10 Things NEVER to Say to a Black Coworker

lictor616 · November 13, 2009

Lictor,

Absolutely not - you're misrepresenting what I said, as expected.

not at all!

again, please notice that all I'm doing is reversing the races... I'm merely "putting the shoe on the other foot" when I bring up these suggestive examples, and when I do this the double standard becomes painfully obvious to anyone who isn't a complete dunderhead or hypocrite.

all I do is invert the race in any so called "hate-crime" and you see immediately that the treatment is VASTLY different.

you're simply rejecting out of hand...

Michael Hardner · November 13, 2009

K,

Most aren't, at least in a city of any significant size. Most assaults and attacks merit a brief mention in a police blotter column in the local news section of the paper.
Only incidents that catch the editor's eye get any more coverage than that. What catches an editor's eye?

Multiple attackers. Multiple incidents. Unusual circumstances. Lurid details. A video of the incident. All of these ones are obvious. I submit that a potential "hate crime" aspect to the case is something that catches an editor's eye as well.

Local TV and radio news carries a good load of crimes and the coverage seems to follow your rules for inclusion but it should be pointed out that the level of coverage changes as well. A downtown Toronto accidental shooting in the tourist area at Christmas shopping time is still mentioned today, whereas a murder that occurred across the street from where I lived around then received scant coverage.

Michael Hardner · November 13, 2009

Lictor,

not at all!
again, please notice that all I'm doing is reversing the races... I'm merely "putting the shoe on the other foot" when I bring up these suggestive examples, and when I do this the double standard becomes painfully obvious to anyone who isn't a complete dunderhead or hypocrite.

all I do is invert the race in any so called "hate-crime" and you see immediately that the treatment is VASTLY different.

you're simply rejecting out of hand...

Please try to read things twice before you post. Where did I say that anybody 'deserved' coverage ?

lictor616 · November 13, 2009

Kimmy,

Ok - well it makes me ask why individual crimes need to be covered in the first place. They're always there but do we need to know about them in such a way ? Aren't trends and statistics more important to us than individual crimes ?

trends and stats are even more taboo! are you kidding? When did you ever hear of a reporter (either here or in the US) talk about the ENORMOUS gap in AIDS infection rates between races?

if you're honest: NEVER.

In the US (where they actually keep racial stats) we know that blacks are vastly more afflicted by the disease, so much so that the CDC estimates (from year to year) that on average heterosexual black women are 25 to 30 times more likely to have aids then white women.

You never hear about this because it "sounds racist"... seriously that's what the CDC admit themselves!... the CDC is actually more concerned of Politically Incorrect then to promote public safety!

And you know that any station who is stupid enough to talk about aids stats will be bitterly attacked by the mass media and immediately tarred as "racist"...

I can already imagine what the mass media would say: "these stats are nothing but scare tactics to prevent loving interracial relationships"

you KNOW and we all know that's exactly what would happen.

No, by and large the news media categorically stay away from any information or fact that may be even slightly unflattering to blacks or other minorities.

Edited November 13, 2009 by lictor616

lictor616 · November 13, 2009

Lictor,

Please try to read things twice before you post. Where did I say that anybody 'deserved' coverage ?

well crimes are public interests and deserve some mention, you're just deflecting the argument: THE MEDIA DOES DISPROPORTIONATELY COVER "hatecrimes" BASED on the racial mixture of the victims/offenders...

the appropriate response to this truism and obvious fact is not "oh well who cares, no news of crimes should make any headline anyways" that's merely an obvious and pathetic attempt at deflection.

Michael Hardner · November 13, 2009

Lictor,

trends and stats are even more taboo! are you kidding? When did you ever hear of a reporter (either here or in the US) talk about the ENORMOUS gap in AIDS infection rates between races?

if you're honest: NEVER.

I don't think I hear them talk about infection rates by age, gender or religion very much either.

In the US (where they actually keep racial stats) we know that blacks are vastly more afflicted by the disease, so much so that the CDC estimates (from year to year) that on average heterosexual black women are 25 to 30 times more likely to have aids then white women.

You never hear about this because it "sounds racist"... seriously that's what the CDC admits themselves... the CDC is actually more frightened to be Politically Incorrect then do its job then promote public safety.

