Data is presented as dots that represent specific groups of people. There are green dots for Whites, blue dots for Blacks, yellow dots for Hispanics, red dots for Asians, and gray dots for Others.
There is no dot for American Indians.
Most survey's don't list us as an option. I've gotten several phone surveys over the years about politics wherein the caller is also collecting demographic data. "American Indian" is never one of the choices I'm given. We are, to use the jargon, "statistically insignificant" in terms of the data. We are, however, overrepresented in terms of Native images on commercial products (like Land O'Lakes) or for school mascots. But wait! Those images are stereotypes, not reality.
Who we are, in reality, is... invisible. Invisible as "other."
At the Times page, I entered the zip code for Nambe Pueblo in the search box. You can do it to, and see what I mean. Our zip code is 87506. You'll end up on a map that includes Santa Fe. Lot of yellow dots clustered there, and some white ones, too.
If you hover your mouse over the map (at the Times site), specific "census tracts" pop up. In those pop up boxes, you'll get data on that tract. When I hover the mouse over the area where Nambe is located, the data I get says:
Census tract 10103
Population estimate: 1,710
Interesting! "Others: 31%" is the tribal members of a federally recognized tribal nation.
When I hover the mouse over the area south of Santa Fe where Kewa Pueblo (formerly known as Santo Domingo) is, here's what the box says:
Census tract 9402
Population estimate: 3,574
In that box, "Others: 96%" is tribal members of another federally recognized tribal nation.
Messed up, don't you think? The people (American Indians) that Americans purport to "honor" with mascots and other stereotypical images don't rate high enough for who we are IN REALITY to be listed... What would happen if all those defenders of that stereotypical imagery rallied around us as people of the present day instead of defending the use of those stereotypes?