what i believe

The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the reproduction, distribution, adaptation, public performance, and public display of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, nonprofit libraries are authorized to lend, lease or rent copies of books, magazines, films, audio recording, and computer programs on a nonprofit basis and for nonprofit purposes. Any person who makes an unauthorized copy, adaptation, or redistribution of this copyrighted item in their possession, except as permitted by title 17 of the United States Code, may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to fulfill a loan request, if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the request would lead to a violation of the copyright law.

Allen, B. J. (2011). Power matters. In B. J. Allen, Difference matters: Communicating social identity (2nd edition; pp. 23-39). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

• • • • Ghapper J. • • • •

Power Matters

When I was about 25 years old I worked as a secretary in the research division of a national association in Washington, D.C. Two other women in their twenties and I sat at adjacent desks in an open area facing the offices of the male research associates for whom we worked. Betty,1 the executive sec­ retary, sat at the front of the room. Her desk (which was larger than the other secretaries’ and mine) was placed perpendicular to the entrance of the unit director’s corner office, which was bigger than those of the three associates.

One time when Betty was going on a weeklong vacation, she asked me to take over her duties. As she listed my responsibilities, she told me to wash her boss’s cup each morning and fill it with coffee (with cream) from the vending machine in the break room. I nodded in agreement, but I definitely did not like the idea. Surely this task wasn’t listed in the job description. All weekend, the problem percolated in my mind. I just did not want to get coffee for Frank. But if I didn’t, what would happen?

That Monday morning, I sat at my desk with butterflies in my stomach. Frank approached me, coffee mug in one hand, and two dimes in the other. He extended both toward me, saying softly, “Betty always gets coffee for me.” My heart pounded as I looked up at him and replied softly, “I know.” Three seconds later, he headed toward the vending machine area. Things went smoothly for the rest of the week and for the duration o f my employment at the association. Frank even intervened on my behalf when Harold, the per­ sonnel director, denied my request to revise my work schedule to attend grad­ uate classes. Frank went over Harold’s head to ask Henrietta, the executive director of the organization, to grant my request. She agreed. I remain grate­ ful to Frank (and Henrietta) for supporting me.

This chapter continues to set the foundation of the book by exploring matters of power and communicating social identity. Betty, Frank, Harold, Henrietta, and I enacted power relationships in varying ways, for varying rea­ sons. Our behaviors may have been based in part on our social identities. Frank was a middle-aged white male department director. Betty, his secre­ tary, was also middle-aged and white. She had been with the association for many years, and she seemed proud of her position. Both of them probably never had questioned the practice of her serving him coffee.

23

24 Chapter Two

In contrast, I was a young black woman, working to pay my bills as I fig­ ured o u t what I wanted to be when I grew up. When I did not get coffee for F rank, I may have been acting from my standpoint as a black woman whose m other, grandmother, and great-grandmother had served white people. M aybe I wanted to break that chain. I also could have been playing the role of a budding feminist who objected to any hint of male domination. Or, perhaps I thought someone with a college degree shouldn’t get coffee for anybody (what an elitist attitude).

Age also may have mattered. As a woman in my twenties, I probably d idn’t view my role or my life in the same way as Betty, who was in her forties (w hich seemed old to me then). The job was a means to an end for me, and I knew I could get another clerical position, whereas Betty seemed settled into h e r position. Any or all o f these aspects of my identity may have affected my response. Believe me, though, I didn’t analyze the situation at that time. In fact, m y emotions played a much stronger role than my thoughts. It just didn’t feel right. W hat do you think you would have done?

As I noted in chapter 1, when and where events occur can significantly affect those events. My coffee tale took place in the 1970s in Washington, D.C., w hen you could buy a cup of coffee for twenty cents! More important, m any citizens were feeling the effects of the civil rights and women’s rights movements. The fact that a first-generation female college graduate from a black working-class family was attending graduate school supports this point. Even my request to adjust my work schedule is time bound, since many orga­ nizations now routinely allow employees to work flexible hours. Throughout th e book, we will explore examples of interdependent relationships between power dynamics and the sociohistorical contexts where they occur. We will use social construction theory to study ways that humans use communica­ tion to construct their realities.

This chapter presents the premise that power matters. First, we will take a close look at the concept of power and its complexities. Next, I explore how concepts known as hegemony and ideology operate to establish and maintain control and systems of domination and I describe critical theory, a useful framework for studying power dynamics. Finally, I show how we enact power relations through communication.

