "Beats, Hippies, the Hip Generation and the American Middle Class: An Analysis of Values." International Social Science Journal 24(4): 326-53. Stansfield, Douglas, and J.B. Lemert. 1987. Alternative Newspapers and Mobilizing Information. Journalism Quarterly 64: 604-607. Suggs, H., ed. 1983. The Black Press in the South, 1865-1979 . Westport, CT: Greenwood Press Tarrow, Sidney. 1989. Democracy and Disorder: Protest and Politics in Italy 1965-1975 . Oxford: Clarendon Press. Taylor, Charles, and David Jodice. 1983. The World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators. New Haven: Yale University Press. Tifft, Susan, and Alex Jones. 1999. The Trust: The Private and Powerful Family Behind the New York Times. Boston: Little Brown. Tilly, Charles. 1995. Popular Contention in Great Britain 1758-1834 . Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Tilly, Charles, Louise Tilly, and R. Tilly. 1975. Rebellious Century: 1830-1975 . Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Trouillot, Michel-Rolph. 1995. Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History. Boston: Beacon Press. Tuchman, Gaye. 1978. Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality . New York: Free Press. U.S. Congress. 1976. Book III: Final Report of the Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities. Washington, D.C.: 94th Congress, Second Session. Wachsberger, K., ed. 1993. Voices from the Underground: Volume 1 Insider Histories of the Vietnam Era Underground Press. Mica Press: Ann Arbor.

40

RASHOMON AND REPRESSION Weber, Max. 1924. Economy and Society . Two Volumes. Berkeley: University of California Press. White, Robert W. 1993. "On Measuring Political Violence: Northern Ireland, 1969 to 1980." American Sociological Review 58: 575-585. Windschuttle, Keith. 1996. The Killing of History: How Literary Critics and Social Theorists Are Murdering Our Past. New York: The Free Press. Wolfsfeld, Gadi. 1997. Media and Political Conflict: News from the Middle East. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wolseley, R. 1972. The Black Press, U.S.A. Iowa: Iowa State University. Ziegenhagen, Eduard. 1986. The Regulation of Political Conflict. New York: Praeger. Zubrzycki, J. 1958-1959. The Role of the Foreign-Language Press in Migrant Integration. Population Studies XII: 73-82.

41

Figure 1. Alternative Coverage Themes of Authority Patterns

Relative Focus Upon Actors

Statewatch

Balanced

Advocacy
Dissident Press - 2

Dissident Press - 1

Alternative Press

Event Frequency
Community Press

Mainstream Press

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party

Figure 2. Event Coverage and Newspaper Focus on Authorities and Challenging Behavior
New York Times Oakland Tribune

Police sanctions Court sanctions

30 127

59 410

BPP Statements Authroity shootings Dissent Org. Cohesion Criminal activity 1 9 5

32 15

65

48 15 4 9

Berkely Barb

Sun Reporter

Black Panther Intercommunal New Service

Police sanctions Court sanctions

38 71

40 91 97

163

BPP Statements Authroity shootings Dissent Org. Cohesion Criminal activity 3 32 10

69

28 10 15 32 24 6 5 66

110

72

148

43

Table 1. Determinants of Police Sanctions, N=363 (Poisson regression estimated unless otherwise noted)
New York Times Oakland Tribune Berkeley Barb Sun Reporter Black Panthersa

Newspaper BPP Activity Statements Shootings Dissent Organizational Cohesion Criminal Activity Lag Police Action Lag Court Action Constant R Squared

0.69(0.38) 3.55(0.41)** 1.29 2.29(0.76)** .44 -0.29(0.50) 0.95(0.90) 0.22(0.40) 0.23(0.15) -3.52(0.31)** .36

0.13(0.24) 2.73(0.28)** 1.34 0.32(0.17) 0.60(0.79) 0.44(0.43) 0.33(0.13)* .11 0.05(0.06) -2.65(0.21)** .29

0.35(0.26) 2.43(0.41)** .74 0.34(0.19) 0.87(0.35)* .14 1.47(0.77) 0.70(0.24)** .11 -0.17(0.22) -3.06(0.25)** .21

-0.42(0.63) 1.86(0.45)** .52 0.90(0.22)** .17 -0.46(0.63) 1.63(0.54)** .43 0.14(0.35) -0.41(0.33) -2.54(0.20)** .16

0.07(0.18) 1.00(0.38)* 1.01 0.29(0.26) 0.31(0.17) -0.20(0.77) 0.33(0.10)* .43 0.05(0.13) -1.44(0.18)** .05

Legend: Cells report parameter estimates, standard errors (in parentheses) and the actual causal impact in events (in boldface); *= significant at .05 level; **= significant at .01 level; a = Negative Binomial Regression was used.