Well, it depends. It sounds racist to me coming from you because to be honest I suspect your motives for discussing race all the time. I have my reasons.

If I heard somebody on PBS discussing it, I would suspect that they're examining the problem as an objective issue.

And you know that any station who is stupid enough to talk about aids stats will be bitterly attacked by the mass media and immediately tarred as "racist"...

I can already imagine what the mass media would say: "these stats are nothing but scare tactics to prevent loving interracial relationships"

you KNOW and we all know that's exactly what would happen.

I don't know that. Discussion of race is necessarily a delicate matter, and best handled by people with tact is all. This is why you're not reading the news, and Peter Mansbridge is.

kimmy · November 13, 2009

So then,correct me if I am mistaken, I can assume the buffaloo incident invilved a geng of blacks beating a white guy who was dating a black girl? I ask this hoenstly.

Yes, that is exactly the case. This was all covered earlier. You can go back and read the provided link from the Buffaloooo newspaper if you wish.

I also disagree race makes something newsworthy. Uniquenes certainly does though. Like a victim thrashing his attackers. Or in yesterdays news, a couple of senior citizens (vets) fughting off a thief.

Sure, there are lots of circumstances that play into how much coverage an incident receives. As I mentioned in my previous post to Michael:

"Multiple attackers. Multiple incidents. Unusual circumstances. Lurid details. A video of the incident. All of these ones are obvious. I submit that a potential "hate crime" aspect to the case is something that catches an editor's eye as well."

While there may be comments to that effect here, I disagree that is the normal perception of what a small town is composed of or that typifies small town values.

I think you're mistaken, but that's a subject for a different thread.

You are right, I don't agree. Mainly because this opinion is unsupported by any facts or anything other than an assumption.

Obviously, I can't *prove* that the incident in Buffalo would have been a much bigger news story if the victim and attackers' races had been reversed. But I think it's a very good assumption based on how other stories of hate attacks on minorities had been played up.

I mentioned the Toronto school rape case where parents' accusations of racist prosecution propelled the story onto the headlines, and I mentioned the followup articles that covered the convictions but completely dropped mention of the racial controversy even though it had been a notable aspect of the case.

I watched the Global News TV report on this incident:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/10/11/bc-man-set-on-fire-east-vancouver.html

Where the reporter, armed with no information other than the fact that witnesses had the attacker being white and the victim being Asian, speculated that this was a hate crime.

The media continued to pursue the angle:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2009/10/12/vancouver-police-probe-possible-racial-motive-after-man-set-on-fire.aspx

...managing to get an "it's possible" from the police spokesman.

Now, somebody getting set on fire is probably going to get in the news (under the "lurid details" rule.) But if the attacker wasn't white and the victim wasn't non-white, the race aspect of this story is not going to be mentioned *at* *all* and you're certainly not going to have reporters pursuing a hate-crime angle.

-k

M.Dancer · November 13, 2009

I think that in the inverse situation, the editors are worried that viewers *would* feel righteous indignation... and are afraid of being accused of fanning racial hatred (or "they treat it as a hot-button issue" in newspeak). They cover these stories as if this was still a culture where a lynch mob of angry whites would hit the streets to retaliate.

-k

I think that can be dismissed out of hand. Editors are far more worried about being factual than fanning any flames, in fact, fanning flames is sometimes an editoirs highest goal.

But lets take the CTV item you posted. You point out that the names should lead one to assume the accused are aboriginal. I agree. You aslo said it would lead someone to believe they were members of the Warriors (and they are an aboriginal gang). I also agree. Especially since in the article...

And you are of course correct that they don't identify the accused as aboriginal.

Clark said the suspects are alleged to be members of the Alberta Warriors street gang

I would suggest that since all the accused are in custody what pupose would including that they are aboriginal have? Would it be more relevant to the story than mentioning the brand of jeans they wore?

Also omitted in the story are the races of the youths beaten...

Now, when the identity of the perpetrators is not known, that is certainly a case where the inclusion of race makes sense or when the perpetrators are at large and there is need for the public to be on the look out.