Conceptions o f Power Power is a complex, multidimensional concept. How do you define

power? You might think of power as “ability to dominate.” This viewpoint usually gives power to persons in powerful positions, which can range from the president of the United States to a boss to parent(s) or guardian(s), and to spouses or partners. Thinking of power in that way implies that certain indi­ viduals have “power over” others. The “power over” perspective casts power negatively and neglects to consider positive aspects of power. It also fails to acknowledge that power is a reciprocal process. The “power over” stance

Power Matters 25

simplifies the nature of power by portraying it as overt, conscious behavior, such as using threats, promises, or orders to get what one wants. This focus on the surface overlooks deep structures of power that operate continually, unconsciously, and subtly based on norms and taken-for-granted assum p­ tions.2 We will study surface and deep levels of power relevant to society in general and in various organizational contexts.

Our primary perspective for studying power relations is critical theory. In case you’re not familiar with this viewpoint, you may think about the every­ day meaning of “being critical” as criticizing people and taking a negative approach. That’s not what I mean. Critical theory provides a set o f frame­ works for analyzing power dynamics in society in order to make the world more equitable.3 Critical theory seeks to liberate and emancipate members of nondominant groups by exploring how and why people comply with dom i­ nant belief systems and how they and their allies resist those systems. Critical theorists seek to raise consciousness, to help people realize how power oper­ ates. We focus on relationships between communication and structures. We acknowledge the power of communication to create and shape structures and rules and to provide means for resistance. We look at social conditions to uncover hidden power dynamics in surface and deep structures of society. Examples of critical perspectives include feminist theories, which focus on gender inequality; critical race theory, which considers legal aspects and implications of racial inequality; and postcolonial theory, which studies unequal relations between nation-states by examining the dominance of Western knowledge in many countries.

I will refer to these and other critical approaches as I rely mainly on the work of French philosopher-historian Michel Foucault, who depicted power as a behavior or process that permeates all hum an interaction.4 In contrast to the “power over” stance, which implies that power occurs occasionally, Fou­ cault asserted that “power resides in every perception, every judgment, every act.”'’ Foucault contended that people enact power to produce and reproduce, resist, or transform structures of communication and meaning, in even the most mundane social practices. He used the term “relations of power” to sug­ gest a network of systematic interconnections among people.6

Foucault believed that power constituteshll relationships: “We define our relationships and how we should behave in relation to each other in terms of power differences and similarities.”7 In my opening story, when Betty (as my supervisor) assigned me to be her substitute, she assumed I would imitate how she enacted the role of secretary. Frank may have expected Betty and me to get him coffee based on how he viewed the secretary-boss relationship (and maybe even the male-female relationship). Perhaps Betty started getting him coffee because she thought that she had to, or maybe she just enjoyed serving him because she liked him. Regardless of the dynamics of Betty and Fred’s relationship, Betty was comfortable with this arrangement, while I was not.

Foucault believed that power can have negative and positive conse­ quences. Power is not always oppressive or prohibitive; power also can be

26 Chapter Two

productive. Power relationships worked in my favor when Frank asked the executive director to let me change my work schedule, and when she agreed.

Power is not limited to persons in power positions; power “exists in the reciprocal relations of the haves and have-nots.”8 Although some persons are authorized to wield power, everyone engages in power practices, including those w ho may be lower in an organizational or societal hierarchy. Some sec­ retaries act as gatekeepers, deciding who will or will not have access to their boss. They also may influence their boss. Or, even though teachers have offi­ cial power over students, students and teachers can police each other. For instance, while teachers may enforce formal dress codes for students, students may verbally and nonverbally express criticisms of teachers’ appearance. In response, members of both groups may modify their dress to meet one another’s approval. Can you think of other examples where the person who supposedly has less power sometimes controls the relationship?

To explain the complexities of power, Foucault introduced the concept, “discipline.” What does the word discipline mean to you? As a verb, disci­ pline means to punish or penalize, as in “the teacher disciplined the unruly child by making her stand in a corner.” W hen used as an adjective, discipline means a strict, self-regulation, as in “I follow a disciplined exercise program.” Discipline also can refer to an academic area of study, such as the discipline o f communication. Notice that the root of discipline is disciple, or follower. As Foucault conceived 11 ̂ hc^Hnejicfers to “elements of social relations that control, govern, and ‘normalize’ individual and collective tehavior.”9

The elock is an ever-present example of how discipline operates. In most contexts in the United States, we usually adhere to customs about time, and we rarely question our obedience to them. It just seems “normal” to be mind­ ful of when and how long we engage in certain activities. Just about everyone knows norms about time (they are common knowledge), which we enact in power relations. Students and teachers use norms about time to affect each others’ behaviors. In the classroom, teachers expect students to be in their seats at the start of a session. Some teachers will not allow students to enter the class late. One informal rule in universities says that students may leave if the professor hasn’t shown up by fifteen minutes after class is scheduled to start. Have you heard that “rule”? When I teach a class, I don’t need a watch to know when class should end because students always begin to pack up when the time is almost over. As in schools, in most organizations discipline helps to produce “regular, recurring, functional behavior.”10 Discipline enables organization members to collaborate and to predict outcomes. Discipline can also help prevent chaos. Therefore, discipline can have positive effects.

