Protected Group

(This post got stuck, and predates the Brown and Gardner incidents.)

In another forum, a commenter is arguing that the media is always quick to mention the criminal’s race if he’s black, but never if he’s Jewish. (There is some confusion there about “race.”) As he summed it up, after many comments and much argument:

After the arrest.
Black crime is racialized
White crime is individualized
Jewish crime is not mentioned.

This struck me as rather far from the mark. I replied:This is not true in the United States.

The media generally goes out of its way to avoid mentioning a black perpetrator’s race, unless photos are part of the deal. Even so, the text generally avoids the topic, so text searches would still not pick it up.

Consider the knock-out game; it is not easy to discover from news articles reporting the crimes that they are almost exclusively perpetrated by blacks. On the rare occasion that a copycat white is the perpetrator, the news media trumpets this as proof that it’s nothing to do with race.

Consider the media going out of its way, for days (until it got ridiculous and photos were being shown) to avoid mention the races of the three killers of the famous Australian sports figure.

Also remember that Zimmerman was initially reported as “white,” and this got reluctantly changed to “white Hispanic” when they could add that he had been “in trouble with the law.” Leftist media never mentioned that Zimmerman had a long history of befriending and defending (at risk to himself) blacks, nor was Martin’s brutish history ever part of the story. The media protected him, using obsolete and Photoshopped pictures of the pair to denigrate the “white” and play up the black as the innocent victim.

Jewish violence, as in something connected to and motivated by the perpetrator’s Judaism, seems rare indeed. What examples do you have in recent America?

And, of course, Islam is protected to a very great extent. In a five-page article about the terrorist who attacked a Salt Lake City mall a few years ago (yelling “Allahu Akbar!”), there was no explicit mention in this laudatory piece that the perpetrator was Muslim. You could infer it by eventually reading that his family was, and that he attended a mosque. But the mosque’s protestation of innocence was featured, and there was no mention of the mosque’s previous involvement with radicalizing others.

The US government has a mandate to not even say the word “jihadist” anymore. So, indeed, there is a protected group, but it is not the Jews.

===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle