Tag Archives: #MediaBias

Posted on by

The Herald-Leader sticks to policy UPDATED!

This website has spent a good deal of bandwidth noting the Lexington Herald-Leader and the McClatchy Company’s mugshot policy. In particular, we have noted the Herald-Leader’s odd habit of violating that policy when it comes to white criminal suspects, but adhering closely to it when the suspects are black.

Well, in this case, the suspect is white, and the paper did not publish his mugshot. Given my disagreement with that policy, I will.

Jason Lee Sharp (Fayette County Detention Center)

Central Kentucky teacher arrested on rape, sexual abuse charges

By Karla Ward | June 19, 2021 | 4:55 PM EDT | Updated: June 20, 2021 | 1:06 PM EDT

Lexington police have arrested a Central Kentucky teacher, charging him with rape, sodomy and sex abuse.

Jason L. Sharp, 32, of Lexington, was arrested Thursday on charges of third-degree rape, third-degree sodomy and first-degree sexual abuse, court records show.

Sharp teaches math at East Jessamine High School, according to the school’s website.

There’s a little more at the link.

A couple of points:

  • While Mr Sharp was arrested on Thursday, reporter Karla Ward’s story did not initially appear until Saturday. Since the McClatchy policy is that an editor must approve the publication of a mugshot, and the Herald-leader does not even publish a Saturday edition, it is possible that no editor was available to approve the publication of the mugshot.
  • Miss Ward noted that, “The circumstances surrounding the charges were not immediately clear.” When one reads a story about a teacher being accused of a sex crime, the automatic assumption is that the victim or victims were students. The Herald-Leader article does not state that such is the case, and it is very possible that any victims of Mr Sharp’s might be adults and not students at East Jessamine or any other school.

The article notes that Jessamine County Schools Superintendent Matt Moore was informed of the arrest on Friday, and stated that the school and he would cooperate fully with any police investigation, “if requested,” a statement which would seem to state that the police had not made any such request at the time. The charges listed in his arrest record do not make any statement that his (alleged) victim was a minor.

One of the points in the McClatchy mugshot policy that editors are supposed to consider in their decision-taking is whether the suspect is a “public official.” That raises the obvious question: what is a “public official.” East Jessamine High School is a public school, making Mr Sharp a public employee. Does simply being a public employee make someone a public official? Since public education in Kentucky is primarily funded by the state, I am one of the Kentucky taxpayers who furnished his salary and benefits! Yes, I would define him as a public official.

But, given my criticisms of the newspaper for publishing the mugshots of white suspects while concealing those of black suspects, it behooves me to note when the paper follows McClatchy policies when it comes to white suspects.
_______________________________________________
Updated!: June 21, 2021

The Herald-Leader is now reporting that Mr Sharp’s alleged victim was a minor:

A Central Kentucky teacher charged with rape, sexual abuse and sodomy allegedly committed the offenses against someone who was under 16 years old, according to arrest records.

Jason L. Sharp’s alleged victim was under 16 years old when the sexual abuse happened in July 2018, police wrote in an arrest citation obtained by the Herald-Leader. Sharp teaches math at East Jessamine High School, according to the school’s website. Police wrote in Sharp’s citation that he made sexual contact with a minor while being “a person in a position of special trust.”

I added a link to this article to the comments section in the original article, in response to a commenter who asked the Herald-Leader for a mugshot of the alleged offender. Though the paper left in place three spam comments hawking online income jobs, it deleted my comments with links. Can’t let anyone see that mugshot!

Posted on by

For the Associated Press, #woke outweighs the public’s right to know

I suppose that this ought not to be a surprise.

We have previously noted the McClatchy Company’s mugshot policy, the one which doesn’t seem to be actually available on McClatchy owned newspaper websites, or McClatchy’s site itself. I only found documentation through a tweet.

Now it seems that the Associated Press has come up with its own version. From the Rock Hill, SC, Herald:

AP says it will no longer name suspects in minor crimes

By David Bauder, Associated Press Media Writer | June 15, 2021 | 5:51 PM EDT

NEW YORK
The Associated Press said Tuesday it will no longer run the names of people charged with minor crimes, out of concern that such stories can have a long, damaging afterlife on the internet that can make it hard for individuals to move on with their lives.