However, discipline can constrain creativity and spontaneity and help maintain power imbalances. Although we need some degree of discipline for organizations and relationships to persist and thrive, discipline can invite neg­ ative consequences. Referring to the example of the clock, patient-doctor relationships show how discipline operates in power dynamics. Although physicians expect patients to arrive on time for appointments, patients often

Power Matters 27

wait well after the appointed time to see the physician. In most organizations, different policies about time apply to employees depending on their status. Some individuals have to punch in and out on a time card and take timed breaks, which illustrates an obvious form of control over the employees. If they don’t follow time constraints, their employer may fire them or otherwise punish them. In contrast, other employees can come and go as they wish without paying close attention to time. In some occupations, individuals keep track of their own time. These examples of how the clock regulates hum an behaviors illustrate Foucault’s definition of discipline, which consists of power, knowledge (truth), and rules of right.

Power and Knowledge Power and knowledge operate recursively: “the exercise of power perpet­

ually creates knowledge and, conversely, knowledge constantly induces effects ofjpower.”11 As a result, what we call “facts” or knowledge often are actually products of political social processes. For example, the act of labeling or defining social identity groups demonstrates power dynamics. Historically, groups in power have named/labeled other groups, whether the other groups agreed with the names/labels or not. “W hat a group is called and how it is described by other groups, particularly those in power, plays an important role in social relations,”12 because these labels usually are not neutral. Most often, dominant groups define these names/labels to establish and maintain hierarchy.13 For instance, definitions of learning ability/disability allow edu­ cators (the dominant group) to classify learners (the nondominant group) as either normal or abnormal. Once a person is labeled (e.g., as “gifted and tal­ ented” or as “developmentally challenged”), that individual’s identity becomes fixed, and the label can forever have positive or negative impacts.

Throughout history, influential disciplines such as medicine, science, law, and religion have developed and instilled many bodies of “knowledge” about social identity groups that became accepted as truth. The Diagnostic and Statis­ tical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) of the American Psychiatric Associa­ tion (APA) is a primary source of information about mental disorders and problems. From their positions of power, medical experts decide which condi­ tions qualify to be included in this storehouse of knowledge, which is presumed to constitute the truth. Anyone who shows symptoms related to disorders cited in the DSM is subject to being categorized and stigmatized because profession­ als such as psychiatrists and psychologists consult the DSM to make and justify diagnoses and recommend treatment. For over twenty years, the DSM defined homosexuality as a mental condition, and this classification affected the lives of countless people. After concerted effort by groups who challenged that defini­ tion, the board of trustees of the APA voted in 1974 to delete it from the DSM.

Rules o f Right The power-knowledge relationship operates through “rules of right,”

which are “principles and practices we create to govern ourselves, presum-

28 Chapter Two

ably in non-arbitrary, systematic ways.”14 Examples of rules of right include the Constitution of the United States at the national level and employee handbooks at the organizational level. W hat are examples on your job or at your school? Rules of right “spell out the right way to act in the organization according to the power relationships.” 15 They guide and regularize our interactions with others, and they help to maintain power positions. Mem­ bers of society and organizations routinely and robotically invoke rules of right w ith statements or sentiments such as “th at’s the way we do things around here,” “these are standard operating procedures,” or “it’s just com­ m on sense.” Organization members tend to refer to those meanings that favor certain groups and interests as “common sense.” This illustrates the political nature of taken-for-granted knowledge. Relations of power often unfold as struggles over meaning as groups try to “fix” meaning and con­ nect it to their own interests.16

The rules of right provide a formal, structural delineation of power; the exercise of power allows for certain “truths” to emerge and to become the taken-for-granted knowledge base for a social system; the effects of this knowledge base in turn reinforce and reproduce relations of power in the system.17

W hen people create, embed, or express meaning to serve or enhance the interests o f some individuals and minimize a n d /o r subordinate those of other individuals, a form of control emerges.

Control in Organizations Organization members employ a variety of methods to control one

another and themselves. Across history, these methods have progressed from simple, direct approaches, to more complex, covert strategies.18 In early orga­ nizations, persons in authority exerted power through simple control, which includes giving direct orders and engaging in overt observation. As organiza­ tions adopted technology, technical control became an option. For instance, assembly lines partially hid authority relations between workers and supervi­ sors. N o longer did the supervisor have to command the worker, because the pace o f the line controlled the worker’s productivity. Next came bureaucratic control, enabled through rules, policies, job descriptions, incentives, and so forth. Experts and specialists created standards and operating procedures, which represented a new form of surveillance. Although all three of these types of blatant or obtrusive control still occur, organizations also are exert­ ing more subtle forms of discipline.

Organizational communication scholars Phillip Tompkins and George Cheney refer to unobtrusive forms of control as corner five control: “In the con- certive organization, the explicit written rules and regulations are largely replaced by the common understanding of values, objectives, and means of achievement, along with a deep appreciation for the organization’s ‘mission.’ ”19

Power Matters 29

Concertive Control Because concertive control works best when organization members inter­

nalize interests of dominant groups, organizations strive to indoctrinate employees to behave according to the organization’s core values and beliefs. A common strategy is to use a rhetoric of identification, the extent to which an individual, when faced with a decision, will be likely to do what aligns with the organization’s objectives rather than with her or his own prefer­ ences.20 Organizations use various methods to gain identification, such as cit-

Media Literacy

Media literacy refers to our ability to critique and analyze media and its potential impact. Media literacy education strives to empower us and to transform our usual passive relationship w ith media to be more active, engaged, and critical. Media literacy education improves h o w w e use criti­ cal thinking skills as w e “sift through and analyze the messages that inform, entertain and sell to us everyday."21

Especially relevant to difference matters, some media literacy curricula critique and analyze power dimensions of how media represent gender, race, class, and sexuality.22 T h e y focus on recognizing and challenging s y s ­ tematic biases and distortions. T h e y also encourage using media as instru­ ments of social communication and change.23 T h e y promote producing alternative media that challenge dominant ideologies and portray more accurate and comprehensive vie w s of nondominant groups.

One fram ework of critical media literacy includes the following con­ cepts and questions to guide critical thinking about media messages:24

• C onc ept: All media are constructions. Therefore, they are subject to the biases of their creators.

• Q u e s tio n s : Who created this message? What did they hope to accom­ plish? W hat are their primary belief systems?

• C o n c e p t Different people experience the same media message differently.

• Q u e s tio n s : H o w might different people understand this message differ­ ently than me? What do I think and feel about this?

• C onc ept: Media have embedded values and points of view .

• Q u e stio n s : What lifestyles, values, and points of v ie w are represented or omitted in this message? What does this tell me about h ow other people live and believe? Does this message leave anything or anyone out?

• C onc ept: Media are organized to gain profit and/or power. Furthermore, only a handful of corporations dominate the U.S. media market.

• Q u e s tio n s : W hy w a s this message sent? Who sent it? Is this trying to tell me so m ething?. . . to sell me something?

30 Chapter Two

ing metaphors (e.g., “we are family”), telling stories, engaging in rituals, and performing ceremonies.23 Organizations also try to get members to identify by trying to establish common ground. For instance, they identify a common enemy or glorify a “corporate we,” as in “We’re number one.”26

These indoctrinating practices occur formally and informally, through such media as employee manuals, newsletters, meetings, annual reports, social gatherings, Web sites, and electronic mail. As members of organiza­ tions internalize organizational premises, control becomes invisible and taken for granted. Concertive control techniques “govern and normalize indi­ vidual and collective action organizations, particularly to the extent that they are internalized by persons and become, if you will, ‘standard operating procedures.’ ”27 In essence, members become disciplined.

In a book entitled The Discipline of Teamwork, organizational communica­ tion scholar James Barker demonstrates the power of concertive control evi­ dent in his longitudinal study o f a self-managing work team at a mid-size manufacturing company.28 The company had established participative groups o f employees with no assigned leaders by referring to a “team” meta­ phor. However, through their talk and actions, team members identified, defined, reinforced, and enacted power relationships that looked more like traditional ones. Due to concertive control, four years after converting from a custom ary bureaucracy, teams had developed formal sets of rules to govern mem bers’ workday activities. Team members engaged in self-surveillance behaviors such as developing and enforcing attendance policies that repro­ duced power dynamics of conventional hierarchy and helped to construct their identities. As one person exclaimed, “Damn, I feel like a supervisor, I just don’t get paid for it.”29 Barker’s study shows how people impose disci­ pline on themselves and their peers.

As organizations and individuals discipline members, “a well-entrenched power hierarchy is maintained so smoothly that dominant and submissive behavior simply seems natural,”30 and disciplined members want on their own w hat the organization wants. The primary means by which these disci­ plinary processes occur is through hegemony.

