Perhaps you’ve heard of a small news story the past few days. Apparently a hateful, racist, conspiracy theorist loaded up with gas masks, bombs, and smoke grenades attacked the wonderfully diverse NYC. He was also described as 5’5″, 170 lbs, wearing a grey hoodie, and a high vis construction vest.
If you’re a typical news blip reader, this probably paints one singular picture, and that’s by design.
WHITE.
REPUBLICAN.
RACIST.
INCEL.
Given that you’re a based chad Hyphen-Report enjoyer, you already know this guy was a black supremacist, constantly spewing anti-White hatred, who advocated for the death of “Whitey”.
What did he mean by this?
Is the media hiding facts like this, and to what extent? Let’s investigate.
Frank James
You would think that someone with such an obvious political motive would have this detailed in the media articles covering him, but this simply isn’t the case.
- The New York Times fails to mention his race in their nearly 2000 word diatribe
- Reuters similarly follows course with a complete lack of this descriptor
- The Washington Post actually does mention it, but only under the context of him being against training programs for black “youths”
Media be like
Other fascinating editorial decisions include CNN calling him a “black gentleman” and the NY Post inexplicably removing “black” and only “black” from their cover up write up.
And as it turns out, the above trends are far more wide reaching than you might imagine.
A Vast Cover Up
In an analysis from the Free Beacon covering over 1100 articles from Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, San Francisco Chronicle, and Minneapolis’s Star-Tribune, we begin to see how deep this agenda goes.
- These papers are 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.
- This is a result from the George Floyd “racial reckoning” which showed a major shift in journalists emphasizing that the criminal justice system is inherently racist.
Here, we see that most articles will mention a murderer’s race almost immediately if White, but wait until the final third of the article to mention race if the suspect is black.
This, of course, assumes they even mention it at all..
This chart reveals that not only are journalists less likely to list the race of blacks early on in the article, but are much less likely to mention it at all.
This follows the quite ahead of its time Coulter’s Law, pegged back in 2015.
Getting back into the “racial reckoning” following George Floyd’s Summer of peaceful protests, we see that while some were busy looting Target and Foot Locker, journalists were busy giving their news coverage strategy a complete overhaul.
While a statistically significant decrease in the mentioning of “black” for a suspect’s race was more or less to be expected in current year, we see a dramatic uptick in calling out the race if they happen to be White.
A Change In Agenda
Going further, we see even more subversive changes in media reporting.
- The Inquirer stopped publishing mugshots due to them reinforcing “negative stereotypes”
- Others ceased the use of terms like “felon” in favor of “formerly incarcerated person”
- Meanwhile, the AP discouraged the use of terms like “riot” due to racist connotations
The New York Times claims this is a difficult, but necessary change in order to promote “moral clarity” over “objectivity.” This would be an insane stance to read just ten years back, but we now live in a world where objectivity, truth, and actual clarity are not goals to achieve, but obstacles to overcome.
