Polls targeting Native Americans Washington Redskins name opinion polls

1 polls targeting native americans

1.1 annenberg 2004 poll
1.2 washington post 2016 poll
1.3 differences between 2004 , 2016 poll

1.3.1 methodology


1.4 response 2016 poll

polls targeting native americans

polls seeking provide evidence of opinion of native americans suffer many limitations. first small size of population, less 1 percent of total population of united states. takes months of sampling in order gather statistically significant sample. significant difficulty has been problem of using self-identification means of identifying native americans.

while not specific redskins, survey conducted in 2002 harris poll sports illustrated (si) found 81 percent of native americans live outside traditional indian reservations , 53 percent of indians on reservations did not find names or images used sports team discriminatory. authors of article concluded although native american activists , tribal leaders consider indian team names , mascots offensive, neither native americans in general nor cross section of u.s. sports fans agree . according article, there near total disconnect between indian activists , native american population on issue. after si article, group of 5 social scientists experienced in researching mascot issue published journal article arguing against validity of survey , conclusions. state, confidence magazine asserts disconnect between native american activists , native americans exists on issue belies serious errors in logic , accuracy made in simplistic labeling of native americans oppose mascots activists.

annenberg 2004 poll

the survey cited opponents of change definitive of native american opinion performed in 2004 part of national annenberg election survey. among other questions regarding election year issues, respondents identified being native american asked: professional football team in washington calls washington redskins. native american, find name offensive or doesn t bother you? in response, ninety percent replied name did not bother them, while 9 percent said offensive, , 1 percent not answer. methods used in survey , conclusions can drawn have been criticized social scientists, native american scholars , legal experts years. in august, 2015, memo written senior researchers @ organization responsible collecting data survey made clear should not taken accurate reflection of native american attitudes @ time.

an alternative method standard opinion polls used center indigenous peoples studies @ california state university, san bernardino. survey conducted of 400 individuals, 98 individuals positively identified native americans, finding 67% agreed statement redskins racial or racist. response non-natives opposite, 68% responding name not racist.

washington post 2016 poll

in may 2016, washington post (wapo) released poll of self-identified native americans produced same results 2004 annenberg poll, 90% of 504 respondents not bothered team s name.

differences between 2004 , 2016 poll

the annenberg poll criticized using land lines @ time when rare on reservations, 60% of respondents in new poll contacted on cell phones, based upon other surveys indicating 95% of native americans have @ least 1 cell phone per household. when land-line answered, there request youngest adult present respond questions; cell phones individual answering phone completed survey.
the new survey included alaska , hawaii, have large populations of indigenous people, while 2004 survey included contiguous 48 states.
sample selection: new survey part of routine wapo opinion survey, in asked “do consider white, black or african american, asian, native american, pacific islander, mixed race or other race?” responded 100% native american/alaskan native asked questions redskins. (however, 16% of sample identified hispanic.) asked if enrolled members of tribe, , if one; 44% of respondents said tribal members. in addition, zip codes containing high proportion of tribal or reservation land targeted. due low percentage of native americans in general population, responses collected on five-month period, december 16, 2015 april 12, 2016.

new questions included:

participants asked if had heard debate; 56% responded had heard not or not @ . 78% said debate either not or not @ important.
80% responded not offended if non-native american called them redskin .
a smaller sample of 340 respondents asked if term redskin disrespectful native americans, 73% responding no .
51% said pro football fans, while 48% not, split similar national polls of adults.

methodology

due variations between characteristics of sample , population of native americans based upon census data 2010, reported results based upon statistical weighting of raw data. respondents older (274 of 504 being on 50), more highly educated (at least college), , more live in northeast , north central regions, compared native americans in census. criticism of wording of question native american, find name offensive or doesn t bother you? being confusing addressed asking question again 43 respondents check same answer given, 41 of 43. however, problem critics have question is unclear being asked given find name offensive distinct or doesn t bother , later being awkwardly worded. reports of results media, such associated press, native americans not offended rather not bothered .

response 2016 poll

adrienne keene, ed.d responded poll uses faulty data , methods, such continuing problem of self-identification, , reporting of results misses point regarding objections name established social science research , authentic voices of native americans being real harms, not individual feelings. ncai executive director jacqueline pata stated, survey doesn t recognize psychological impacts these racist names , imagery have on american indian , alaska natives. not respectful native people. poll still doesn t make right.

the native american journalists association (naja) issued statement calling publication of poll, , reporting of significance, not inaccurate , misleading unethical. reporters , editors behind story must have known used justification continued use of these harmful, racist mascots. either willfully malicious or dangerously naïve in process , reporting used in story, , neither acceptable journalistic institution.

while not addressing naja criticism, wapo editorial board continues maintain prior position name slur , avoid use as possible. however, 1 wapo editor , advocate change, robert mccartney, has decided drop further protest in light of poll results.

a los angeles times editorial cites evidence name offensive many, poll not change given questionable representation of native american opinion.