CJOB News Team reporting

11/11/2009

Two Winnipeg residents received an awful shock yesterday afternoon, when two robbers broke into their home, forced them into a bedroom, stole their property and fled.
Winnipeg Police are searching for a male and female suspect in connection with the robbery, which happened at 3 pm Tuesday in the 700 block of Selkirk Avenue in Winnipeg's North End.

One victim, a 40 year old woman, suffered minor injuries, but medical attention was not required. The victims and the suspects are not known to each other.

The female suspect is described as Aboriginal in appearance, is in her mid twenties to early thirties and has a heavy build. There is no suspect description available for the male suspect

http://www.cjob.com/News/Local/Story.aspx?ID=1164174

Winnipeg police say they’ve received information to suggest there may be an elevated risk to a missing 16-year-old girl’s safety.
Police didn’t disclose the information, which has investigators even more concerned about the well-being of Nicole Houle.

It’s believed Houle is in the company of Thunder Belanger, who is currently wanted on an arrest warrant.

Houle was last seen in the North End on Oct. 18.

Police consider Houle to be in need of immediate protection and a high risk of being exploited or victimized.

Houle is aboriginal, 5-foot-6, 140 pounds with a medium build, dark shoulder-length hair and brown eyes.

Belanger is aboriginal, 5-foot-10 and 150 pounds with a thin build

http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/10/28/11558811.html

Michael Hardner · November 13, 2009

Lictor,

well crimes are public interests and deserve some mention, you're just deflecting the argument: THE MEDIA DOES DISPROPORTIONATELY COVER "hatecrimes" BASED on the racial mixture of the victims/offenders...

There's really no evidence of this, although as I have stated in my discussion with Kimmy it wouldn't surprise me if it were true.

the appropriate response to this truism and obvious fact is not "oh well who cares, no news of crimes should make any headline anyways" that's merely an obvious and pathetic attempt at deflection.

I guess you're acknowledging, then, that I never said that one group 'deserved' coverage ? Thanks, if so.

My response is that race is just one aspect of the news that is distorted by our information industry operating as it does. Unsurprisingly, you appear (by use of CAPS) to fly into a rage when any issue of race comes up that doesn't favour whites.

Again, these are delicate issues which is why your sledgehammer (ALL CAPS) handling of them is far, far apart from the mainstream. As your conservative president indicated: "Islam is peace."

If you don't buy that, then get thee to the sidelines.

lictor616 · November 13, 2009

Lictor,

There's really no evidence of this, although as I have stated in my discussion with Kimmy it wouldn't surprise me if it were true.

I've provided ample evidence (which you chose to ignore) confirming this, (courtenay vs Buffalo being the most recent) but anyhoozle.

keep dodging...

Edited November 13, 2009 by lictor616

M.Dancer · November 13, 2009

[quote name='kimmy' date='13 November 2009 - 01:50 PM' timestamp='1258132930'

I watched the Global News TV report on this incident:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/10/11/bc-man-set-on-fire-east-vancouver.html

Where the reporter, armed with no information other than the fact that witnesses had the attacker being white and the victim being Asian, speculated that this was a hate crime.

The media continued to pursue the angle:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2009/10/12/vancouver-police-probe-possible-racial-motive-after-man-set-on-fire.aspx

...managing to get an "it's possible" from the police spokesman.

Now, somebody getting set on fire is probably going to get in the news (under the "lurid details" rule.) But if the attacker wasn't white and the victim wasn't non-white, the race aspect of this story is not going to be mentioned *at* *all* and you're certainly not going to have reporters pursuing a hate-crime angle.

-k

I disagree. If the perpertrator is at large and the police release a description, white will certainly be included.

On a side note, that incident is what we once called "bum lighting". I knew some folks who did this sort of thing (and this is 30 years ago) where they would set the pants of a sleeping wino on fire. Not particularly nice

Edited November 13, 2009 by M.Dancer

M.Dancer · November 13, 2009

and that is merely a barefaced brazen lie...

I notice a complete absence of facts in this flaccid rebuttal

lictor616 · November 13, 2009

I notice a complete absence of facts in this flaccid rebuttal

there are the obvious ones which you routinely ignore, courtenay being one of them but anyway... why keep pretending you actually believe what you're saying dancer?

Why repeat myself a 5th, 6th, 7th time? the onus is 100% on you at this juncture.

