Race, Murder, Journalism

Thanks to a blind link to PostWatch over there, I see La Shawn Barber writing about race in Media and Dog-Bites-Man:

Close your eyes and imagine reading a news story about two white men breaking into a black man’s house in the Georgetown area of Washington, D.C., slashing his throat and killing him, and attempting to rape his girlfriend, also black. Picture a white woman waiting in the getaway car.

Now envision the media coverage. Would it be a stretch to say that newspapers, 24-hour cable TV channels, local stations, national networks, and Oprah would converge on the area and set up camp to provide blanket, non-stop coverage of the atrocity? Can’t you see it? Every race-based group, faux civil rights organization — including women’s advocacy groups — and so-called black leaders and the clownish New Black Panthers descending on Georgetown demanding an old-fashioned lynching…

Take the man-bites-dog story above, reverse the skin colors, and you’re left with a classic yet ordinarily dull dog-bites-man crime story....

She's writing about a horrible crime in which Alan Senitt, a white man, was murdered and his white female companion barely escaped rape. All the suspects are black, as shown in a video from the local NBC channel 4.  Their race isn't identified in the Post's story, written by Lori Montgomery and Kevin Sullivan. The Post's policy, as I understand it, directs reporters to normally omit racial identifications in these stories as superfluous. That's led to sadly comical situations in which the race of unapprehended suspects remains unknown. Oh yes, that will help the community track them down.

However.

Even though I agree with Barber's larger point about the unique three-alarm fires declared by the media when blacks are victims of whites--and have written about that myself--the racial angles in crime coverage cut in some bewildering directions, as I expect Barber would agree. Today's story by Montgomery and Sullivan, Man Slain In Attack on Couple in Georgetown, is on the front page and runs with a lot of detail into A9. Most of the (many) victims of murder in D.C. are black, and most don't get this kind of coverage. Most of the murderers are black, too. Intra-racial murder itself, in a majority-black city, is common enough to be tagged as a "dog-bites-man" story (the expression being old newspaper shorthand for routine events that merit little or no coverage).

One more thing: In the NBC4 video, one of the Georgetown residents they interview says that "now we'll have to start locking doors."

Now?

UPDATE: Not exactly on point, but here's an old post of mine in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina that shows how the Post thinks about race.

Comments

[TJM]

So I guess you discount the idea that the victim's background and resume don't warrant this story having slightly more import than usual? You're really stretching to find fault with this placement on the front page.
But,hey,any conspiracy in a storm,I suppose.

[Christopher Fotos]

"Even though I agree with Barber's larger point," which is in the post above that you allegedly read, is a little flag calling attention to the fact that a front-page story about a white man being murdered by a black assailant contradicts Barber's point about such crimes being ignored. Nor do I say this one should have been ignored, nor do I find fault with placing it on the front page.

Please read all the way to the end of these posts. They're usually shorter than the stories they're referencing.