In so doing, one of the world’s biggest newsgathering organizations has waded into a debate over an issue that wasn’t of much concern before the rise of search engines, when finding information on people often required going through yellowed newspaper clippings.

Often, the AP will publish a minor story — say, about a person arrested for stripping naked and dancing drunkenly atop a bar — that will hold some brief interest regionally or even nationally and be forgotten the next day.

But the name of the person arrested will live on forever online, even if the charges are dropped or the person is acquitted, said John Daniszewski, AP’s vice president for standards. And that can hurt someone’s ability to get a job, join a club or run for office years later.

In one way, this makes more sense than the McClatchy policy, which doesn’t publish mugshots, but still prints the names of criminal suspects; search engines look for words, not faces. I noted in this story that while the Lexington Herald-Leader does not normally publish mugshots, it was easy enough for me to find the mugshots of criminal suspects.

The AP, in a directive sent out to its journalists across the country, said it will no longer name suspects or transmit photographs of them in brief stories about minor crimes when there is little chance the organization will cover the case beyond the initial arrest.

The person’s identity is generally not newsworthy beyond local communities, Daniszewski said.

The AP said it will also not link to local newspaper or broadcast stories about such incidents where the arrested person’s name or mugshot might be used. The AP will also not do stories driven mainly by particularly embarrassing mugshots.

The policy will not apply to serious crimes, such as those involving violence or abuse of the public trust, or cases of a fugitive on the run.

With this, the AP has taken it upon themselves to decide which crimes are serious. But, other than the ‘fugitive on the run,’ which wasn’t enough to get the Herald-Leader to publish Juanyah Clay’s mugshot, the rationale that publishing the name of a criminal suspect could hurt his life if he happens to be acquitted ought also to apply to rape, robbery or murder. Why would a man found not guilty of murder be different from a man found not guilty of disorderly conduct?

Remember the famous Duke lacrosse team rape case, the one in which Crystal Mangum falsely accused three team members of rape? The media absolutely loved that case, and even though then state Attorney General Roy Cooper “dropped all charges, declaring the three lacrosse players ‘innocent’ and victims of a ‘tragic rush to accuse'”, the names of the accused live on on the internet. Rape is a serious, violent crime, and three innocent men will be forever tarred with the accusation.

Now, either the public has a right to know about criminal charges, in which case names and mugshots of suspects are reasonably disclosed, or those accused have a right to privacy on everything, at least until they are convicted of a crime; that should not change based on the serious of the alleged crime.

Posted on by

It only took one line to reveal the reporter’s ignorance and bias

We noted yesterday the hypocrisy of the oh so #woke New York Times. And now we can see how one almost throwaway line exposes the bias and ignorance of Times reporter Jason Horowitz:

Vatican Warns U.S. Bishops: Don’t Deny Biden Communion Over Abortion

Conservative American Catholic bishops are pressing for a debate over whether Catholics who support the right to an abortion should be allowed to take Communion.

by Jason Horowitz | June 14, 2021 | 5:41 PM EDT

ROME — The Vatican has warned conservative American bishops to hit the brakes on their push to deny communion to politicians supportive of abortion rights — including President Biden, a faithful churchgoer and the first Roman Catholic to occupy the Oval Office in 60 years.

But despite the remarkably public stop sign from Rome, the American bishops are pressing ahead anyway and are expected to force a debate on the communion issue at a remote meeting that starts on Wednesday.

But the money line is in the next paragraph:

Some leading bishops, whose priorities clearly aligned with former President Donald J. Trump, now want to reassert the centrality of opposition to abortion in the Catholic faith and lay down a hard line — especially with a liberal Catholic in the Oval Office.

What kind of ignorance is this? The Catholic Church was a vocal opponent of abortion and euthanasia long before Donald Trump burst onto the political scene. The Church has been opposed to same-sex ‘marriage’ and ‘transgenderism’ long before the 2016 election.

But it is also true that the Church has been primarily on the political left on other issues. The Church is very much in favor of greatly eased immigration restrictions, the Church would like to see greatly increased social welfare programs, the Church favors economic changes far more in line with European ‘democratic socialism,’ and the Church is very concerned with environmental issues, especially global warming climate change. None of those policies are exactly Trumpian.

Did Mr Horowitz not know these things, or was he trying to use propaganda to undermine the more conservative bishops?

Posted on by

Journolism: We publish what the Lexington Herald-Leader will not.

