Excerpted from a USF Anthropology Master's Thesis by Eric Chrisp "THE POWER OF THE PAST IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT."

"Riot, Rebellion or What?"

At this point it is important that I clarify my use of the various terms which have been ascribed to the events of October 24 and November 13, 1996.  I employ here a rudimentary linguistic analysis for the purpose of drawing the reader=s attention to the political uses of those terms.  I furthermore take the liberty of devising my own acronym in the interest of impartiality.  The events might most succinctly and descriptively be stated as ARock and Bottle Throwing, Burning and Looting@ (RBTBL).  However, one must also be aware that the RBTBL was associated with but not necessarily, exclusively caused by the police shooting of Tyron Lewis. 

We can analyze the lexicon used to refer to this event to demonstrate a real-life application of what Philippe Bourgois (1995:17) calls cultural production theory.

 The local newspapers referred to the RBTBL variously as Ariot,@ Arace riot,@ Aracial disturbance,@ Aviolent unrest@ and when the appearance of neutrality seemed editorially prudent, as a Acivil disturbance@ or simply Adisturbance.@ The National People=s Democratic Uhuru Movement (NPDUM) referred to it exclusively as a Arebellion@ or as an Auprising.@  Locality residents were not shy about using the word Ariot,@ but never to my knowledge used Arace riot.@ There are likely to be unexamined conditions and contexts which would influence locality residents to Asoften@ their language.  All of the terms are politically charged.  Although the events of those two evenings fit the legal definition of a Ariot,@ (Porter and Dunn, 1984:107) when used in this context Ariot@ seems to connote a more serious event.^[1]  Additionally, Ariot@ may have become more Aracialized@ as a result of the events in Los Angeles in 1992.  Even the euphemistic word disturbance elicits the connotation of an amoral disruption of the ordinarily proper, moral social order. 

What most Americans today call the Civil War serves as a parallel example of attempts to influence the social construction of reality through strategic linguistic maneuvering.  After the war, White southerners would often refer to it as Athe recent unpleasantness.@  Today one can hear some refer to it as Athe War of Northern Aggression@ or Athe Thousand Years War@ (meaning, presumably, that the Civil War is far from over) (Cartwright 1998).  Each usage hints at a different interpretation of what happened, what its causes were, and what its implications were.  In terms of cultural production theory, the speaker places the word, packaged with its referent connotations, in circulation in the linguistic market in opposition to words with contradictory connotations.  The terms are used to shape future debate and past remembrances and therefore support or oppose specific political ends.

The RBTBL of October 24 and November 13th, 1996, had a powerful and complex effect on the south-central St. Petersburg community.  Numerous organizations sprang up (some of which are still in operation more than two years later).  Dozens of public meetings were held to air opinions and anguish.  Washington D.C. sent envoys to listen to residents and Aleaders,@ and generally, peoples= time, conversation, emotions, and energy were diverted for a time to the perceived crisis.  Meanwhile, residents of the Ariot-torn community@ had to contend with a media feeding frenzy where reportersCfew of whom had any intimate knowledge of the communityCdescended on the previously un-news-worthy area to seek out the answers to the question, why had the Ariots/disturbances@ happened?  In doing so the mostly white reporters of both television and print media seemed to struggle with their own cultural assumptions to little avail.  Two things that most of the television media were able to see clearly in hindsight are that some of the violence was directed at the media (several news vehicles were destroyed in the melee), and that their presence at the flash point and their coverage may have escalated the event (Tampa Tribune October 26, 1996 B1, B7).^[2]

What was less clear to many members of the media was the way in which their utter confusion over the nature of the underlying problems affected their coverage.  The gap in understanding between white and Black, have and have-not, was seldom more evident than when I attended several post RBTBL public events discussing the media=s coverage.  A few members of the media actually acknowledged their Acluelessness@ and at least made overtures toward correction.  Nonetheless, even the most sincere effort toward fairness on the part of the media is likely to fall short without a recognition of the chasm between perspectives due to class and ethnic differences.

