Supporters of bilingual education finally have decided to play politics.
Until now, they’ve used facts to battle the initiative that would ban bilingual education.
And gotten nowhere.
So now they’ve decided to do the same things everyone else does to reach U.S. voters.
Exaggerate.
Distort.
Frighten.
In short, advertise.
“The outsiders backing Proposition 203 want you to believe Arizona has a problem. However, nothing could be further from the truth,” the voice says.
The ad currently plays 10 times a day on five of the Valley’s top-rated radio stations. And, like other campaign commercials, this one diverts attention from the issue by distilling it into slogans and sound bites.
Instead of bilingual education, the commercial pushes the parental choice button – always popular with Arizona voters.
“If Proposition 203 passes, parents will be denied any choice and will be forced to rely on one unproven program.
” . . . Let parents choose what’s best for their child. Vote no on Proposition 203.”
The words “bilingual education” are not uttered. Nor is there any mention of the Spanish language.
Instead, the ad reduces the complicated bilingual education issue into a simple series of declarative sentences.
And it’s about time.
This is a high-stakes issue.
Arizona has a growing population of students who are not fluent in English. Their education is paramount to the future economy of the state.
Up until now, supporters of bilingual ed – the “English Plus More” folks – have favored town-hall meetings as the best forum to present their well-reasoned, well-researched, cohesive arguments.
But there’s no time for that. Not with polls saying two-thirds of Arizonans want to dump bilingual education.
So, last month, state Sen. Joe Eddie Lopez started up Arizona Citizens Opposed to Proposition 203 and started looking for money for radio commercials. On Tuesday, the campaign said it would try to buy TV time as well.
“It’s the reality of campaigns,” says Paul Berumen, an assistant to Phoenix Mayor Skip Rimzsa. He’s on two months’ leave to coordinate the “No on 203” effort.
The first donor was the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, which fears the initiative would end native language programs in tribal charter schools.
That money allowed the campaign to hire a consultant to figure out the best way to get the message across.
And judging from the ad, the best way is to use words like “outsiders,” “hidden agendas” and “choice.”
“Parents know a lot more about what works best for their child than outsiders with no education experience,” the ad says.
Ironic that the ad effectively uses all-American campaign techniques to save a program some fear will destroy American culture.
But most ironic is the last line, which mentions that major funding comes from the Salt River Community.
That means this ad campaign about education is being paid for with money from a casino.
Which thrives off people who didn’t pay attention when the teacher talked about the laws of probability.
Reach Ruelas at [email protected] or (602) 444-8473.
Comments are closed.