It has become somewhat of a passion with me to provide the information the Lexington Herald-Leader will not. We have noted the McClatchy Company’s Mugshot Policy and how the local newspaper has honored it by declining to publish mugshots of non-white criminal suspects but doing so when the accused are white. And we noted Robert Stacy McCain’s point that journalists used to refer to the “public’s right to know,” but that such has been subjugated to political correctness, and to what the Sacramento Bee called “perpetuating stereotypes about who commits crime in our community.”

Mr McCain noted last Saturday that the media were, once again, seeking to avoid perpetuating stereotypes.

You might think that when 13 people are shot in downtown Austin, and the gunman is still at large, that it would be a public service to describe this murderous maniac. But you’re not “woke” enough:

Police have only released a vague description of the suspected shooter as of Saturday morning. The Austin American-Statesman is not including the description as it is too vague at this time to be useful in identifying the shooter and such publication could be harmful in perpetuating stereotypes and potentially put innocent individuals at risk.

Oh, if it was a right-wing white supremacist Trump voter who had committed this atrocity, you bet the media would have no qualms identifying the suspect, “perpetuating stereotypes” or not. Because the “woke” media have made themselves utterly useless as a source of facts, we must turn to Breitbart for the relevant information:

A statement from the Austin Police Department states . . . “It is unknown if there is one, or multiple suspects involved. There is one suspect described as a black male, with dread locks, wearing a black shirt and a skinny build.” . . . The shooting follows massive cuts in police funding by the Austin City Council. The council cut $150 million from the police budget . . .

Is it any wonder why people hate the “fake news” media?

The Austin American-Statesman is not a McClatchy newspaper. The Herald-Leader is:

2 more suspects arrested after death of Lexington man who was shot, set on fire

By Jeremy Chisenhall | June 14, 2021 | 11:55 AM EDT | Updated 4:11 PM EDT

Two more people have been charged in connection with a Lexington homicide after the victim’s body was set on fire in a barn, according to court records.

Martae Laron Shanks and Autumn Owens, both residents in the building where 38-year-old Lazarus Parker was allegedly shot and killed, have been charged with arson, abusing a corpse and criminal mischief, according to an indictment from a Fayette County grand jury.

The grand jury alleged that Shanks and Owens either intentionally started the fire or tried to help with the fire by purchasing gasoline in Fayette County and taking it to Bourbon County to burn Parker’s body.

Shanks and Owens were both arrested in Scott County and then transferred to the Lexington-Fayette County Detention Center last week, according to jail records.

Cecil T Russell (Fayette County Detention Center)

Cecil T. Russell, a co-defendant with Shanks and Owens in the case, was previously charged with murder. Russell was charged with killing Parker after a “cooperating witness” told investigators she heard Russell and Parker get into an argument before multiple gunshots rang out and someone screamed, according to an arrest warrant.

Cecil Russell’s mugshot was not published in the Herald-Leader, but I was able to find it in an Associated Press story published by WVLT-TV. The First Street Journal is dedicated to your right to know, and thus we reproduce it here.

Martae Shanks (Fayette County Detention Center)

More, I was able to open account with the Fayette County Detention Center, and get access to mugshots there, thus getting the mugshot of Mr Shanks. There are actually three mugshots of Mr Shanks in the records, dated October 16, 2015, March 4, 2021, and June 9, 2021, so it would seem that he is not unfamiliar with the jail. The record lists only the current offenses with which he is charged.

There were two mugshots for Autumn Owens, one dated March 4, 2021, and the current one June 10, 2021. It’s interesting that both of her bookings came concomitantly with Mr Shanks. As with Mr Shanks, only her current charges are listed on the jail website.

Autumn Owens

Is there something wrong with a mid-sized newspaper, part of a national newspaper chain, subjugating the public’s right to know to political correctness? I think that there is, and that’s why this website goes ahead and finds and published these mugshots. As for the claim that this “perpetuates stereotypes,” please note that one of the three suspects here is white, and that, in my previous post with mugshots, one of the convicted criminals was white, and one was black.[1]I confess: I had originally written that post with the black offender’s mugshot first, and the white offender’s second. Since Twitter tends to pick up the first photo in an article, I … Continue reading

A further note: the Lexington homicide investigations page has not, as of this publication, been updated since May 9th. We had previously noted this, and there have been three additional homicides in the city since that date. Someone needs to start doing his job.

