Even Martin Luther King Day had to fight for its right to be noticed
By Jackie Zimmermann, Staff Writer
January 21, 2008 | noon
The symbolic importance of Martin Luther King Jr. is unquestionable. For many, he represented change and promoted tolerance while teaching peace: a triple threat in the world of civil rights.
Like many great reformers, his time was cut short by the lethal combination of unwillingness to change and a gun. His incredible influence and involvement within the civil rights movement will never be forgotten and is enthusiastically taught in schools, revered in churches and celebrated nation-wide.
Much like its namesake, Martin Luther King Day has found its way through a labyrinth of committees, prejudices and hesitance, only to be met with the reluctance of tradition and belittled with questionable media tactics.
A history of reluctance
Martin Luther King Day officially became a national holiday in 1983 but was not officially celebrated until 1986. However, even though the bill was voted on 338-90 in favor in the House of Representatives and 78-22 in the Senate, it was met with opposition from both senators and their constituents. North Carolina Senator Jesse Helmes even declared King a communist and gave a speech to Congress connecting King to various far-left organizations and individuals.
Even after the bill passed, some states were reluctant to celebrate the holiday. The year 2000, 17 years after beingofficially placed on the calendar, marked the first time all 50 states recognized the holiday. In fact, Arizona’s resistance to accept the holiday resulted in its inability to host the Super Bowl in 1993. After a proposition to observe the day did not pass, the National Football League refused to host Super Bowl XXVII at the Sun Devil Stadium in Tempe.
In 2000, South Carolina officially made Martin Luther King Day a state holiday, making it the last state to recognize it as a paid day off. Before then, employees were allowed to choose between it and one of three confederate holidays.
Virginia had its own Martin Luther King discrepancies. Originally, King was added to the already existing Lee-Jackson Day. The day then became known as the Lee-Jackson-King Day and celebrated the births of two Confederate generals and King simultaneously. However, the absurdity of lumping King into a category with two men known for their support of the southern army was finally corrected in 2000 when Virginia officially gave King a day of his own.
Part of the resistance to accepting Martin Luther King Day is that before the bill passed, there were only three federal holidays that were dedicated to individuals: Washington’s Birthday (Presidents’ Day), Columbus Day and Christmas. Some felt that other Americans, like John F. Kennedy or Abraham Lincoln, deserved national holidays and that by enforcing Martin Luther King Day, the government would be overlooking many other people who suffered and died for the civil rights cause.
However, as the years go on, Martin Luther King Day is becoming more and more recognized. According to the Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., there has been a steady rise in companies observing it as a paid holiday. Last year, 33 percent of companies, mostly non-profit and government entities, gave their employees the day off. That number is up 19 percent from the first recognized Martin Luther King Day in 1986.
Idealism: honest opinions or blind inferences?
Despite the importance of the holiday, some say its coverage, or lack thereof, shows that America still has leaps and bounds to go before equality is reached and racism is demolished.
For Christopher P. Campbell’s 1995 book Race, Myth and the News, Campbell watched TV news programs from around the country from January 18 January 20, 1993. The time of the sample was supposed to represent the coverage surrounding Martin Luther King Day.
In the introduction to his book, Campbell says that “majority culture perceptions… reflected in local television news coverage feed mythological notions about Americans of color—notions that can contribute to contemporary racist attitudes.”
For Campbell, blatant under coverage of minorities and minority holidays is a form of “enlightened racism.” The King Holiday in particular was used as a way to demonstrate the attainability of the American Dream and the victory over modern day racism instead of a factual representation of minorities and change.
Campbell argues that “if our society is the just and fair one that was portrayed on King Day, the constant barrage of menacing images of minorities that more commonly appear on local TV news will undoubtedly fuel racist attitudes.”
On an everyday basis, minorities are often portrayed in a positive light as being athletes and entertainers and portrayed in a negative light as being criminals. For Campbell, concluding that racism is defeated by pointing out a few prominent minority figures actually emphasizes it because it blinds the public to the blatant stereotypes found in the everyday media.
Campbell also questioned newspaper coverage of Martin Luther King Day.
“In terms of how King Day was covered,” he wrote, “some newspapers chose to ignore the persistence of racism and highlight events that appeared to celebrate America’s victory in the war against it.”
Even though many newspapers take the opportunity to dispel racial myths that are easily formed by television’s short stories, some still manage to taint the news with a positive, yet unrealistic light.
Never-ending battles result in never-forgotten heroes
Even though Martin Luther King Day has had to prove itself to the skeptics and fight against the whitewash of corporate media, it still provides an opportunity to honor a man who will always be remembered as one of the greatest reformers of the twentieth century. His teachings and speeches will be studied in schools for decades to come, and his influence on society will forever be recognized.