H eg em on y Italian philosopher-theorist Antonio Gramsci conceptualized hegemony

(if this is a new word for you, it’s pronounced hih-jeh'-minny), as “the ‘spon­ taneous’ consent given by the great masses of the population to the general direction imposed on social life by the dominant fundamental group.”31 Communication scholars Lee Artz and Bren Ortega Murphy define hege­ mony as: “the process of moral, philosophical, and political leadership that a social group attains only with the active consent of other important social groups.” They elaborate:

Hegemony addresses how social practices, relationships, and structures are negotiated among diverse social forces. Hegemony offers a template for understanding why women wear makeup, employees participate in

Power Matters 31

actions to improve company profits, and homeowners and renters accept segregated housing patterns. In each case, subordinate groups (women, workers, or ethnic minorities) willingly participate in practices that are not necessarily in their best interests because they perceive some tangible benefit. The mass media, educational institutions, the family, govern­ ment agencies, industry, religious groups, and other social institutions elicit social support for such hegemonic relations through patterns o f communication and material reward.32

As Artz and Murphy imply, hegemony operates everywhere in a society. In organizations, hegemony occurs as individuals work to accomplish

the organization’s goals while being complicit in their own domination. Organization members often support belief systems and enact power rela­ tions that may not serve their interests (they may even work against those interests).33 Thus, a central tenet of hegemony is “domination through con­ sent,” as seen in Barker’s study.

However, everyone does not always consent to domination. Hegemony also cncompasscsifesistance} any means by which societal or organizational members attempt to undermine or overthrow the dominant orderTPoucault contended that power relations always meet with resistance, as individuals or groups imagine and seek better realities. Moreover, “acts of resistance are as dispersed and innumerable as sites of power.”34 An individual might resist strictly for personal reasons, as I did with Frank. People also resist to seek rights for themselves a n d /o r others, to transform specific organizational con­ texts, or to cause social change. Recall how Frank intervened on my behalf by going over his supervisor’s head. Resistance may be planned and organized, for instance through whistle-blowing, filing a lawsuit, going on strike, or working precisely within guidelines. Resistance also occurs as random acts such as cheating, lying, telling jokes, being late, or stealing. As these exam­ ples imply, resistance may be overt or covert.

Resistance also can be “simultaneously resistant and consensual, uniting and dividing, radical and conservative.”35 Although government agencies often control categories of social identity groups, sometimes individuals and groups assert their own names to redefine themselves, to assert power, an d / or to reject others’ imposing an identity on them.36 For instance, civil rights groups were instrumental in changing the racial label “Negro” to “black” and “African American.” However, name changes can arouse conflict within groups, as all members may not agree with them. I remember some older African Americans responding negatively to the idea of being called "black” because they thought it was a derogatory term. Also, some gay rights activists have embraced the label “queer” as an act o f defiance, while others think the label perpetuates oppressive meanings.37

To summarize, hegemony is a complex concept about domination/coer­ cion, consent, and resistance/transformation. Hegemony persists within a society and within organizations when most members agree on dominant belief systems, also known as ideologies.

32 Chapter Two

Ideology Ideology is a contested concept with multiple and sometimes contradic­

tory meanings. For our purposes, think oftdeologyfs “a set of assumptions and beliefs that comprise a system of thought.’’̂ 8 Ideology has powerful, intricate influences on all of us. As organizational communication scholars Eric Eisenberg and Lloyd Goodall explain:

Ideology touches every aspect o f life and shows up in our words, actions, and practices. . . . Because ideology structures our thoughts and interpre­ tations of reality, it typically operates often beneath our conscious awareness. . . . it shapes what seems “natural,” and it makes what we think and do seem “right.”39

This perspective on ideology corresponds with how Karl Marx and Frederick Engels focused on ideology as a means for justifying social stratification.40 For example, the belief that rich people are hard workers and poor people are lazy is ideological.

Dominant ideologies reflect perspectives and experiences of ruling groups, whose members construct and circulate beliefs that will most benefit them. Those who control means to disseminate belief systems usually also control which ideologies become widespread within a society. Over time, ideologies become taken for granted and accepted as universally valid by most members o f a society. Ideology thus becomes a “filter to screen out beliefs and pro­ posed actions that do not fit, and to accept opinions and proposed actions that are consistent with the ideology.”41 In essence, ideologies help to validate worldviews that help dictate our attitudes and behaviors. Power and control processes occur as individuals and groups attempt to produce, reproduce, resist, a n d /o r change a society’s dominant ideologies.

To further define ideology, here’s a preview o f some of the dominant ide­ ologies we will examine. Team members in Barker’s study were immersed in the ideology o f organizational hierarchy, which arranges job positions in a strat­ ified structure (usually in the form o f a pyramid), with power flowing from the top down. Even though a self-managing work team structure empowered the employees not to enact hierarchy, its ideological force was so strong that they reverted to it.

The ideology of hierarchy also is evident in the power-infused interac­ tions between employees, as described in this chapter’s opening story. Betty the secretary told me to make coffee for Frank, her boss; Frank’s boss, Harold, informed me I couldn’t revise my work hours to attend school; Frank went over Harold’s head to ask Henrietta, the executive director, to grant my request; Henrietta gave me permission. From my account, you almost can visualize the organizational chart that mapped organization’s hierarchy.