Mr McCain was correct, and the credentialed media, decades ago, were correct: the public does have a right to know these things. The question is: why so small, private websites like Mr McCain’s or mine have to be the ones to

References

References
↑1 I confess: I had originally written that post with the black offender’s mugshot first, and the white offender’s second. Since Twitter tends to pick up the first photo in an article, I switched the order, so that the tweet of the article would show the white offender.
Posted on by

Surely the #woke New York Times couldn’t be this misogynistic!

Remember how Bari Weiss was forced out by the #woke[1]From Wikipedia: Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from … Continue reading of The New York Times? Remember how the #woke at the Times decided that the Grey Lady, long a supporter of the First Amendment, no longer thought Freedom of Speech was such a great idea?

Well, I spotted two tweets from the Times this morning, which showed that the very much anti-misogynistic they are:

This is actually a full sized screen capture of a promoted Tweet, promoted meaning that the Times paid Twitter to send it out; if you click on the image, it will take you to the original, at least if the Times doesn’t delete it. The Times is using the naked legs of a a reasonably thin white woman in the shower as clickbait. It was originally sent out at 12:35 PM EDT on May 28, 2021, but it’s paid-for status is evidenced by the fact it appeared on my Twitter feed this morning.

But, it wasn’t the only one:

Same thing: a screencap with the link embedded, in case the Times deletes it, this time using a cute bikinied white girl as the clickbait. The non-misogynistic editors of the Times apparently couldn’t find a picture of a male diver.

Oops, that’s wrong: in the article they had five photos used as illustrations, a male diver, tourists near Cebu Island in the Philippines feeding whale sharks in 2019, tourists hand feeding dolphins in western Australia, tourists photographing loggerhead turtles in Greece, and a video of green turtle’s view of feeding by tourists in the Bahamas.

What isn’t in the article is the photo used in the tweet. Normally, when you use Twitter to link an article, it will pick out one of the photos in the article to use, usually the first one. For this tweet to have the photo of the bikinied diver, it had to have been added manually by someone.

And here I thought that it was us evil-reich wing conservatives who were the sexist pigs! Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the left were trying to fool us?
____________________________
Also published on the American Free News Network.

References

References
↑1 From Wikipedia:

Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from the African-American Vernacular English expression “stay woke“, whose grammatical aspect refers to a continuing awareness of these issues.
By the late 2010s, woke had been adopted as a more generic slang term broadly associated with left-wing politics and cultural issues (with the terms woke culture and woke politics also being used). It has been the subject of memes and ironic usage. Its widespread use since 2014 is a result of the Black Lives Matter movement.

I shall confess to sometimes “ironic usage” of the term. To put it bluntly, I think that the ‘woke’ are just boneheadedly stupid.
Posted on by

Resistance is not futile. I will not be assimilated.

Is National Public Radio supposed to be an advocacy reporting organization? Is NPR supposed to push a particular political point of view?

NPR’s Laurel Wamsley, who purports to be a journalist, wrote an article entitled A Guide To Gender Identity Terms, in which she presented the “proper use of gender identity terms.”

Issues of equality and acceptance of transgender and nonbinary people — along with challenges to their rights — have become a major topic in the headlines. These issues can involve words and ideas and identities that are new to some.

That’s why we’ve put together a glossary of terms relating to gender identity. Our goal is to help people communicate accurately and respectfully with one another.

Proper use of gender identity terms, including pronouns, is a crucial way to signal courtesy and acceptance. Alex Schmider, associate director of transgender representation at GLAAD, compares using someone’s correct pronouns to pronouncing their name correctly – “a way of respecting them and referring to them in a way that’s consistent and true to who they are.”

This guide was created with help from GLAAD. We also referenced resources from the National Center for Transgender Equality, the Trans Journalists Association, NLGJA: The Association of LGBTQ Journalists, Human Rights Campaign, InterAct and the American Psychological Association. This guide is not exhaustive, and is Western and U.S.-centric. Other cultures may use different labels and have other conceptions of gender.

Yeah, that’s an unbiased group!

But, Mr Schmider did tell the truth in one important way. Using a ‘transgendered persons’ preferred pronouns and sexual identity terms is meant to be “respecting them and referring to them in a way that’s consistent and true to who they are.” Miss Wamsley put it as “a crucial way to signal courtesy and acceptance.” At bottom, it is an attempt to coerce “acceptance” by claiming it is only courtesy.

