Riot On The Streets Summary

The documentary “Riot on the Streets” presented a multifaceted and complex demonstration of anger and frustration from different ethnic and racial groups and its relation to the power institutions. The 1992 Rodney King Riots, also referred to as the L.A Race Riots, unearthed the frustrations that existed in Los Angeles with the justice system. Regarding the Asian population and specifically the Korean, the docudrama exposed the vulnerability of the community as immigrants and developed a narrative that had been ignored at the time of the event. Additionally, the docudrama emphasized a change in mentality and perspective reactionary to the riots and the losses Koreans had. Modeled and paralleled with the bendability of 24 karat gold, Koreans

and Asian groups refused to be perceived as malleable to society and the system. Congruently, it was also interesting to analyze the conflicting perspectives between the cohabiting black communities and the Asian communities, and how such led to the targeting of Korean-owned stores. Despite it being presented partially as a drama, the film exposed instrumental factors in the development of the riots- the interactions and inclusion of racial and ethnic distinctions included.
The unclarity surrounding the cause, development, and understanding of the demonstrations of civil unrest exhibited in the L.A. Riots of 1992 have driven the need for this investigation. The relationships between the Asian (Korean) ethnic communities with the white community (the LAPD included) and the black community were greatly impacted and distorted during the events and exponentially furthered the aftermath. The role of the media coverage was contributory and guiding to the way the events developed.
Initially, the alleged display of police brutality by Los Angeles police in relation to the arrest of Rodney King and the history of complaints against the police department for police brutality heightened the pent-up tensions that had been building among the habitants of the city of Los Angeles. The strain and pressure climaxed on April 29th 1992, when the four police officers involved were acquitted of all charges. The reactionary response of the black and Latino community towards the verdict and the LAPD’s impunity was one of overt and irate discontent- demonstrated by large displays of violence, looting, and the ignition of fires throughout the city. My research and understanding on the events was primarily conducted through the observance of media usage and the consequent analysis of bias and hysteria-driven reports, as well as the employment of sensationalistic and exaggerated accounts. I also relied on external analyses of the interracial and interethnic workings of Los Angeles in 1992 as to understand the context surrounding the riots and the targeting of Korean American and Asian businesses.
The climate leading up to the riots and the unjust targeting of Korean businesses was tense and charged with a, not general but existing, racial animosity between Asian (Korean) merchants and the African American community.

With the city changing demographically, many members of the African American community saw Korean migration as an invasion. From the black perspective, Korean migrants could be described as rude and disrespectful, as outsiders. Both representations lacked the factor of self-determination until 1992. Prior to 1992, white America and the black community had presented Korean and Asian citizens as a “model minority” or as undesirable- this evident by the depictions of rapper Ice Cube and film maker Spike Lee. The article titled “Violence and trauma as constitutive elements in Korean American racial identity formation” by Rose Kim points out that it wasn’t until after the violence that Koreans and other Asian groups felt the need and sought after the opportunity to forge their own image and present themselves to America. She states that “this narrative emerged belatedly in response to the violence and marked a significant shift in the collective consciousness of Korean Americans” (2010). The apparent distinction and divide among neighboring ethnic groups was due to the different demographic characteristics of the Korean immigrants residing in L.A. Korean migrants which were not similar to other minorities, such as African Americans and Latinos. This being in the sense that their previous socioeconomic standing was not parallel to the lower class in America. Most of them had high levels of education and specialized careers. As they were part of the Korean upper class, they didn’t see themselves as minorities. With their arrival came the assimilation into the American social and racial hierarchy- they saw their progress trumped by language barriers and by the fact that they were now considered a minority. According to Angelo Oh’s “An Issue of Time and

