The NAACP: “Snookered”, Hoodwinked, & Bamboozled

2010-07-21
By Eric Easter

Without being in the room,  I can pretty much tell you how the decision to use the platform of the NAACP convention to attack the Tea Party went down. That is to say, a group of very persuasive and compelling elders made an impassioned case that the NAACP should seize the day on a topic that was “relevant” and “now”.  It’s hard to say no to those voices, and it before anyone gave a proper vetting of the consequences and possible counter-punches, a pres release was being written and a press conference was being called. That’s what happened when C. Delores Tucker took on the music industry and when the Rainbow Coalition unilaterally decided Blacks  were all African American.

Sometimes it works, sometimes not. But this time, it was as if the NAACP was in a bar and picked a fight with an obnoxious drunk without expecting that drunk to hit back. As a result the NAACP threw a good right hook but got caught flat footed and knocked off message with an upper cut.                                                                       

That’s the kind of thing that happens when you don’t protect your flanks. The NAACP made a top down decision of the kind too frequently made by old line civil rights organizations, and they almost always turn out less effective than intended. That’s because in 2010, good intentions, the moral higher ground and an old school press conference are insufficient to win a media battle.   

In 2010 it takes more than a press release to the AP to win an argument in a 24-hour news cycle. You must also supply the opinion makers ground with ample ammunition to make your case for you.  Unfortunately, the people who could have undergirded the NAACP’s argument – bloggers, radio talk show hosts, key influencers, you and me on our Facebook pages– found out about the NAACP’s announcement when the rest of the world did. So when they went on the offensive, its supporters were left defenseless, no audio and video clips, no photos, no quotes – to share with their social networks. It was a jab that scored on points but lacked sustained power.

I’m not completely sure the NAACP was clear who it was up against. Misspelled signs aside, nobody should mistake the Tea Party for a ragtag group of hillbillies and nutjobs.  By now it should be clear that somewhere at the center of the movement is a fairly sophisticated and purposeful financial and organizational infrastructure with considerable media savvy. The NAACP underestimated the passion of a whole network of backdoor strategists, sympathizers and enablers obsessed with the destruction of the liberal left and who will not stop until a return to conservative power. The left, on the other hand, has directed all its passion toward pushing its own president to be more leftist. 

And despite a constant barrage of attacks by conservatives on any acknowledgment of race as a continuing issue, the NAACP seemed oddly thrown for a loop when they got called out, ridiculously, as reverse racists.  That defensive posture put the NAACP in the position to do perhaps the most tone deaf thing I’ve seen a group do in a long, long time, which was to allow itself to be pushed into condemning, without sufficient evidence, the edited words of USDA official Shirley Sherrod, only to retract that condemnation just hours later .The great irony being of course, that Ms. Sherrod would not even be known to any of us had the NAACP done a better job of planning its offensive.   

To its credit, the NAACP has come back smartly with a full accounting of the Sherrod video and they made a fast apology their wrong-headed decision. But all that comes with considerable damage to Sherrod’s career and whatever street cred the NAACP had left.

Still, I’m not one to call the NAACP irrelevant or without purpose. There remains a great need for that organization and others like it. Equal rights and justice are marathon issues and, progress notwithstanding, America is not nearly finished that race. Nor does this tactical mistake negate the NAACP original point which is now lost: The Tea Party coddles, and thus seems to support, its racist and intolerant elements.

As for the NAACP, even though they’ve had brilliant spokespeople at the helm (Benjamin Hooks, Kweisi Mfume) the organization has never been at its best on the media attack. It’s just not wired that way. With an unwieldy board and a slew of local officials with larger ambitions, there are just too many chefs in the kitchen to be nimble.  And with a young, smart telegenic leader in Ben Jealous and a whole slew of media tools at hand, it must be tempting for the NAACP to try to raise its profile and be more aggressively vocal.

But the fact is the NAACP has always been substantially better at the quiet and strategic body blow as opposed to the loud and open brawl. I’m guessing 90% of Americans who know the name Rosa Parks still have no idea that she was a local NAACP officer handpicked to be the symbol that sparked a movement. That was just the kind of savvy sucker punch the South never saw coming and the impact is still being felt today. I’m thinking the NAACP needs to go back to that playbook.  Sure, use all those new media bells and whistles to build membership and raise money, but when it comes to doing serious battle they need to keep their head down and throw strong, consistent blows at issues where they hurt the most.