The unasked question is — and the author never added anything in to her article which would have paid any attention to those who disagree — what if someone does not accept the idea that Bruce Jenner is really now a woman, or that anyone can somehow change his sex?

It begins with a falsehood. “Sex,” Miss Wamsley wrote, “refers to a person’s biological status and is typically assigned at birth, usually on the basis of external anatomy. Sex is typically categorized as male, female or intersex.” This is wholly untrue. While we might forgive His Majesty King Henry VIII for believing that Catherine of Aragon or Anne Boleyn were somehow responsible for his first two children being daughters, the role of the X and Y chromosomes in determining the sex of mammals, including humans, has been known for over a century. Sex is not somehow “assigned” at birth; sex is determined at conception, depending upon whether the sperm which fertilized the egg carries the X or Y chromosome. We recognize the sex of a newborn child by visual examination of the child, but the characteristics which indicate sex developed long before birth, during gestation, as programmed in by the developing child’s DNA.

When you read or hear someone talking about sex being assigned at birth, you know automatically the pure bovine feces is about to follow.

Everyone has pronouns that are used when referring to them – and getting those pronouns right is not exclusively a transgender issue.

“Pronouns are basically how we identify ourselves apart from our name. It’s how someone refers to you in conversation,” says Mary Emily O’Hara, a communications officer at GLAAD. “And when you’re speaking to people, it’s a really simple way to affirm their identity.”

“So, for example, using the correct pronouns for trans and nonbinary youth is a way to let them know that you see them, you affirm them, you accept them and to let them know that they’re loved during a time when they’re really being targeted by so many discriminatory anti-trans state laws and policies,” O’Hara says.

“It’s really just about letting someone know that you accept their identity. And it’s as simple as that.”

Well, yes it is . . . and I don’t. When Bruce Jenner tells me that he is now a woman, I do not believe him and I do not accept his claims. To refer to him as “Caitlyn,” to use the feminine pronouns in reference to him, is to concede something I do not and will not concede; it would be both lying to him, leading him to believe that I went along with his claims, and it would be lying to myself.

But, at least Miss Wamsley was sort of asking us to use the terms the transgender would like. It was November 29, 2018, that The New York Times granted OpEd space to Chad Malloy[1]Chad Malloy is a male who claims to be a woman, going by the name ‘Parker’ Malloy. to publish an article claiming that Twitter’s ban on ‘deadnaming’ and misgendering[2]‘Deadnaming’ refers to using the name a person was given at birth, such as Chad Malloy rather than his faux name of ‘Parker’ Malloy, while misgendering means referring to … Continue reading actually promotes free speech rather than stifling it. On October 4, 2019, the Times published an OpEd by staffer Andrew J Marantz, entitled Free Speech Is Killing Us. Noxious language online is causing real-world violence. What can we do about it?

Messrs Marantz and Malloy obviously believe that what hey can do about it is simply to ban any publication of speech with which they disagree. If I say that no, Mr Malloy is not a woman, I have not harmed him, at least not beyond hurting his precious little feelings, nor have I prevented anyone else from going along with his claims of being a woman; all that I would be doing is being truthful to myself.

It does not matter how well or how poorly this article is written; neither The New York Times nor any other outlet of the credentialed media would ever publish it, because they have established transgenderism as part of their core beliefs. In publishing Miss Wamsley’s article in its present form, it becomes clear that NPR has done so as well.

To control language is to control the terms of the debate, and the credentialed media clearly believe that if they can just get people to refer to Bradley Manning as ‘Chelsea,’ to get people to use the preferred gender identity pronouns and terms in reference to the ‘transgendered,’ such concessions will go a long way to validating their argument.

But I will not, and I urge others to look at what they are saying, and how they are saying it, and not to go along with the left’s attempts at controlling speech.
______________________________________
Cross posted on American Free News Network.