Organizational hierarchy exemplifies the ideology o f domination, a funda­ mental belief system in U.S. society “in a notion of superior and inferior, and its concomitant ideology—that the superior should rule over the inferior.”42 This ideology is so ingrained that most people believe domination is natural.

Power Matters 33

Systems of domination are common in social structures, which usually are stratified, or “organized [hierarchically] so that one group of people consis­ tently has more opportunity or privilege than another group.”43 Consequences of stratification include unequal, differential distribution of resources, oppor­ tunities, status, and services. Structures and systems can be exclusionary and damaging to individuals. This systemic/structural perspective is key to how we will explore difference. I delve deeply into structures of society' at large as well as within various contexts to expose power relations that constitute social reality and to discuss how they matter to communicating social identity.

The social identity groups we will study usually are explicitly or implic­ itly stratified. Social class is layered from upper to lower levels, and not hav­ ing a disability is usually considered more desirable than having one. Persons in the lower strata of social identity groups tend to occupy lower levels of hierarchies, and to be the lowest paid, while the converse usually is true for persons in higher strata. For instance, women occupy most clerical positions in organizations, and most high-level executives are men.

The ideology o f patriarchy—the “structural dominance of men that is built into the institutions of society”44—often prompts gender-based assump­ tions and expectations about organizational roles and behaviors. Returning to my opening story, the roles and expected power relations of (female) secre­ tary and (male) boss exhibit the classic gender hierarchy of U.S. society. This ideology also forms the basis for resistance to those assumptions and expecta­ tions, for instance as enacted in women’s rights movements or men’s profemi­ nist groups.

The ideology o f white supremacy refers to an internalized belief that white people are superior to all other races. This belief stems from power sources in the United States that have steadfastly reinforced and perpetuated a hierarchy of race. Through various actions, including government legislation, groups and individuals systematically have sought to separate white from nonwhite, to glorify whiteness and malign color.

The culture of poverty ideology contends that poor people collectively embody traits that keep them down. This perspective on social class blames the poor for their plight and ignores the fact that many wealthy people have inherited their wealth and resources or that they were better positioned to attain the “American dream.” This ideology does not acknowledge that eco­ nomic, cultural, and social capital can tilt the playing field in favor of those who have accumulated wealth, knowledge, a n d /o r connections.45

Finally, heteronormativity refers to a belief system that values and normal­ izes heterosexual identity while marginalizing and stigmatizing individuals who do not identify as heterosexual. This ideology contends that humans are either female or male, and that sexual relations should occur only between a female and a male. This perspective affects related aspects of life, including gender roles, norms of sexual relationships, and marriage.

Whether consciously or not, members of society often allow dominant ideologies like these to dictate their attitudes and behaviors: “the dominant

34 Chapter Two

assumptions of a culture establish hierarchical relationships, and as long as the members of a culture believe that the hierarchies are normal and natural, they will tend to act in ways that perpetuate those hierarchies.”46 Although these dynamics matter for everyone, nondominant group members tend to be m ore negatively affected than dominant group members. Thus, power rela­ tions occur in society at large and within organizations as individuals rein­ force or resist dominant ideologies. The primary means by which people enact power relations is through communication.

1

Power and th e Media The media play a powerful role in communicating social identity. Every

day, media such as books, newspapers, magazines, radio, recordings, m ov­ ies, television, and the Internet create and transmit millions of messages to large audiences around the world. Since the 1930s, media scholars in com­ munication have studied a range o f topics, including media effects on cul­ ture and society, influence and persuasion, and motivations for using media. T h e y've developed a substantial body of w o rk about how media impact our beliefs, attitudes, and actions. For example, social cognitive theory contends that w e often learn about life from the media without hav­ ing direct experience, and w e tend to believe that the media accurately rep­ resent aspects of life. So, members of dominant groups w h o don't have much contact w ith nondominant groups w ill tend to believe media portray­ als o f those groups. Cultivation theory sa ys that media shapes our percep­ tions of social reality through extensive and cumulative exposure to media messages. W e develop beliefs, attitudes, and expectations about the real world based on media, and w e use those beliefs, attitudes, and expecta­ tions to guide h o w w e behave.

Some communication scholars conduct critical cultural studies, which focus on ‘ h o w the media can be used to define power relations among va r­ ious subcultures and maintain the status quo. Critical cultural studies researchers examine h o w the media relate to matters o f ideology, race, social class, and gender.”47 T h e y assert that media not only reflect culture, but they also produce culture. T h e y stress h o w political and social struc­ tures influence mediated communication and h o w that influence helps to maintain or support those w ith p o w e r in society.

