Assessing the reliability and accuracy of advocacy group data in hate group research Mark S. Purington James Madison University
https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cgi/viewcont...ster201019
https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cgi/viewcont...ster201019
Quote:This paper has examined the claims made by the Southern Poverty Law Center, the hate group data and statistics the organization has produced over the past three decades, and the words and actions of its most visible actors, founder Morris Dees and Director of Intelligence Mark Potok.
From the fundamental lack of a fixed, universal definition for “hate group,” to the incongruous interaction between Morris Dees and the Ku Klux Klan, as well as his inconsistent hiring and fundraising policies, to the numerous contradictory public statements made by Mark Potok, it is apparent that a demonstrable credibility gap exists between the SPLC’s carefully crafted reputation and the accuracy of its widely accepted claims.
External stakeholders have their own reasons for accepting the SPLC’s unvetted data. The media, academic researchers and publishers, and law enforcement all have vested interests in perpetuating SPLC claims, and to greater and lesser extents. Those interests may be financial, as SPLC reports will often draw an audience and may be used to justify budgetary requests, though personal bias is often an ancillary motive. Ultimately, the interests of all three stakeholders, as well as that of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which generates tens of millions of dollars in donations each year, based largely on a fundraising program built squarely around its unsubstantiated hate group statistics, overlap, forming a self-feeding, self-perpetuating cycle to the benefit of all players. At best, SPLC hate group data is unsubstantiated and clearly biased. At worst, the numbers are fabricated as part of a larger fundraising program that is based largely on fearmongering.
As Mark Potok noted, the SPLC routinely “finds the 200 Nazis running around,” exaggerates the threat posed, if any, and “makes money off of it.” The ethical 135 challenges posed by the SPLC’s internal policies, such as claiming to be a civil rights organization but never hiring minorities to highly paid positions of authority, or by suggesting that the organization is in dire need of donations while it retains hundreds of millions of dollars in unrestricted funds, is also of great concern.
Such direct mail persuasion gimmicks as the Wall of Tolerance and legal-but-dubious accounting practices, such as claiming “joint costs” to lower the apparent percentage of money spent on fundraising, or the use of telemarketers at the expense of tens of thousands of unsuspecting donors each year, all call the integrity of the SPLC into question. Last, the sheer amount of money involved, from the tens of millions for the SPLC and related think tanks to the hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars in funding for the Department of Homeland Security, must be recognized as a significant possible influence on ignoring the accuracy of SPLC data.
Professional researchers such as Chermak and Freilich are prepared to perform a complete about-face on their criticisms of SPLC data when there are millions of DHS dollars at stake. The information is still unreliable, they note, but at least it is consistent.
Hate has always been and may always be part of the human condition. There is no denying that some people harbor racist, sexist and xenophobic attitudes and may be drawn to like-minded people in the same way as anyone else. Hate is largely based on fear, ignorance, and inequality. As with any highly emotional issue, there will always be those who will seek to exploit those feelings for gain.
The “Hate Industry” Laird Wilcox wrote of is larger than ever and the Southern Poverty Law Center continues to play a major role in that industry. The organization’s hate group data are unverified, inconsistent, inaccurate and demonstrably biased. The data shows all of the hallmarks of 136 classic propaganda and the uses to which they have been put by some recall the darkest days of McCarthyism.
As Jacques Ellul wrote, propagandists must create a need in the minds of their audience, feed it through half-truths and fearmongering, and ultimately supply a simple solution, if not to the problem itself, (which would put the propagandists out of business), then to the audiences’ question of “What can I do to help?” SPLC donors can “fight hate” and “seek justice” by simply writing a check. The SPLC even provides a self-addressed, postage-paid envelope. One could argue that the donors are being swindled, but from Ellul’s viewpoint, they are getting precisely what they paid for and feel they are getting good value for the dollar. And as Ellul posited, propaganda often works most effectively on those who arguably have the best tools with which to detect it. Propaganda, by design, circumvents logic and targets emotion.
If any other advocacy group, such as the National Rifle Association, were to produce the exact same claims as the SPLC, word-for-word, it would be met with skepticism, at the very least, by the media, academia, and law makers. Marketing master, Morris Dees, has honed his organization’s reputation over the past forty-five years, creating a singularly successful brand name in the process, noting that We run our business like a business.
Whether you’re selling cakes or causes, it’s all the same thing, the same basic process—just good, sound business practices (Egerton, p. 15). Unreliable information such as that produced by the Southern Poverty Law Center and other advocacy groups invariably taints research that is based largely upon it, and calls into question the ethical characters of those who produce and propagate it. Not only does 137 this flawed data lead to flawed research, that flawed research poses very real threats to American civil liberties.
Laird Wilcox notes The SPLC has managed to engage police and government agencies to assist them, interfacing informational resources about personal circumstances, vulnerability, and any opportunities for prosecution. They have even counseled the military in stigmatization and defamation procedures.
The rules and procedures that still pertain to law enforcement and criminal justice agencies don’t apply to the SPLC because they’re private, unsupervised, and unaccountable to anyone. Americans really need to ask themselves if they are willing to tolerate this kind of operation in a free society. Even if you agree with their stated goals, remember that sooner or later they might start looking at you or someone you love. Don’t imagine they can be contained by good will alone. What the Southern Poverty Law Center can get away with, eventually others can too (Wilcox, 2010).
And if you will confess with your mouth our Lord Yeshua, and you will believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall have life.