AbstractWe review 1982–1984 articles identifying Superfund sites in three national newspapers. Articles almost never identify the race of nearby residents. Based on sites receiving disproportionate coverage, readers might conclude that Superfund generally affected white, working-class families, but results do not support this narrative. In a pooled sample, neither race nor income predicts the number of times a site gets mentioned. When the sample is partitioned by newspaper or by each newspaper's coverage of nearby sites, a positive relationship emerges between the proportion of Hispanic or nonwhite residents and the number of articles about a site. We discuss this apparent contradiction.