References

References
↑1 Chad Malloy is a male who claims to be a woman, going by the name ‘Parker’ Malloy.
↑2 ‘Deadnaming’ refers to using the name a person was given at birth, such as Chad Malloy rather than his faux name of ‘Parker’ Malloy, while misgendering means referring to someone by his biological sex rather than his preferred ‘gender identity.’
Posted on by

And there they go again! The Lexington Herald-Leader publishes another photo of a white criminal suspect

It might not be quite as egregious as some others, because the man has some notoriety due to having been pardoned on a murder conviction, but there’s still the McClatchy Company’s policy on mugshots:

Publishing mugshots of arrestees has been shown to have lasting effects on both the people photographed and marginalized communities. The permanence of the internet can mean those arrested but not convicted of a crime have the photograph attached to their names forever. Beyond the personal impact, inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness. In fact, some police departments have started moving away from taking/releasing mugshots as a routine part of their procedures.

To address these concerns, McClatchy will not publish crime mugshots — online, or in print, from any newsroom or content-producing team — unless approved by an editor. To be clear, this means that in addition to photos accompanying text stories, McClatchy will not publish “Most wanted” or “Mugshot galleries” in slide-show, video or print.

Any exception to this policy must be approved by an editor. Editors considering an exception should ask:

  • Is there an urgent threat to the community?
  • Is this person a public official or the suspect in a hate crime?
  • Is this a serial killer suspect or a high-profile crime?

If an exception is made, editors will need to take an additional step with the Pub Center to confirm publication by making a note in the ‘package notes‘ field in Sluglife.

As I have previously stated, despite several Google searches, using various permutations, I have not been able to find this policy in written form. I found this tweet:

and a photograph I have previously used from another tweet, along with the Sacramento Bee’s precursor article.

So, here’s the story:

Kentucky man pardoned by Matt Bevin for 2014 homicide is back in jail, held for Feds

By John Cheves | May 31, 2021 | 12:33 PM | Updated 1:30 PM EDT

Patrick Baker, left, who was pardoned by Gov. Matt Bevin in 2019 after a reckless homicide conviction, was back in jail on Monday on an unspecified federal charge. Photo by Marcus Dorsey, Lexington Herald-Leader. Click to enlarge.

Federal authorities have jailed a Kentucky man who received one of former Gov. Matt Bevin’s controversial pardons in December 2019.

Patrick Brian Baker, 43, was convicted of reckless homicide in the death of Donald Mills during a Knox County home invasion in 2014. However, Baker maintained his innocence and blamed law enforcement for overlooking an alternative suspect in the case. In his pardon, Bevin described the evidence against Baker as “sketchy at best.”

Baker had served two years of a 19-year sentence when Bevin set him free.

Baker’s brother and sister-in-law held a political fundraiser in 2018 that raised $21,500 for Bevin, according to the Kentucky Registry for Election Finance. The couple donated $4,000 to Bevin.

Baker, who now has a Frankfort address, was held in the Laurel County Detention Center on Monday as a federal prisoner, according to the jail’s website. Jail officials would not identify the criminal charge that Baker faced; they referred media calls to the U.S. Marshal’s office. But federal offices were closed Monday for Memorial Day.

There’s more at the original, but Mr Baker, having been pardoned by former Governor Bevin, is not a convicted criminal. He is in jail right now, which means that he is not an “urgent threat to the community, nor is he a public official, nor the suspect in a hate crime, nor a suspected serial killer, nor the suspect in a high-profile crime.

So, why did the Herald-Leader choose to publish his photograph?

Remember: under the McClatchy policy, the article reporter does not have the discretion to publish a ‘mugshot,’ though it could be argued that this particular photo isn’t a police mugshot. Rather, an editor has to give his approval, and that means:

  • Peter Baniak, Executive Editor and General Manager;
  • Deedra Lawhead, Deputy Editor, Digital;
  • Brian Simms, Deputy Editor, Presentation:, or
  • John Stamper, Deputy Editor, Accountability

So, who approved the publication, and why? None of the listed reasons editors should consider in taking the decision to publish have been met. The only unusual circumstance is former Governor Bevin’s pardon of Mr Baker, but that isn’t among the criteria specified by McClatchy. Attempting to embarrass Mr Bevin is something that would be high on the list of the newspaper’s priorities, but that isn’t a reason to publish Mr Baker’s photo.

One of us suspects that the photo was published because Mr Baker is white, and that it would not have been published were he not white. Perhaps the Herald-Leader could give us a different reason?

Posted on by

Journolism: Newspapers don’t think their readers can handle the truth! Once again, the Lexington Herald-Leader gets racially selective in publishing mugshots

Have you ever heard of JournoList? It was an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, to facilitate communication between them across multiple newsrooms, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.