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party Table 2. Determinants of Court Sanctions, N=363 (Negative Binomial regression estimated)
New York Times Oakland Tribune Berkeley Barb Sun Reporter Black Panthers

Newspaper BPP Activity Statements Shootings Dissent Organizational Cohesion Criminal Activity Lag Police Action Lag Court Action Constant R Squared

0.23(0.43) 0.77(0.96) 1.63(1.04) -0.76(0.94) -15.66(658.42) 0.04(0.45) 0.50(0.14)** .38 -1.42(0.17)**

0.61(0.18)** 1.41 0.33(0.46 0.25(0.17 -0.30(0.86) -0.73(0.66) 0.25(0.16) 0.25(0.04)** .82 -0.64(0.12)**

0.26(0.34) 0.94(0.80 0.53(0.21)* .21 0.05(0.53) 1.29(1.35) 0.75 (0.36) 0.51(0.26) -2.33(0.22)**

0.51(0.51) -15.44(681.76) 0.44(0.39) 0.57(0.56) -14.46(875.93) 0.62(0.33) 0.13(0.21) -1.64(0.18)**

0.21(0.23) -0.05(0.68) -0.04(0.32) 0.37(0.22) -14.98(876.94) 0.05(0.16) 0.38(0.19) -1.72(0.22)**

.03 .06 .07 .03 .01 Legend: Cells report parameter estimates, standard errors (in parentheses) and the actual causal impact in events; *= significant at .05 level; **= significant at .01 level.

45

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party

ENDNOTES

Other sources might include: memoirs, government documents, and oral histories . Others use different phraseology: Said (1978) discusses what he refers to as contrapuntivity while Duffy (1994)

addresses world versions.

3

Much of this debate has taken place in the realm of post-modern criticisms of social science (Rosenau 1992). We cannot do justice to this discussion in the space allotted within the article. Particularly within the field of

history there are some excellent reviews of the argument within Iggers (1997) and Southgate (1996). The response of some historians to these challenges can be found within Fox-Genovese and Lasch-Quinn (1999). Critiques of this development also abound (for example, see Windschuttle 1996).
5

Though some retain information about the origins of data sources (e.g., Rummel 1996; Francisco 2000), most ignore

this variable in their analysis.

6

After comparing sources across dimensions, these individuals select the one source that reports the most events

and/or the one that most neatly fits with anecdotal or expert accounts.
7

The point is similar to the embedded social act discussed by Weber (1924) and Parsons (1937) retold by Lichbach

(1997, 261).
8

This provides the dramaturgical aspect of the interest referenced by Oliver and Myers (1999: 66, 75). There is a slight difference in labels applied for Zubrzycki (1958-9) identifies roughly four categories: communal,

ethnic, alternative, and radical. These are differentiated from one another because of the perceived emphasis that the papers place on the polar opposites of reacting to an audience (personified by the community media) and exclusively considering message content (personified by the radical media). Our categories generally overlap with these.
10

Naturally there is some variance here. The Black Panther Party Intercommunal News Service (BPINS), which at

one point maintained a 100,000 circulation, had a decent size cadre that was dedicated to publishing the newspaper, dividing up tasks among the allocated personnel. As identified earlier, the sheer size of this organization did not approach that attained within the mainstream press, but it was quite decent as well as effective under the circumstances (Abron 1993).

46

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party

11

Of course, it appears to us that many presses stipulate that they fit within this category (almost by definition) as

they follow the principles of neutrality and objectivity in their newsgathering efforts. If this were adopted, then they would maintain that if repression were covered in greater amounts than protest, that it was either larger in number or simply more newsworthy. If this approach were accurate, however, then we would not expect to identify systematic differences in accordance to the type of newspaper one considered. We see this as an empirical question.
12

In international coverage this would not likely be the case as one would anticipate a certain level of demonization

of ones enemies (e.g., the US newspapers against many countries affiliated with the Soviet Union).
13

One point might be seen as questionable. We can envision arguments that the mainstream press would be more

inclined to stay away from controversial subject matter such as repression (e.g., Chomsky 1989). In this context, one would not expect to find much at all regarding contentious politics. While plausible and inevitably an empirical question, we would disagree with this position as it ignores the way in which news organizations collect information. Government is a constant source of information and is perhaps the most central focus of any mainstream news organization (Sigal 1973). While we accept that the justification offered for repressive activity within the mainstream might be conveyed in a manner that blames dissidents, this does not interfere with the method of data collection within the events-based tradition where one reads newspapers to identify discrete events. Justifications aside, therefore, the magnitude of attention would still be placed on authorities.
14

Such a position is never made explicitly but appears to lie implicit within the way that data are used. The exact end-date for the Black Panther Party is a point of some contention in and of itself. Many note that

15

activities had significantly waned as early as 1973 (Goldstein 1978), but some note that the newspaper did not end publication until 1980 (Abron 1993).
16

In addition to these objectives, the organization also espoused black control over the political-economic

environment (e.g., education, housing, and healthcare), and economic development, exemption from military service, and just treatment across society.
17

For example, the Bay Guardian was an alternative press identified by a few scholars but as its publication was

monthly (at best), it gave very little attention to specific events and it tended to discuss issues in a very thematic or abstract fashion.