These and other perspectives on communication and the media help to inform our stu dy of difference matters. T o enhance your understanding of media effects on difference matters, I include a spotlight on media in each of the follow ing chapters.

Power Matters 35

Com municating Power We enact power relations through a variety of interrelated communica­

tion processes, including: language, everyday talk, and responses to norm s and policies about physical appearance.

Language A primary medium for communicating power is language, which helps

to spread ideologies and to reinforce hegemony. Although no language sys­ tem is superior to another, persons in power tend to value certain systems more than others. Powerful groups usually control language systems and expect all organization members to use vocabulary, jargon, dialects, accents, as well as topics of interactions that the dominant group values and uses.

Communication inequities can arise when members privilege certain lan­ guage systems and dominant groups tend to place the burden o f proof on nondominant group members. For instance, an ideology o f rationality values objective, “cool-headed” behaviors, and devalues emotionally expressive communication styles characteristic of some women and people o f color.48 During co-cultural exchanges, or communication between nondominant and dominant group members,49 dominant group members may stigmatize a nondominant speaker as deviant or deficient because the person does not comply with dominant norms. These power relations often occur during rou­ tine interactions, or everyday talk.

Everyday Talk Everyday talk consists of discursive practices, which are “characteristic

ways of speaking and writing that both constitute and reflect our experi­ ences,”50 that can help to produce, maintain, or resist systems of power. Everyday talk tends to be political. That is, it tends to favor the interests o f one group over another. As a result, “all discourse potentially structures rela­ tions of dominance and subordination in organizations.”51

Norms about small talk in everyday situations can inhibit developing harmonious relationships and stifle productivity and creativity. The ease with which a person can engage in small talk—inside or outside the workplace set­ ting—can help or hinder career stability and mobility. For example, some per­ sons might avoid informal networking opportunities, such as company- sponsored social events, because they expect to be uncomfortable about con­ versing in an informal, nonwork-related context. Some people may also feel inhibited at work. A white male professional described his discomfort in the corporate bank setting where he worked. He let his working-class, Irish-Ger­ man background restrain him from interacting freely with his middle-class, Ivy League colleagues.52 Women o f color in workshops I conduct often lament that they cannot be “themselves” at their workplaces because they feel obligated to accommodate to “white” ways o f communicating.

36 Chapter Two

To “fit into” dominant contexts, members of nondominant groups may engage in code switching, or adapting their speech to standard English-speak­ ing norms. When nondominant group members do not adapt, power dynam­ ics can become visible. A Chicana told me that her white female supervisor constantly reprimanded her for rolling her r’s when she pronounced certain words. Although she told her supervisor the pronunciation was characteristic of her native language, the supervisor repeatedly told her to pronounce words “correctly.”

Parents who never attended college or who have limited literacy skills may hesitate to talk with their children’s teachers due to a sense of intellectual inferiority. Also, in situations such as doctor-patient encounters, older patients a n d /o r patients who speak English as a second language may not talk openly or ask for clarity when communicating with physicians or other health care providers.

T he employment interview represents a common discursive practice in organizations based on dominant ideals: “assumptions about proper inter­ viewing behavior and outcomes exclude experiences of traditionally under­ represented groups and maintain managerial control.”53 Recruiters tend to select new hires based on “fluency of speech, composure, appropriateness of content, and ability to express ideas in an organizational fashion.”54 Further­ more, interviewers tend to rate interviewees more highly when their responses m atch their expectations. During co-cultural interviews, nondominant group members may feel even more uneasy, self-conscious, cautious, or tense than interviewees who are part o f the dominant group. They may struggle to match their language and behavior to meet the expectations of the interviewer.

M o st organization members accept dominant ideologies and enact/ reproduce them in everyday interactions until they become so embedded that they are invisible, and taken for granted. One consequence is discursive clo­ sure, processes that mute or distort voices of certain persons or groups: “rather than having open discussions, discussions are foreclosed or there appears to be no need for discussion.”55 A prime example of this is the “don’t ask, d o n ’t tell” policy in the military regarding homosexual identity.

