XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.homosexuality XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In article <t1i9p7$326l5$65@news.freedyn.de>
<governor.swill@gmail.com > wrote:

That's why

<https://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/suspect- arrested-yesterdays-brooklyn-subway-shooting-768x512.jpg>

Frank James, the man arrested for Tuesday's New York City subway
shooting, is a black nationalist and outspoken racist who railed
against whites, Jews, and Hispanics. A careful reader of the New
York Times could be forgiven for overlooking that. In a nearly
2,000-word article on the attack, James's race is not mentioned.
The same is true for the coverage offered up by Reuters; the
Washington Post only mentioned James's race in relation to his
condemnation of training programs for "low-income Black youths."

Media critics on the right say that the conspicuous omission of
James's race from these news reports illustrates a trend among
prestige papers, which deemphasize or omit the race of non-white
criminals while playing up the race of white offenders. But is
it a real pattern?

Yes. A Washington Free Beacon review of hundreds of articles
published by major papers over a span of two years finds that
papers downplay the race of non-white offenders, mentioning
their race much later in articles than they do for white
offenders. These papers are also three to four times more likely
to mention an offender's race at all if he is white, a disparity
that grew in the wake of George Floyd's death in 2020 and the
protests that followed.

The Free Beacon collected data on nearly 1,100 articles about
homicides from six major papers, all written between 2019 and
2021. Those papers included the Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles
Times, New York Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, San Francisco
Chronicle, and Minneapolis's Star-Tribune—representatives of
each paper did not return requests for comment for this article.
For each article, we collected the offender's and victim's name
and race, and noted where in the article the offender's race was
mentioned, if at all.

The data suggest an alarming editorial trend in which major
papers routinely omit information from news reports, presenting
readers with a skewed picture of who does and doesn't commit
crime. These editorial choices are part and parcel with the
"racial reckoning" that swept newsrooms in the wake of Floyd's
murder, which saw journalists dramatically overhauling crime
coverage to emphasize the view that the criminal justice system
is racist at the root—perhaps at the expense of honesty about
individual offenders' crimes.

The chart above indicates that papers are far quicker to mention
the race of white murderers than black. (Those two races account
for 92 percent of mentions in the data, so others are not
shown.) Half of articles about a white offender mention his race
within the first 15 percent of the article. In articles about
black offenders, by contrast, mentions come overwhelmingly
toward the end of the piece. Half of the articles that mention a
black offender's race do not do so until at least 60 percent of
the way through, and more than 20 percent save it until the last
fifth of the article.

Of course, journalists choose not only where in a piece to
mention an offender's race, but also whether to mention it at
all, and omissions can skew a reader's perspective.

To measure these choices, we identified the race of the offender
in roughly 900 stories where his name, but not his race, was
mentioned, first by looking at the race of people with the same
name in Census data, and then hand-confirming race based on mug
shots or other images published in local news stories.

Doing so permits an estimate of how often journalists highlight
an offender's race—or don't. Again, the skew is startling: White
offenders' race was mentioned in roughly 1 out of every 4
articles, compared with 1 in 17 articles about a black offender
and 1 in 33 articles about a Hispanic offender.

This effect is driven in part by a handful of major news stories
involving white perpetrators, though the attention paid to these
stories is also an editorial choice. But even after omitting
reports about white offenders Kyle Rittenhouse, Derek Chauvin,
and the killers of Ahmaud Arbery, the race of white offenders is
mentioned in 16 percent of cases, two to three times the rate at
which the race of black offenders is mentioned. (Middle Eastern
offenders were labeled as Asian in this analysis, but labeling
them as white results in only a small change to the race mention
rate.)

This disparity widened following George Floyd's murder. Before
May of 2020, papers were roughly twice as likely to mention the
race of a white (13 percent of stories) versus a black
perpetrator (7 percent). After May of 2020, the numbers were 28
percent and 4 percent, a ratio of seven to one. Even omitting
the above-mentioned stories, papers still mentioned race in 23
percent of stories about white killers post-Floyd, a six-to-one
ratio.

It could be that there were more stories in which a white
offender's race was relevant after Floyd's death than before.
But it is also easy to see how the increased attention to white
murderers represents a change in what reporters and editors
thought it was, and was not, important for their readers to hear
about, particularly after they publicly committed to revamping
their crime reporting following Floyd's death.

Newspapers across the country—including the Inquirer—stopped
publishing mugshot galleries in part because, two Florida
newspapers wrote, they "may have reinforced negative
stereotypes." Others committed to overhauling their language,
substituting phrases like "formerly incarcerated person" for
"felon" to respond to what the Poynter Institute described as an "inextricabl[e]" link between reporting on crime and "race and
racism." And the Associated Press amended its style guide to
discourage the use of the word "riot," which allegedly has
racist connotations.

At the same time, major newsrooms have prioritized "racial
justice" coverage, part of a push for what the journalist-cum-
activist Wesley Lowery called "moral clarity" over
"objectivity": writing news reports that take the sides on
contested issues with the goal of advancing a political
objective.

Such "moral clarity" may mean downplaying black crime and
emphasizing white crime. In the case of offenders like James, it
means leaving readers in the dark about an important element of
the story—journalistic malfeasance that is, of course, in
service of the greater good.

Charles Fain Lehman is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a
contributing editor of City Journal.

Published under: Crime, Media, Media Bias, Murder, New York
Times, Racism, The Washington Post, Woke

https://freebeacon.com/media/yes-the-media-bury-the-race-of- murderers-if-theyre-not-white/

Lee is an idiot.

Kill those who misuse guns and televise it.

Kill anyone else who objects, televise that too.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)