Foreign Relations of the United States, 1917–1972, Volume VII, Public Diplomacy, 1964–1968

161. News Policy Note Prepared in the Office of Policy and Research, United States Information Agency¹

No. 21–67

Washington, July 28, 1967

VIOLENCE IN AMERICAN CITIES

(NOTE: This NPN consolidates and supplements a series of recent guidances issued to the media in both written and oral form. However, this paper should also be considered only an interim guidance, subject to change as the situation in the cities evolves and as other developments unfold.)

The “long, hot summers” of discontent and violence in American cities were amply predicted; yet when Newark, Detroit and other cities erupted in recent days they left the country shocked and dismayed by their nature and magnitude.²

A variety of explanations of the events is being offered. Theories are manifold, and sometimes conflicting. Several Congressional hearings have been scheduled, and from these undoubtedly will emerge a wide range of ideas and proposals.³

Treatment

Stories of urban violence and the economic, social and political problems associated with racial unrest are likely to remain prominent in the coming weeks. These are major news stories, and USIA media must continue to report them in some detail in order to maintain credibility.

Guidelines:

—Focus sharply on President Johnson’s two-pronged response (7/27/67) to the challenge: (1) measures aimed at a quick, final and permanent end to the violence and punishment of law-breakers, and (2) “an attack—mounted at every level—upon the conditions that breed despair and violence . . . ignorance, discrimination, slums, disease, and not enough jobs.”⁴

—Stress that only a tiny minority of the Negro population has taken part in the violence; that the great majority of Negroes, as well as whites, utterly deplore such tactics.

—Call particular attention to the July 26 joint statement by Negro leaders Martin Luther King, A. Philip Randolph, Roy Wilkins and Whitney M. Young, Jr., condemning the criminal violence and those who incite it. They stated: “We who have fought so long and so hard to achieve justice for all Americans have consistently opposed violence as a means of redress. Riots have proved ineffective, disruptive and highly damaging to the Negro population, to the civil rights cause, and to the entire nation.”⁵

—To the extent possible, place the urban violence in socio-economic perspective. Rapid industrialization in the South, especially in agriculture where mechanization displaced human labor in recent years, as well as other factors, resulted in mass migrations to the cities. Cities were not prepared to cope with the massive influxes, and overcrowding, inadequate housing and schooling, and unemployment followed. Most Negroes from rural areas lacked technical skills, and were thus unemployable until trained. All these complex problems are being tackled, but by their nature are solvable only over the long term.

—While the U.S. as a whole has been enjoying unprecedented affluence, there has remained a hard core of disadvantaged persons who, for lack of education or the technical skills required by a modern nation, have not benefited. Results of the War on Poverty and a variety of other Great Society programs, such as massive Federal aid to education, will be felt in time.

—While these long-range programs are gaining momentum—and many will take years to produce large-scale results—a number of intermediate measures are also in progress—by municipalities, volunteer groups, states, and the Federal Government. The Federal Government’s Office of Economic Opportunity directs such diverse programs as Job Corps, Head Start, Neighborhood Youth Corps, Upward Bound, and others.

—Many of these programs have stirred interest and hope among the underprivileged where previously there had been only passivity and despair. Thus, paradoxically, the improvement in the Negroes’ condition in recent years has contributed to the bringing about of violence, in the opinion of some observers. “Nothing is so unstable as a bad situation that is beginning to improve,” writes William V. Shannon (New York Times, 7/27/67).⁶ Sociologists point out that progress in its initial stages tends to generate expectations faster than they can be fulfilled; people who harbor frustrated hopes are more likely to rebel than those with no hope at all.

When violence takes over, obviously the story of quiet, steady progress of the Negro American cannot command comparable attention. But we must continue to plug away at that story, as we have over the years. That it has produced results is evident in the generally sympathetic and knowledgeable way many foreign editors have been handling the story of the Negro American and the current situation. The progress has been dramatic in civil rights legislation, voter registration and other political gains, economic benefits deriving from various Great Society and other programs.