Edited November 13, 2009 by lictor616

Michael Hardner · November 13, 2009

Lictor,

keep dodging...

No dodge here - I'm waiting for something real from you and will continue to do so.

Speaking of dodge, though, thanks for the implicit acknowledgment (again) that you're outside the fringe of conservatives such as GW Bush.

kimmy · November 13, 2009

I think that can be dismissed out of hand. Editors are far more worried about being factual than fanning any flames, in fact, fanning flames is sometimes an editoirs highest goal.

Only in certain situations. They know they'll be cast as villains if they don't handle stories with a racial aspect with utmost care.

But lets take the CTV item you posted. You point out that the names should lead one to assume the accused are aboriginal. I agree. You aslo said it would lead someone to believe they were members of the Warriors (and they are an aboriginal gang). I also agree. Especially since in the article...

I pointed out that the article mentioned their affiliation with the Alberta Warriors, and pointed out that someone in-the-know would recognize that as an aboriginal gang.

And you are of course correct that they don't identify the accused as aboriginal.

I would suggest that since all the accused are in custody what pupose would including that they are aboriginal have? Would it be more relevant to the story than mentioning the brand of jeans they wore?

The article states that only one of the 6 accused, Keewatin, was in police custody. Warrants had been issued for the remaining 5, who remained at large.

Also omitted in the story are the races of the youths beaten...

Now, when the identity of the perpetrators is not known, that is certainly a case where the inclusion of race makes sense or when the perpetrators are at large and there is need for the public to be on the look out.

I've already agreed that when suspects are at large, the media is willing to provide that information.

I provided that article as an example of how the media seeks to tip-toe around race in cases of violence by non-white assailants. Now contrast that with the coverage of the "Vancouver man set on fire" story where reporters were breathlessly pursuing a white racist hate crime aspect to the story.

-k

Edited November 13, 2009 by kimmy

M.Dancer · November 13, 2009

there are the obvious ones which you routinely ignore, courtenay being one of them but anyway... why keep pretending you actually believe what you're saying dancer?

Why repeat myself a 5th, 6th, 7th time? the onus is 100% on you at this juncture.

That is not a fact. Had it been 3 black men getting pummeled by a lone victim it would have been newsworthy...

Not sure how the onus is on me. proof lies with the positive claiment. You make the flaccid claim, it's your job to prop it up.

And your rebuttals are flaccid.

kimmy · November 13, 2009

I disagree. If the perpertrator is at large and the police release a description, white will certainly be included.

On a side note, that incident is what we once called "bum lighting". I knew some folks who did this sort of thing (and this is 30 years ago) where they would set the pants of a sleeping wino on fire. Not particularly nice

You've put your response inside my quote. Can you clean up this message so I can tell what you're replying to?

-k

bush_cheney2004 · November 13, 2009

...Americans are not as bold in mentioning race as you'd like to present, Dick.

-k

{on the bright side, at least neither of the boxers was described as a "visible minority".}

They are much bolder than some Canadians, and certainly bolder than Canadian media or government reports. We've already had this discussion.....Canada never had a civil rights initiation by fire, or the corresponding "All in the Family".

Michael Hardner · November 13, 2009

BC

They are much bolder than some Canadians, and certainly bolder than Canadian media or government reports. We've already had this discussion.....Canada never had a civil rights initiation by fire, or the corresponding "All in the Family".

Then again, we didn't have slavery on that scale so we didn't need to. But your point is taken, and indeed that to me is a revelation of the more British nature of Canadian society. Polite quietude is the norm.

lictor616 · November 13, 2009

Lictor,

No dodge here - I'm waiting for something real from you and will continue to do so.

Speaking of dodge, though, thanks for the implicit acknowledgment (again) that you're outside the fringe of conservatives such as GW Bush.

well, let's look at the way the media handled two very similar crimes: The Jasper Texas dragging death of James Byrd and the Streator, Illinois dragging death of Patricia Stansfield.