Place…”, at the time of the riots, there were no Korean American judges appointed to the county Superior Courts, political appointees, or advocacy groups that pushes for changes in policy that benefited the Korean American community. By being ostracized by the society around them and with no real representation in the political power, Korean immigrants invested their money, efforts, and time into small convenience stores and swap meets. Being a family owned businesses, these stores were attended by the family members. Buying retail and selling as retail, the prices their products were sold for were higher if compared to establishments like Walmart. These factors contributed to the sentiment of discontent felt by the black community. The neighboring black community were left to feel like they were profiting from them and as if Asians made the conscious decision not to invest back into their community as they didn’t hire black people. On the other hand, Asian merchants had established in areas ridden by poverty and violence. Prior to the riots, Asian merchants had been the victims of violence against them, often to the point of death. Thus, an animosity and culture of fear was materialized. These conflicting perspectives and misunderstanding created tensions between both communities prior to the riots.
The found information disclosed the central misrepresentation of Asians involvement in the riots and the biased and erroneous portrayal of Asians as violent and militant. The media, specifically the Los Angeles Times and the Sentinel forged specific narratives about the way the riots developed. Michael Thornton’s analysis titled “Meaningful Dialogue? The Los Angeles Sentinel’s Depiction of Black and Asian American Relations” discusses the importance of racial formation and the role it played in the development of the events. He emphasized the white media’s fixation with sensationalizing disputes and tensions between people of different ethnic and racial backgrounds. He stated that the media “link cultural symbols, which identify and give meaning to race, to social structures that organize humans and resources along racial lines. To manage these resources, racial projects provide interpretations, representations, or explanations of racial dynamics and efforts” (Thornton 1277). He also exposed that journalists often consciously pick certain issues, events, and sources to emphasize more than others. In his scrutiny, he found that Asian narratives were often ignored unless they fit the stereotypes Americans had of the Korean community. In their depictions Asians were used as business models or their stories often involved violence. Images of armed Korean men were cemented as the lasting legacy of the L.A. race riots. Assistant professor at the University of Texas, João H. Costa Vargas and his dissertation based on and titled “The Los Angeles Times’ coverage of the 1992 rebellion” concurs with Thorton’s findings. Through his research, he presents the reader with an identifiable audience- he includes a quote from the head of the Times Mirror Empire, Otis Chandler, in which the middle and upper class were identified as their intended target and audience, the people who they wrote for. Vargas indicates that
“At the very least, therefore, we can state that the Times’ coverage of the civil rebellion was characterized by its alignment, even if involuntary, with widely held, white-dominated, hegemonic perspectives on racialized people, especially blacks. Rather than constituting an isolated narrative, the newspaper’s rendition of such events was in dialogue with, and contributed to, the further consolidation of shared understandings of racialized social hierarchies, justice, and politics” (212).
It is very conclusive to find this logic applicable to the Asian community and the proposal that their narrative was distorted as well. According to Kim’s documentary “Clash of Colors”, the media antagonized the Korean community and their efforts to protect their property and their own wellbeing. The LAPD and the white community of reporters and journalists in charge of patrolling and recounting the events ignored the vulnerability of the Asian community and vilified their approaches. The video footage and interviews indicated the lackadaisical efficiency and apathy of the police and the absence of a conscious intervention protocol. The implemented procedure ignored the problem area yet focused all units to the protection of the suburbs; not suppressing the riots and lessening the ramifications but merely containing the area. Their calls of help her ignored, the 911 service being denied to them. Later, the Korean community were told to pack and leave town by the police, without any regard of the possessions and property that they would leave behind. Yet, with the intent of exercising the second amendment right of bearing arms, Korean volunteers saw the responsibility of maintaining the order forced upon them. Using their experience from their mandatory service in the military, Korean volunteers took up arms and set up a guard to protect their property from looters and their violent approaches. Once more invalidating their struggles, the police chose to arrest these Korean volunteers and prevent them from protecting their businesses and from lessening the damage caused.
The targeting of Korean-owned businesses by black looters stemmed from the racial animosity that had been building up to that point. The assassination of Latasha Harlins by Korean store-owner Soon Ja Du exacerbated the tensions among both ethnic groups. Du merely received a 5-year probation, 400 community service hours and a $500 fine for the murder. The incident and the insignificancy of the sentencing was appealed but unanimously upheld in April 1992, a week before the riots. The observers created a parallel in the Latisha Harlins ruling and the Rodney King verdict- both emphasizing a structural and institutional unjust system. The timing of the decision triggering the targeting of Asian-owned businesses during the riot demonstrations. The black community also resented the lack of investment in black entrepreneurship from the banks in comparison to their financing of Asian businesses. These factors combined with the sensationalist reports of crimes involving Asians and blacks forged an illusion of reality and hyped the tensions and reactions of both ethnic groups.