Physical Appearance A final example of communicating power can be found in how organiza­

tions discipline members’ bodies. As organizational communication scholar Angela Trethewey explains, “Control, in its most insidious form—disci­ pline— operates simultaneously on employee minds and bodies.”56 Foucault viewed the body as a central object and target of power in organizations. Through disciplinary practices (including self-surveillance), organization members internalize and reproduce dominant ideologies by transforming their ow n bodies into “carriers” or representatives of prevailing relations of dom ination and subordination. In essence, they become what Foucault called “ docile” bodies.57

Power Matters Yl

Members of dominant as well as nondominant groups learn to conform to formalized expectations or unspoken norms about aspects o f appearance, such as types of clothing, grooming, and acceptable body weight. Many, if not most, of these policies and norms persist without challenge. Moreover, some policies are based on legitimate business necessity, such as safety issues. For instance, a group of black frrefighters claimed that the policy requiring them to be clean shaven was discriminatory. These men suffered from an inflammatory skin condition common to African American men that con­ strains them from shaving every day. Although the judge indicated that the plaintiffs’ concerns were valid, the court ruled in favor of the defendant because respirator masks do not fit properly on firefighters with beards.58

However, many policies are based less on necessity than on masculinist, white, middle-class and middle-aged ideals and aesthetics. Furthermore, although the notion of docile bodies affects everyone, it is especially relevant to nondominant group members because rules of right often require them to mod­ ify their appearances. Other examples o f resistance to traditional norms and pol­ icies include lawsuits related to various policies about bodily appearance such as weight requirements for women; men’s ponytails or earring(s); young persons’ piercings, tattoos, or colored hair; and black people’s braided hairstyles.59

The preceding discussion only begins to address ways that people enact power relations. In addition to written and oral communication, power rela­ tions are expressed through nonverbal phenomena, such as the use of space. Recall, for instance, my description o f the office layout where I worked. Research associates worked in offices with windows and doors, while secre­ tarial staff were located out in the open, in the interior o f the building. Other examples of nonverbal cues o f power include parking privileges, access to bathrooms, and office size and location in the worksite.

Conclusion Power dynamics are inevitable aspects of communicating in organiza­

tions and other contexts. The relationships among power, hegemony, and ideology reveal that organizations are “sites of struggle where different groups compete to shape the social reality o f organizations in ways that serve their own interests.”60 Dominant groups rely on various ideologies to m ain­ tain and reproduce relations o f power, usually through consent o f nondomi­ nant groups rather than coercion. However, nondominant groups and their allies from dominant groups often strive to develop more equitable realities. Moreover, although power processes can exclude and marginalize people, they also can enable and empower them.61

Organizational power dynamics do not occur in a vacuum. Enacting power in organizations resembles and relies on power dynamics in society at large. M ajor forces such as our families, the government, religion, educa­ tion, and the media impact how people enact power in organizations, and vice versa.

38 Chapter Two

Throughout history and currently, many individuals and groups in the United States enact(ed) power relations not only to produce and reproduce domination, but also to empower, liberate, and transform. They visualize(d) alternative ways to take us closer to the ideal of liberty and justice for all. Their responses to hegemony and ideology have wide-ranging effects on soci­ ety at large as well as for organizational communication processes. When Rosa Parks refused to sit in the back of a bus in Montgomery, Alabama, in 1955, a group of citizens formed a grassroots organization whose bus boycott ignited a transformative social movement. This movement formed the back­ drop against which power relations unfolded between my coworkers and me in the early 1970s.

Chapters 1 and 2 established the foundation for the remainder of the book by outlining primary concepts and theoretical perspectives. In the fol­ lowing chapters, I describe and analyze the social construction of social iden­ tity groups in the United States, and I examine related power dynamics. Throughout, I clarify the power of communication.

R e f l e c t i o n M a t t e r s

1. W hat did you find intriguing or interesting in this chapter? Why? 2. How empowered do you usually feel? Why? Do you tend to feel

more empowered in certain situations? Do you tend to feel less empowered in certain situations? Does your sense of empowerment seem related to any of your social identity categories? Explain

3. Recall the example of how the clock disciplines students and faculty in a university setting. Provide another example of discipline (as Fou­ cault conceptualized it) that routinely occurs in educational settings.

4. Offer an example of discipline from your own work experiences, or from the work experiences of someone you know.

5. Discuss examples of simple, technical, and bureaucratic control at workplaces.

6. Does any organization or group that you belong to try to get mem­ bers to identify with it? W hat communication strategies did/do they use? Explain.

7. Apply Foucault’s conception of power to analyze interaction pat­ terns in significant relationships in your life (e.g., child-parent, supervisor-worker, student-teacher, romantic partner).

8. Narrate a personal example of resistance in an organizational con­ text. In the form of a brief story (similar to my coffee tale), explain what happened, and why. If you do not have a story from your life, obtain a story from someone you know, or from the media (e.g., a movie or television show). Emphasize communication processes that the individuals enacted.

Power Matters 39

9. Have you experienced any co-culmral communication challenges (i.e., communication between members of dominant and nondom i­ nant groups)—as either a dominant or nondominant group m em ­ ber—that I describe in this chapter? Explain.

10. How is language a primary medium for communicating power? Give examples from your experiences.

11. Review the list of dominant ideologies and select any that you have experienced. Explain and give examples.

12. Based on Tool #2 (p. 29), how would you rate your level of media lit­ eracy? Explain.