47

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party

18

To provide some context, one survey of the Bay-area media identified that: (i)n overview, the nine-county bay area (Alameda, Contra Cosa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma) seems to be awash in newspapers. It is served by 28 dailies (10 morning, 18 evening a total daily circulation of 1.6 million), plus 96 weeklies and over a dozen papers that are published monthly or two or three times a week, a few of them in exotic languages: Chinese, Portuguese, Spanish and Radical. Since many of these papers appear far (and profitable), one could easily assume that the nearly 5 million Bay Area residents are being informed up to their eyeballs. But news coverage is not neatly geographic, with each paper covering its own ground. Nearly every newspaper pushes its circulation range as far as it considers it financially feasible and then attempts to cover the news in the circulation area. In many cases, the result is thin coverage nearly everywhere. Not even the home city is reported thoroughly (Rivers and Rubin 1971, 9-10).

The selection of newspapers within this study is generally representative of the diverse communities within the region, while tending to focus on the three areas of BPP activity: Alameda, Oakland and San Francisco.
19

One explanation for the coverage appears to be a certain amount of dissatisfaction and boredom of the staff within

these organizations. One individual who was reflecting about journalists in underground/radical newspapers notes that: Lots of radicals will give you a very precise line about why their little newspaper or organization was formed and what needs it fulfills and most of that stuff is bullshit, you see the point is theyve got nothing to do, and the prospect of holding a straight job is so dreary that they join the movement and start hitting up people for money to live, on the premise that theyre involved in critical social change blah blah blah. And its really better that was, at least for some people, than finishing college and working at dumb jobs for constipated corporations; at least its not always boring thats why we decided to start a news service not because the proliferating underground and radical college press really needed a central informationgathering agency staffed by people they could trust (that was our hype), but because we had nothing else to do (Mungo 1970).
20

Before 1968, it was published infrequently.

48

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party

21

In fact, within one advertisement within this newspaper, they explicitly state that (t)he Black Panther Party Black Community News Service was created to present factual, reliable information to the People The News Service is the alternative to the government approved presented in the mass media and the product of an effort to present the facts not the stories dictated by the oppressor, but as seen from the other end of a gun (The Black Panther Party 1970, 17)

22

On the bias issue, Max Frankel (one of the top editors during the 1960s and 1970s), admitted on an internal memo

to the publisher (Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Punch) that if anything, as our vigorous critics on the left have contended, we have been more naturally and too easily pro business and pro government in our many routine and unquestioning reports on how politicians and corporate leaders define themselves and their works (Diamond 1994, 123).
23

There was actually an interesting incident when the Tribune responded to (a) boycott (by African-Americans of

white merchants to pressure them into assisting with a police harassment issue) with a front-page editorial from the publisher, William F. Knowland, urging white Oakland residents and homeowners in surrounding areas to help break the boycott by shopping in the ghetto stores.
24

It should be clearly understood that this does not mean that coverage of these institutions was particularly good.

As Rivers and Rubin (1971, 10) report, (i)n one bay area community that seemed typical, less than 50 percent of the public meetings of government bodies and civic organizations were attended by a reporter from the only daily in town. Some of the others were covered by making phone calls to officials and officers after the meetings, or by asking someone who planned to attend to call the paper if anything newsworthy occurred.
25

In line with Wolfsfeld (1997, 52-4), moderate refers to the perceived reasonableness of the claims made by

African-Americans in this case as well as the mechanisms used to achieve these objectives.
26

Several have argued that the Black press was created, in part, to capture this Subaltern reality of an African-

American minority and pass this reality along to their constituency (Suggs 1983). The Sun Reporter would clearly follow in this tradition.