You should screen the Negro press in the U.S. for constructive editorial comment which will make clear that most of America’s 20 million Negroes are opposed to extremism and law-breaking, that the vast majority seek ways of working with their white fellow-Americans toward racial and economic equality.

Cautions:

Only to the minimum extent consistent with credibility should you report extreme, partisan statements seeking to place blame for the violence on one political group or another. On the other hand, statements which demonstrate widespread recognition of the need to do more for the underprivileged are useful.

Do not espouse any one theory, or any “pat” interpretation, of the cause or causes of the urban unrest. Many of the so-called experts are baffled by seeming inconsistencies and conflicting facts.

Avoid such inflammatory reports as those describing the situation as “a conspiracy,” “civil war,” “revolution,” etc.

In President Johnson’s words (7/27/67), “Let us acknowledge the tragedy; but let us not exaggerate it . . . Most Americans, Negro and white, are leading decent, responsible and productive lives. Most Americans, Negro and white, seek safety in their neighborhoods and harmony with their neighbors . . .”⁷

Background

Foreign Press Treatment

The riots in Newark, Detroit, and half a dozen other cities have drawn increasingly sensational headlines and heavy coverage in most news centers around the world.

As the riots in Detroit rose to a new level of violence, newspapers abroad generally raised the pitch of their headlines from “riots” to “rebellion” or, in some extreme cases, to “revolution” and even “civil war.”

Editorial comment reported from widely separated parts of the non-Communist world has reflected great concern but also sympathetic understanding of the complexities. The primary lines of thought emphasized most frequently were:

1. U.S. race relations are very serious and dangerous. Any one-sided condemnation would be wrong because they are also very complex.

2. The tragic situation is “paradoxical” and “ironic” because the Johnson administration has done far more than any other to improve the welfare of the Negroes.

3. But much more progress is needed to give the Negroes equality. What has been done is “like sprinkling water on thirsty soil.”

4. Therefore, the Negro extremists are, “unfortunately,” taking over from the moderates.

5. Extremists such as Stokely Carmichael⁸ believe that the force of riots is necessary to stimulate faster progress for the impatient Negroes. This is not surprising and they may be right.

Less conspicuous has been the view expressed in some commentaries that the riots have little or nothing to do with the civil rights movement but are created by lawless, hooligan elements that exist in every city ready to destroy and loot whenever possible.

1. Source: National Archives, RG 306, General Subject Files, 1949–1970, Entry UD WW 264, Box 309, Master Copies, 1967. Limited Official Use. Drafted by Sorkin. Sent for action to Modic, Vogel, Findlay, and Sayles. The News Policy Note is an enclosure to Infoguide 68–3, sent via pouch to all Principal USIS posts on July 31. In the infoguide Marks stated that the News Policy Note was being sent “for your information, and to guide you in treating this subject.” (Ibid.)
2. See footnote 2, Document 158.
3. Between August 2 and August 30, Senate committees held hearings addressing the riots in considering H.R. 421, the Anti-Riot Bill, which the House of Representatives passed immediately following the riots in late July. (John Herbers, “Police in 3 Cities Say S.N.C.C. Chiefs Incited Rioting,” New York Times, August 3, 1967, p. 1; John Herbers, “The Riots: What to Do Is the Issue,” New York Times, August 13, 1967, p. 153; Eve Edstrom, “No Easy Answer to Riots, Senators Told,” Washington Post, August 22, 1967, p. A4; and “Firemen Tell Senators of Riot Attacks and Ask Protection in Law,” New York Times, August 31, 1967, p. 17)
4. Reference is to Johnson’s July 27 “Address to the Nation on Civil Disorders.” For full text of the address, see Public Papers: Johnson, 1967, Book II, pp. 721–724.
5. For full text of the statement, see “Top Negro Leaders Call for an End to Rioting,” Washington Post, July 27, 1967, p. A1.
6. For full text of Shannon’s commentary, see William V. Shannon, “Negro Violence vs. the American Dream,” New York Times, July 27, 1967, p. 34.
7. See footnote 4, above.
8. See footnote 4, Document 158.