The media=s sometimes illogical search for the Atruth@ about the RBTBL also provides a demonstration of the mechanics of institutional racism, the utilization of cultural capital, and the extent to which political economic forces weigh heavy on the lives of the poor.  In January of 1997, three months after the murder of Tyron Lewis, The St. Petersburg Times asked Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Dee Anna Farnell to make public the juvenile court record of Lewis (St. Pete Times February 13, 1997 1b).  The St. Petersburg Times reported that normally Ajuvenile court records are kept confidential to protect the future of the children involved,@ but that The St. Petersburg Times sought the records Ain the hopes it would paint a more complete portrait of who he was.@  As The St. Petersburg Times reported it, the Judge:

noted that the facts of Lewis= life and death Amay be inextricably intertwined with the harsh reality of rioting in a grieving and angry part of our community.@ Because of that, the records should be open, Farnell said. AThe Life of Tyron Lewis and his interaction with our community=s law enforcement agencies has had a significant impact on a large portion of our society,@ Farnell wrote in her order. AThis court finds that the greater good would be served in our community by making the entire story involving Tyron Lewis and the city of St. Petersburg a part of the public record.@

Judge Farnell went on to say that APerhaps, as in this notorious case, by permitting the inspection of minors= records, a community may begin to heal.@  How does the Judge believeCwe may ask Cthat Tyron Lewis= checkered past resulted in the RBTBL?  Ostensibly the reasoning is that his poor performance according to the norms of U.S. jurisprudence led him to the position he was in that fateful afternoon, caused him to disobey the officer=s orders, further causing him to be shot, which in turn caused the RBTBL.  Although Lewis may have been culpable for the traffic stop, the judge=s reasoning lays heavy blame on an individual, completely ignoring systemic, structural, historical and cultural forces which led to burning and looting. The judge=s analysis seems to ignore that the officers who confronted Lewis knew nothing of his criminal record or that the car he was driving was Astolen@ (the details about this remain fuzzy at best).  He had been stopped on a routine speeding offense.  Moreover, one could argue that any Black motorist shot at that particular moment would have elicited the same reaction from the rock and bottle throwers.  Albeit unintentionally, The St. Petersburg Times and the justice system worked in concert to further criminalize the Black community of St. Petersburg, by saying in essence, the roots of the RBTBLs can be found in the criminality of individuals.

From my perspective the seriousness of St. Petersburg=s RBTBL was largely created by the media.  By Aseriousness@ I mean in comparison to similar, recent events in other cities (such as Los Angeles and Miami) and the death of Tyron Lewis notwithstanding.^[3]  For example, whereas the 1992 Los Angeles riots resulted in around 3,500 damaged businesses, the October 24, 1996 St. Petersburg event damaged only 25 (Tampa Tribune October 27, 1996). 

It seems fair to speculate that the media=s intense coverage of the eventCduring, immediately after, and for numerous months laterCwas largely driven by television and subscription ratings.  In the modern profit driven media, news seldom becomes news if it cannot sell newspapers.  Politics, however, may also be a compelling reason to draw attention to the RBTBL.  Organizations apart from the media took part in generating hyperbole.  NPDUM explicitly sought to gain political mileage from the RBTBL, and consequently, contributed to the inflating of the event in the consciousness of the public.  Numerous people from the locality gave unsolicited statements to the effect that NPDUM had enjoyed a tremendous resurgence as a result of the events.  This is not to say, however, that the messages embodied in the media=s coverage are not equally as political; by and large, the media messages are implicitly political as opposed to explicitly political.  The simple explanation for this difference is that the media=s hyperbole by and large implicitly defends the status quo construction of reality, while NPDUM=s hyperbole explicitly challenges the media controlled defacto construction of reality.