As we have previously noted, the McClatchy Company, which owns the Lexington Herald-Leader, has an explicit mugshot policy:

Publishing mugshots of arrestees has been shown to have lasting effects on both the people photographed and marginalized communities. The permanence of the internet can mean those arrested but not convicted of a crime have the photograph attached to their names forever. Beyond the personal impact, inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness. In fact, some police departments have started moving away from taking/releasing mugshots as a routine part of their procedures.

To address these concerns, McClatchy will not publish crime mugshots — online, or in print, from any newsroom or content-producing team — unless approved by an editor. To be clear, this means that in addition to photos accompanying text stories, McClatchy will not publish “Most wanted” or “Mugshot galleries” in slide-show, video or print.

Any exception to this policy must be approved by an editor. Editors considering an exception should ask:

  • Is there an urgent threat to the community?
  • Is this person a public official or the suspect in a hate crime?
  • Is this a serial killer suspect or a high-profile crime?

If an exception is made, editors will need to take an additional step with the Pub Center to confirm publication by making a note in the ‘package notes‘ field in Sluglife.

As I have previously stated, despite several Google searches, using various permutations, I have not been able to find this policy in written form. I found this tweet:

and a photograph I have previously used from another tweet, along with the Sacramento Bee’s precursor article. Assistant Managing Editor Ryan Lillis wrote:

The Sacramento Bee announced Wednesday it will limit the publication of police booking photos, surveillance photos and videos of alleged crimes, and composite sketches of suspects provided by law enforcement agencies.

Publishing these photographs and videos disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness, while also perpetuating stereotypes about who commits crime in our community.

McClatchy’s headquarters are located in the Sacramento Bee’s building.

And thus we return to the Herald-leader:

Eastern Kentucky man tries to run over a cop, flees police after being shot at

By Jeremy Chisenhall | May 28, 2021 | 8:13 AM

An Eastern Kentucky police officer shot at a suspect Thursday afternoon after the suspect allegedly tried to run the cop over, according to Kentucky State Police.

James Bussell, a 45-year-old from Owingsville, allegedly sped away from a Mount Sterling police officer during a traffic stop, made a U-turn and tried to run over the officer. The officer involved in the traffic stop fired his gun at Bussell, but didn’t hit him. The suspect made another U-turn and tried to run the cop over again, state police said.

After Bussell’s second attempt to run the officer over, his car got stuck, according to state police. He got out and fled on foot, state police said. The altercation didn’t result in any injuries, police said.

Clearly a bad dude. There’s more at the original, including this:

Well, how ’bout that? The Herald-Leader posted another photo, of a criminal suspect, this one coming from the Mt Starling, Kentucky, Police Department’s Facebook page.

Unlike the photos of Jessica Ahlbrand and Ronnie Helton,[1]The newspaper deleted Mr Helton’s mugshot from the article a couple of weeks after publication, by May 16. which the newspaper published, Mr Bussell is still on the loose. The text of the MSPD’s Facebook page and Jeremy Chisenhall’s newspaper article does not make clear that Mr Bussell fits as “an urgent threat to the community,” but he is charged with:

  1. Attempted Murder (Police Officer).
  2. Fleeing or Evading Police 1st Degree (Motor Vehicle).
  3. Wanton Endangerment 1st Degree (Police Officer).

Yeah, those are pretty serious, and I would not disagree with the assessment that Mr Bussell is a threat to the community. But so was Juanyah Jamal Clay, and the Herald-Leader declined to publish his mugshot when he was on the lam.

So, why did an editor approve of publishing Mr Bussell’s photos, but not Mr Clay’s? Mr Bussell is charged with attempted murder, while Mr Clay was wanted on an murder, not attempted murder, but actual murder charge. Why publish the mugshots of Miss Ahlbrand and Mr Helton, both of whom were in custody, but not Mr Clay, who was still on the loose?

Why? Despite my obviously brilliant mind, I am not a telepath, and cannot read the minds of Mr Chisenhall, or peter Baniak, Executive Editor and General Manager of the Herald-Leader, but, when I look at all of the photos of criminals and criminal suspects that the newspaper has published, it has been easy to notice one thing: all of the published mugshots I’ve seen have been of white suspects. Mr Lillis’ article noted that the Sacramento Bee was concerned about “perpetuating stereotypes about who commits crime in our community,” and that could fit in well with the pattern I have noticed in the Herald-Leader.