49

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party

27

The difficulties encountered while conducting this research have been discussed in [reference to authors

withheld].
28

These are differentiated from machine-assisted (e.g., Francisco 2000) and machine-coded (e.g., Schrodt and Gerner

1994) data collection efforts by their reliance upon humans to both identify and extract all relevant information. In many cases, only hard copies could be identified and in others microfiche had to be relied upon. Existing technology does not allow this to be scanned in and put into machine-readable formats for content analysis.
29

Complete articles were read and not the familiar practice of reading leads. Given the interest that we have in alternative (i.e., rival) newspaper event sequences and the fact that differences

30

might be explained by inefficient coders, there was some effort extended to account for this possibility. In line with the argument of Duffy (1994) there is a tradeoff between the former and construct validity. Normally, multiple coders are used to contend with intercoder reliability, while multiple data sources are used contend with the latter. Unfortunately, increasing one tends to decrease the other. In an effort to enhance the capacity to investigate construct validity, this research effort primarily relied upon the coding efforts of one individual who was diligently trained in event coding. Other coders were used for an assessment of approximately 25% of the cases dealt with by the initial coder and intercoder reliability consistently ranged between 75-85%. Consequently, we have enhanced our capacity to investigate the variance within source information while diminishing the capacity to fully investigate the rigorousness of the coding procedure itself.
31

As defined commonly in the literature, events are defined by three criteria: location, participation, and

temporality. Events take place in particular places (i.e., some defined spatial locale), involve particular individuals (i.e., members of a defined community such as common citizens, challengers and authorities), and last for particular amounts of time (e.g., an hour, a day, or a week; most adopt the convention that where singular events normally take place over the course of a day and when they exceed these parameters additional events are indicated).
32

This includes: Alameda, Contra Cosa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma

counties.
33

For example, within an article one might find one of three situations: 1) a discussion of a BPP event counted as

one event, 2) a discussion of an authority event counted as one event, or 3) a discussion of a BPP event and an

50

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party

authority event which is accordingly counted as two separate events. It is possible that numerous events could be identified within any of these categories. Thus, if 14 protest events were identified within an article, then the number of protest events would be coded as 14.
34

Some may believe that during one incident that all aspects of police and court activity are reported. This

disregards the fact that often a BPP member would be arrested and then released at the station or that a newspaper article may pay attention to the court activity and ignore how the BPP arrived there.
35

The effectiveness of these repressive efforts is another matter altogether: e.g., Lichbach 1987; Moore 1998. The variable presents something of a complex situation because the initiator of the shooting (as one would expect)

36

varies with the source being considered. The point of using the variable within this analysis is that when such interactions take place, the police as well as the courts are expected to take some form of action.
37

Data are currently being collected regarding internal characteristics of the BPP as well as various characteristics

about the Bay area. Despite neglecting these variables, the analysis is perceived as valid for lagged repression and dissent are two of the most strongly and consistently supported causal determinants within existing research (e.g., Davenport 1995; 1999; Moore 1998). Additionally, many of the variables normally considered within this work are likely invariant over time (e.g., economic development, political characteristics of the Bay area governing bodies) and not necessary to include in this analysis.
38

A likelihood ratio test was applied to gauge the appropriateness of the technique to estimate the model relative to a

negative binomial regression. The test revealed that the Poisson was appropriate across each of the estimated equations/newspapers employed.
39

Pearson correlations between the different measures did not exceed .31 they are fundamentally distinct indicators. This is similar to the findings of Oliver and Myers (1999, 76) who find that more liberal newspapers are more

40

inclined to cover specific types of contentious events.

41

What would explain this type of coverage? While the black press often reports challenges to existing authority

patterns (e.g., anti-lynching campaigns or Affirmative-Action), some papers within the African American community have historically assumed moderate, assimilationist positions that do not highlight contentious behavior over other events taking place within the community (e.g., they tell success stories about African-Americans doing well against

51

Rashomon and Repression of the Black Panther Party

the odds). In an effort to be Americans and survive within a frequently hostile environment, Black sources simply mask or submerge their interests (Goodman 1994, 64; Davis 1997).

42

I have used a program developed by King et al. (1999), called CLARIFY.42 This program offers an approach, built

on the technique of statistical simulation, to extract the currently overlooked information from any statistical method and to interpret and present it in a reader-friendly manner (King et al. 1999, abstract). Specifically, it is composed of three macros run in the statistical program STATA (King et al. 1999, 25): the first macro estimates a Poisson regression model and generates random draws from the multivariate normal distribution; the second macro sets the value of Y (the dependent variable) conditional on one chosen value of a particular statistically significant explanatory variable, while holding the other explanatory variables at their mean; and, the third macro computes the expected value of the dependent variable (given the conditions specified within the previous stage), with a confidence interval of 95%. This procedure renders emp irical results readily communicable for one can estimate the expected value of repression, when independent variables assume a value of 1 and compare the magnitude of these effects across newspapers.

52