In 1998, three white men tied a black ex convict by the name of James Byrd to the back of a pickup truck to drag him at road speeds, killing him painfully. The news media was apoplectic about this crime, it received star billing, and was talked about for 3 weeks in CNN... that's right 3 weeks. Every detail of the trial was covered without letup http://www.cnn.com/US/9902/22/dragging.death.03/, the story mad it all the way to Europe! Jacques Chirac issued a one minute statement about the horror and gravity of the crime, bill Clinton ADDRESSED THE NATION and him and Janet Reno then supported passage of an anti-hatecrime bill... which was sponsored by Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore.

The city of Jasper Texas, erected a statue of James Byrd (again an ex-con) and even built a PARC in his memory: http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/ap/44db0094-fec8-46a4-b307-18987e1d0b18.hmedium.jpg

Books were written about the event: http://www.amazon.com/Jasper-Texas-Roy-T-Anderson/dp/B0000TSR10

countless subsequent news segments, memorials etc were made...

Compare that to the Stansfield murder:

Patricia Stansfield, a 46 year old nurse and mother who was kidnapped by Christopher Coleman a black criminal, and was dragged two miles to her death along a road in Streator, Illinois. the black man went to her house knocked on the door and then he flashed his pistol for money and when she wasn't able to give him money and offered her car keys instead he tied her to the back of her own car and dragged at highway speeds, dismembering her completely.

how much attention was this news item given you ask?

NOTHING, a local streator newspaper segment for one day... the item never featured on any major news outlet and was never spoken about even in State news sources.

a lexis nexis search of the Byrd dragging death gets you 934 AP and other articles, Patricia Stansfield: ZERO ...

And don't waste your time looking for a Patricia Stansfield memorial or parc either... after all she wasn't a noble black person... so who cares right? isn't that the message?

the double standard could scarcely be more dramatic.

Edited November 13, 2009 by lictor616

M.Dancer · November 13, 2009

You've put your response inside my quote. Can you clean up this message so I can tell what you're replying to?

-k

Must be a bug. When i first posted, everything was in your quote, then I when to edit and everthing was where it should be...and I have tried twice to fix it and each time it shows your quotes in the right place with all the tags nice and neat and my comments below....

I will report my own post to Greg...hope I don't get banned.

lictor616 · November 13, 2009

That is not a fact. Had it been 3 black men getting pummeled by a lone victim it would have been newsworthy...

Not sure how the onus is on me. proof lies with the positive claiment. You make the flaccid claim, it's your job to prop it up.

And your rebuttals are flaccid.

I make the claim that the media ignores interracial crimes when the race of the victim is white...and the offenders non-white.

I illustrated this with examples that you have simply rejected out of hand, refused to even comment on and said "there's no evidence"... only to ask me to reproduce and repeat evidence which is already there for you to look at.

then you ask for more suggestive examples, which I have given, but those won't sway you either because you are absolutely reconciled and content with this anti-white double standard... and don't really care about interracial crimes (only if the victim is white mind you).

how more "flaccid" can a rebuttal be then "there is no evidence" and other such one liners... you're the guy with flaccidity issues.

Edited November 13, 2009 by lictor616

M.Dancer · November 13, 2009

I make the claim that the media ignores interracial crimes when the race of the victim is white...and the offenders non-white.

I illustrated this with examples that you have merely rejected out of hand and said "there's no evidence"...

yadda yadda yadda

You illustrated it with cherry picked examples which can easily be rejected because they are cherry picked. I could cherry pick example that would be in contrast to yours.

And that would prove only there are lots of cherrys.

It is enough to say you have an opinion which is not supported by any research or facts.

The rest of your post isn't worth the effort of laughing at.

lictor616 · November 13, 2009

"You illustrated it with cherry picked examples which can easily be rejected because they are cherry picked. I could cherry pick example that would be in contrast to yours.

And that would prove only there are lots of cherrys.

It is enough to say you have an opinion which is not supported by any research or facts.

The rest of your post isn't worth the effort of laughing at."

yaddi yaddi yadda, reject, discount and misrepresent, repeat as necessary

plug fingers into ears and scream: I can't hear you if that doesn't work... got that about right dizzle?

cherry picking is bad because its um cherry picking? really Dancer?... unless of course the mass media does it with interracial crimes... then its A-OK isn't it dancer? Wow... pure undiluted crack-logic there.

cherry pickign is what cherry pickin does or words to that effect... go on! keep dancing boy

Edited November 13, 2009 by lictor616