GREENSBORO, NC -- When it comes to describing criminal suspects, the News & Record will scrub race from descriptions in police press releases if it deems the descriptions to be otherwise not "complete." Fair enough, that's their prerogative. One might think that as much information as possible, no matter how scant, would aide the public in helping to identify possible criminals—presumably, that's why the police provide the information to begin with—but the News & Record regularly proves itself allergic to inclusion of all the facts, so no real surprise that it would be okay with intentionally withholding public information.
But here's the thing: Why is that delineation made for race but not gender? While the News & Record will take police descriptions that include gender and race and scrub race from what they print, they will still report gender. Even as they cite the lack of "complete descriptions" as the reason for not reporting suspects' race, they will still identify the same suspects as "male."
I question the journalistic purpose of scrubbing anything from police issued descriptions to begin with, but it is truly unfathomable to me why a newspaper would describe "white males" as simply "males." The way I see it, either as much information as is available should be reported or, if characteristics are to be scrubbed because the description is otherwise too broad, then gender should not be reported either. If not "white males," it should be "people." What am I missing? What is the justification for reporting only the gender of suspects when only gender and race are known?
Because mention of race triggers derogation in a way that mention of gender does not. I'm not claiming that's a valid argument, just that that was the thinking when I was there.
ReplyDeleteSo that's the reason? To avoid some unspecified generalized "derogation?" of -- wait, who exactly? Anybody who has race as a characteristic?
ReplyDeleteNot only am I unconvinced that possibility, to the extent it may exist, wouldn't also apply to gender, I am certain that it is not the job of a news organization to withhold information in an effort to manipulate readers' reactions. That's not news, that's propaganda.
Thinking about it a little bit more, your explanation (which I understand is merely repeating what you know, not your personal explanation) makes really no sense.
ReplyDeleteIf the mention of race can cause derogatory thoughts—and the News & Record see as part of its role to manipulate the thoughts of its readers—why mention race ever? How does the mention of race cease to be derogatory if it is also accompanied by weight, age and height? Is a reader inclined to have a derogatory opinion of a suspect merely described by race and gender going to have a different opinion if a few other characteristics are included?
I'm sorry, but it seems impossible to come up with a justification for the News & Record's practices that isn't nonsense.
Yvonne Johnson was Greensboro's first black mayor. I think they printed that. So, I am even more confused now. I am going to go ask Billy.
ReplyDelete