Race Crimes and the People Who Encourage Them
I may be wrong on this but isn’t one of the principal
responsibilities of every police department and their counterparts on university
security police departments to prevent crime and apprehend criminals?
Apparently the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) doesn’t think so anymore than do black activists at the University of Minnesota.
In an article in their magazine, SPJ redundantly warned their membership that when reporting racial violence, mentioning race in their stories is a journalistic no-no, in their politically correct opinion and regardless of the obvious fact that identifying the race of an assailant, a rapist, a mugger, etc. is critical to catching and prosecuting them and is usually among the first questions asked by 911 dispatchers and among the first detail dispatchers transmit to patrol cars.
According to WND.com, the article reflected “what dozens of chapters around the country tell its members in regular seminars: Unless someone is considerate enough to wave around a sign saying, ‘Kill Honky,’ or issue a press release or utter racial expletives in front of lots of witnesses, the fact that the suspects just happen to be black has no bearing on the story.”
The oldest and largest organization of journalists in America unprofessionally added that anyone doubting their no-no policy, was probably a “racist and hater.”
Oddly coincidental with the SPJ’s major breach of journalistic ethics, members of UM’s African American and African Studies, Black Faculty and Staff Association, Black Graduate and Professional Student Association, Black Men’s Forum, Black Student Union and Huntley House for African American Males jointly directed a letter to UM president and a vp.
The letter, sent over a month after the campus locked down because of an attempted robbery and after university police had wrongfully identified a black student as the suspect, made no mention of the school’s 25 robberies, an increase of 27% percent over the last few years, but it did register a slew of black complaints.
While initially professing deep concern over campus safety, the letter-writers clearly felt that racial profiling was their overriding interest since it could be absolutely devastating for black male students.
An excerpt: “[We] unanimously agree that campus safety should be of the UMPD’s utmost importance; however, efforts to reduce crime should never be at the expense of our Black men, or any specific group of people likely to be targeted. In addition to causing Black men to feel unsafe and distrusted, racial profiling is proven to inflict negative psychological effects on its victims.”
At a forum on the profiling issue, Ian Taylor Jr., president of the Black Men’s Forum, said members of his organization feel threatened when racial description [sic] of suspects are provided in university crime alerts. . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=35462.)
Apparently the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) doesn’t think so anymore than do black activists at the University of Minnesota.
In an article in their magazine, SPJ redundantly warned their membership that when reporting racial violence, mentioning race in their stories is a journalistic no-no, in their politically correct opinion and regardless of the obvious fact that identifying the race of an assailant, a rapist, a mugger, etc. is critical to catching and prosecuting them and is usually among the first questions asked by 911 dispatchers and among the first detail dispatchers transmit to patrol cars.
According to WND.com, the article reflected “what dozens of chapters around the country tell its members in regular seminars: Unless someone is considerate enough to wave around a sign saying, ‘Kill Honky,’ or issue a press release or utter racial expletives in front of lots of witnesses, the fact that the suspects just happen to be black has no bearing on the story.”
The oldest and largest organization of journalists in America unprofessionally added that anyone doubting their no-no policy, was probably a “racist and hater.”
Oddly coincidental with the SPJ’s major breach of journalistic ethics, members of UM’s African American and African Studies, Black Faculty and Staff Association, Black Graduate and Professional Student Association, Black Men’s Forum, Black Student Union and Huntley House for African American Males jointly directed a letter to UM president and a vp.
The letter, sent over a month after the campus locked down because of an attempted robbery and after university police had wrongfully identified a black student as the suspect, made no mention of the school’s 25 robberies, an increase of 27% percent over the last few years, but it did register a slew of black complaints.
While initially professing deep concern over campus safety, the letter-writers clearly felt that racial profiling was their overriding interest since it could be absolutely devastating for black male students.
An excerpt: “[We] unanimously agree that campus safety should be of the UMPD’s utmost importance; however, efforts to reduce crime should never be at the expense of our Black men, or any specific group of people likely to be targeted. In addition to causing Black men to feel unsafe and distrusted, racial profiling is proven to inflict negative psychological effects on its victims.”
At a forum on the profiling issue, Ian Taylor Jr., president of the Black Men’s Forum, said members of his organization feel threatened when racial description [sic] of suspects are provided in university crime alerts. . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=35462.)
No comments:
Post a Comment