Some may argue that no crisis of this proportion had struck St. Petersburg since the 1968 riots.  However, to accept this statement at face value is a bias of analysis.  If we are to grasp the true importance of an event on shaping the cultural history of a locality we must understand how the event affected a diverse group of stakeholders and not only those with the loudest voices.  An event is labeled a crisis when it is sudden, urgent and most threatens the dominant ethnic communityCthe community that controls the means of social production (i.e. the community closely associated with the white controlled media). The 1968 riots were also labeled Arace riots.@  The official damage estimate from two nights of RBTBL in 1996 was over $1 million (St. Petersburg Times November 20th 1996:1b).  Most of this cost was presumably absorbed by insurance companies and private home and business owners.  The city requested $100,000 in taxes to clean up debris (St. Petersburg Times December 11th 1996:3b).  Tropicana Field, on the other hand, had a monetary cost of over $200-million of mostly city and county tax dollars   (The original tax payer cost was estimated at only $65-million) (St. Petersburg Times October 11th 1997:1a).  This does not include the $11.3-million cost of demolishing the Black community that once stood where Tropicana Field now stands; $11.3-million that Acame from federal community redevelopment grants, which were supposed to help lift people out of poverty@ (St. Petersburg Times March 29th 1998:7b).  Nor does this cost include the emotional and cultural toll of 285 demolished buildings, 522 relocated households, and more than 30 relocated or closed businesses. Who is to say which is the bigger disaster?

The article quoted directly above notwithstanding, newspaper coverage of the Dome has been primarily laudatory.  The white controlled media, and (to a lesser extent) the white community did not appear to see the construction of the Dome as a disaster, even though it necessarily entailed the destruction of a Black neighborhood and cost tax payers in excess of $200-million.  Why then are the riots (only $1-million) seen as so threatening that they deserve the coverage that they received?  

Tourism is at least part of the key to this mystery.  Tropicana Field was conceived by the white power elite of Pinellas County in hopes that it would be a tremendous boon to St. Petersburg=s tourist dependent economy. Conversely, the true cost of the RBTBL was not counted in burnt buildings, or looted stores, but in the potential decline in tourist dollars.  Demonstrating their concern the Florida Tourism Industry Marketing Corporation met a month after the RBTBLs Awith tourism executives to discuss ways of countering the decline@ (St. Petersburg Times December 15-17 1996:BE1).  Economics is not the whole answer though.  Despite the Booming headline ABAD FOR BUSINESS@ placed under a color photo of a policeman donned in riot-gear, silhouetted by a burning car, The St. Petersburg Times admits Aother establishments in the area report no significant change in their customer volume, and business and tourism leaders say they think any decline is temporary.@ So why the hyperbolic headline?  Was it to shame African American citizens for Aallowing@ this to happen; to criminalize them for responding to a murder in their community; to reinforce the belief that the Arebellion@ was in fact a Ariot@ and therefore served no good purpose; or to shift attention away from the underlying problem of racism being alive and well in America? I consider all of these possibilities, but whatever elaborate interpretation is applied to it, the headline is there to remind the public that such Arace riots@ are a threat to the public good.  The city administration had a more immediate problem in the form of massive public criticism.  Both the police department and the Mayor=s office were in public disfavor because of their handling of the RBTBL, and the Mayor was already campaigning for reelection. Besides economic stability, the RBTBL threatened the white power elite=s position as a legitimate authority and their ability to maintain social control.  Therefore the Ahype@ created by the media can be seen as serving any number of possible motives.

Conclusion

When John Donaldson arrived, and for twenty years after, being Black in St. Petersburg was not an extreme social or economic liability.  The social order was not well established, social norms were in a unique state of flux, and his single family posed no threat.  As more Blacks arrived they began to compete economically with the growing white population, spawning sanctions from the white community.  Gradually a city within a city was formed.  The birth of St. Petersburg coincided with what some historians of the U.S. call the Anadir of race relations@ (Lowen 1995:154).  Developing between 1890 and 1920, the system of segregation in St. Petersburg was a symptom of that era.