Zhou 1 Jonathan Zhou Professor Cooperman HIST135 - Section 0102 November 5, 2021 The Tulsa race massacre took place in 1921 on the night of May 31 through the early morning hours of June 1. Tulsa’s newspapers played an outside role in the matter, contributing directly to the riots that claimed so many innocent black lives and even spinning accounts of the massacre in its aftermath. Randy Krehbiel’s novel “Tulsa 1921: Reporting a Massacre” gives important insight into the details of the Tulsa race massacre, and the role of the media in driving the narrative behind the event. Randy Krehbiel grew up in western Oklahoma, joining the ranks of the Tulsa World as a writer and reporter in 1979. Krehbiel was tasked with creating for the Tulsa World a Tulsa Race Massacre archive, which would then serve as a resource for future coverage. The decades of research and writing Krehbiel invested in the project culminated in his book: “Tulsa 1921: Reporting a Massacre.” In his book, Krehbiel makes sure to draw attention to how the contemporary news sources of the time influenced and portrayed this dark chapter of American history. In 1921, Tulsa’s Greenwood District, dubbed “Black Wall Street,” was one of the most affluent African American communities in the United States. On May 30 of that year, a black man named Dick Rowland was riding an elevator with a white woman named Sarah Page when an incident occurred resulting in Rowland’s arrest. The following day, the Tulsa Tribune released a story alleging that Dick Rowland attempted to rape Sarah Page. The inflammatory report led to the gathering of a large white mob outside of the courthouse in which Rowland was held, Zhou 2 Jonathan Zhou Professor Cooperman HIST135 - Section 0102 November 5, 2021 culminating in a confrontation with a group of armed African Americans trying to protect Rowland before he had a chance at a fair trial. Shots were fired, and the blacks were pursued back to the Greenwood District. White rioters burned and looted Greenwood before the National Guard arrived. Contemporary reports of death began at thirty-six but could have been upwards of three hundred. With how widespread the media is, the information that it generates, whether it be factual or fictional, can easily influence a population’s actions and opinions. Such was the case in the Tulsa race massacre. The Tulsa Tribune, one of the main news sources for Tulsa at the time, played a direct role in instigating the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. The day after Dick Rowland’s arrest, the Tulsa Tribune published a story on Rowland’s arrest with the headline “Nab Negro for Attacking Girl in Elevator” (Krehbiel 32). The brief story boldly claimed that “a negro delivery boy” was “charged with attempting to assault the 17-year-old white elevator girl in the Drexel building,” having “attacked her, scratching her hands and face and tearing her clothes” (33), even though Rowland had yet to be charged with anything. The “story was freighted with racially charged language,” portraying Rowland as “the sort of ‘shifty Negro” who...hung about deserted hallways looking for something to steal; the sort who was impertinent to white women and attacked teenage orphans working their way through school, tore their clothes, ravished them in public elevators, and ran cravenly away’” (33). Thus, the Tribune essentially “accused a young black man of attempting to rape an innocent white girl” (33). The story appealed to the racial Zhou 3 Jonathan Zhou Professor Cooperman HIST135 - Section 0102 November 5, 2021 prejudices of the time and seemed specifically tailored towards its audience’s preexisting disdain towards African Americans. Given these racial tensions, and with notions of vigilante justice still alive in the west, the inflammatory story was bound to lead to violence. It was almost as if the story itself was a call to action for white Tulsans to rally against Rowland. Many were aware of the inflammatory effect the Tulsa Tribune’s story had. Parties including the Tulsa World, Chief of Detectives J.W. Patton, and commander of the National Guard sent to restore order in Tulsa, Charles Barrett, blamed the Tulsa Tribune for the “colorful and untrue account” of the Roland-Page affair that “incited such a racial spirit upon the whites” (Krehbiel 89). General Barrett cited “‘yellow journalism’” as being “responsible for touching off the riot” (89), calling out the Tribune as nothing more than a “sensation-seeking newspaper” (90). Despite the clear role of the Tulsa Tribune in inciting racial violence, contemporary news sources managed to pull off a role reversal in regards to the Tulsa race massacre; whites were inciting violence, yet blacks were largely blamed. In an editorial published just two days after the riots, the Tribune “poisoned the well with a first sentence that informed readers, ‘A thoroughly bad element in the negro district has for some time past been collecting firearms and ammunition,’” even referring to the alleged activities as “‘war’ plans” (Krehbiel 114). The Tulsa World, although sympathetic to the plight of the Greenwood residents, didn’t hesitate to call out the “‘bad n*ggers’” that “armed themselves” and “defiantly sought to take the law into their own Zhou 4 Jonathan Zhou Professor Cooperman HIST135 - Section 0102 November 5, 2021 hands” (114). The World warns its readers of these “bad n*ggers,” claiming they have the potential to “start anew the holocaust,” and so must be “controlled by their own kind” (114). Using extremely harrowing language, the World helps the Tribune further convince Tulsa residents that the blacks were indeed totally at fault for the calamity. Public opinion of the riot, “driven by local newspaper reporting,” overwhelmingly shifted towards the notion that “black Tulsans brought their destruction upon themselves by failing to control their unruly elements” (116). As the Tribune puts it, “‘The bad n*ggers started it...Why were these bad n*ggers not made to feel the force of law and respect the force of law?” (Krehbiel 115). Even the New York Times reported that “‘The negroes were either expecting or preparing for trouble,’ and claimed that explosions in some of the burning buildings were ammunition caches” (90). All of the aforementioned news sources paint the picture that Greenwood residents were planning some sort of negro uprising and that putting down said uprising was necessary. The aftermath of the Tulsa race massacre demonstrates how easily the media can shift the narrative or influence an audience’s perspective of an event. A similar instance of media sources spinning a narrative and inciting violence can be seen recently in India. Facebook products, WhatsApp in particular, are being flooded with inflammatory content meant to create hostility between Hindus and Muslims. Hindu nationalist groups are using Facebook and WhatsApp as a platform to demonize Muslims, spreading all sorts of misinformation to generate anti-Muslim sentiments among Hindus, just as the Tulsa Zhou 5 Jonathan Zhou Professor Cooperman HIST135 - Section 0102 November 5, 2021 Tribune used yellow journalism to spark hostility between whites and blacks in the lead up to the race riots. According to the Wall Street Journal, examples of inflammatory content include “material blaming Muslims for the spread of Covid-19 and assertions that Muslim men are targeting Hindu women for marriage as a ‘form of Muslim takeover’ of the country.” As exemplified by the Tulsa race massacre, rumors spread by media sources have the potential to sow seeds of hatred which culminate in violence, as it did “in late February 2020, when communal violence in Delhi left 53 dead.” Given how prevalent social media is and the speed at which content can be generated in the palm of one’s hand, Krehbiel’s emphasis on the media’s influence over the opinions and interactions of society holds more weight now than ever. Randy Krehbiel’s “Tulsa 1921: Reporting a Massacre” is important not only as a record of Oklahoma history but as a reminder of the power the media has over the views and even actions of people. One should not underestimate the ability of words and the profound effects they can have. I applaud the exemplary job that Krehbiel does at relaying this principle. Krehbiel’s detailed telling of the events following the “story that set Tulsa ablaze” truly captures the bedlam that insured and immerses his readers into the chaos of the moment. His descriptions of how public opinion was overwhelmingly turned against black Tulsans surely captured the sympathies of readers over the unfair and despotic treatment of the Greenwood residents. Overall, Krehbiel’ novel serves well as a commentary on both the Tulsa race massacre of 1921 and the important implications of the tragedy.
