Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah... pretty sure that group is not comprised of the type of people goodthinkers are supposed to be concerned about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vacommonwealth
I don't think I saw anything on the national news about the Minneapolis attack. races reversed FBI civil rights investigation
While I know what you'll are assuming (bunch of black or minority kids attacking a white kid), neither video report nor the written portion said that was the case.
That of course would be part of what you'll are getting at, but do we know for certain (from some source) that it was a black on white crime?
While I know what you'll are assuming (bunch of black or minority kids attacking a white kid), neither video report nor the written portion said that was the case.
That of course would be part of what you'll are getting at, but do we know for certain (from some source) that it was a black on white crime?
`
Is it lost on you that if they were white kids - it would have been reported as '20 white kids attacked a white boy'???
No, we're protesting against the blatant double-standard of liberals and the media (but I repeat myself). If 20 black people attack 2 white people, the attackers are described as "youths." But if 20 white people attack 2 black people, the attackers are described as "a mob of racist white people committing a hate crime." Everyone knows that these two scenarios would be reported dramatically differently, and we are frustrated that the media steadfastly refuses to admit it.
You answered your own question in your post right above this one. Journalists don't want to state the races involved when it's black-on-white crime because they don't want to stigmatize black people as being criminals. They prefer to maintain the narrative that white people are irredeemably racist and black people are perpetual victims. Maybe that was true 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago; but the evidence that stares us in the face concerning the relative frequency of black-on-white versus white-on-black crime suggests that things have undergone a dramatic change. But for whatever reason, liberals (of which most journalists are) just can't bring themselves to admit this.
No, we do not know with certainly that this is black on white crime. But we can be pretty sure the attackers were not white or it would have been mentioned.
You answered your own question in your post right above this one. Journalists don't want to state the races involved when it's black-on-white crime because they don't want to stigmatize black people as being criminals. They prefer to maintain the narrative that white people are irredeemably racist and black people are perpetual victims. Maybe that was true 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago; but the evidence that stares us in the face concerning the relative frequency of black-on-white versus white-on-black crime suggests that things have undergone a dramatic change. But for whatever reason, liberals (of which most journalists are) just can't bring themselves to admit this.
Actually I should have been more specific with my question.
I am not asking why most of the MSM is liberal in their reporting, as that is self evident (though obviously not professional).
I was asking if you can think of other reasons they report such incidents in the manner they do. I can think of at least two others, both interrelated.
Actually I should have been more specific with my question.
I am not asking why most of the MSM is liberal in their reporting, as that is self evident (though obviously not professional).
I was asking if you can think of other reasons they report such incidents in the manner they do. I can think of at least two others, both interrelated.
`
The only other thing I can think of is that there is a segment of the white population that seems to be ashamed of their whiteness. It's as if they assume responsibility for all the bad things that white people have done in history, without realizing that they are not to blame for the actions of their ancestors, and without taking credit for the good things that white people have done. I really can't understand this form of self-loathing, but it does seem be a rather common trait amongst some on the Left.
No, we do not know with certainly that this is black on white crime. But we can be pretty sure the attackers were not white or it would have been mentioned.
I am not disagreeing in general with the principle of why most MSM outlets exclude race with it is black on white crime.
However I am saying that before we jump to such conclusions (like knee-jerk liberals do), we should get the facts first.
BTW - I know you mis-typed your reply, as the report most likely would not have mentioned race if the attackers were all white either.
Just as they do not mention race when it is black on black or brown on brown crime.
It is only when white people attack minorities is race prominently mentioned, even when the crime has nothing to do with race.
`
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