I am not the only person who has noticed!

We have noted previously Elizabeth Hughes, publisher of The Philadelphia Inquirer, and her determination to make her newspaper “an anti-racist news organization,” but has turned it into exactly that, a newspaper more concerned with racial identity and sorting out its news coverage that way than it has been about the “public’s right to know.”

The Society of Professional Journalists published their Code of Ethics; you should read it. It says, among other things, that “Journalists must be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know the truth.” This is exactly the opposite of McClatchy’s decision to suppress photographs of criminals and crime suspects because publication might cause “disproportionate harm” to one group or another, or what facially appears to be the Herald-Leader’s editorial decisions[2]Remember: an editor must approve all published mugshots. This is (supposedly) not left up to the various article authors. to skew the public’s perception by publishing only the photographs of white criminals and suspects.

It ought to be simple: just tell the truth, and be consistent in publication policies. If the editors are going to decide to publish photos of suspects who are still on the loose. publish photos of all suspects who are on the loose. Be journalists, and not journolists.

References

References
↑1 The newspaper deleted Mr Helton’s mugshot from the article a couple of weeks after publication, by May 16.
↑2 Remember: an editor must approve all published mugshots. This is (supposedly) not left up to the various article authors.
Posted on by

The racism of The Philadelphia Inquirer The Publisher of the Inquirer says the paper is "an anti-racist news organization," but there's no actual evidence of that

I am not from Missouri, not from the “Show Me” State, and, to the best of my recollection, I’ve only passed through the place once, way back in August of 1972. Nevertheless, I am one of the people who likes to see something really radical, like actual evidence, of something before I accept it as true.

Thus, when I came to this OpEd piece by Elizabeth H. Hughes, the Publisher and Chief Executive Officer of The Philadelphia Inquirer, my truth detector sounded, loudly.

Inquirer publisher: One year later, reflection and a look ahead

A year after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis and the printing of a racist headline in The Inquirer, work remains left to achieve an equitable future for all.

By Elizabeth Hughes | May 26, 2021

June 2 will mark a year since The Philadelphia Inquirer published this racist headline: “Buildings Matter, Too.”

If printing those words in 72-point type had occurred in a vacuum, it would have been a grievous and unpardonable offense. That it was published at a moment of national reckoning over social justice — prompted by the vicious murder of George Floyd at the hands of the police a year ago yesterday — amplified the outrage and brought us well-deserved scorn and scrutiny.

There is somewhat of a playbook whenever a self-inflicted crisis like this threatens to define any institution and the people who work for it. And so it played out here. Apologies were issued, a change in newsroom leadership was announced, earnest promises of reform and redress were made.

Translation: Executive Editor and Senior Vice President Stan Wischnowski was forced to resign.

But what, exactly, was “racist” about the headline, “Buildings Matter, Too”? Philadelphia is an old city, founded in 1682 by William Penn, to serve as the capital for the Province of Pennsylvania, on a land grant from King Charles II. Boelson Cottage, built sometime between 1678 and 1684, is the oldest still standing house in Fairmont Park. Independence Hall was built in 1753, and is where both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States were debated and adopted. The city has an Historical Commission, dedicated to preserving Philadelphia’s rich history. Why, in a place like Philadelphia, would anyone think that buildings don’t matter?

Even buildings with far fewer, or even any, historic connection, serve important purposes, being places where people live and eat and work, things necessary to survival.

What did the “Buildings Matter, Too” article say?

Does the destruction of buildings matter when black Americans are being brazenly murdered in cold blood by police and vigilantes?

That’s the question that has been raging on the streets of Philadelphia, and across my architecture-centric social media feeds, over the last two days as a dark cloud of smoke spiraled up from Center City. What started as a poignant and peaceful protest in Dilworth Park on Saturday morning ended up in a frenzy of destruction by evening. Hardly any building on Walnut and Chestnut Streets was left unscathed, and two mid-19th century structures just east of Rittenhouse Square were gutted by fire.

Their chances of survival are slim, which means there could soon be a gaping hole in the heart of Philadelphia, in one of its most iconic and historic neighborhoods. And protesters moved on to West Philadelphia’s fragile 52nd Street shopping corridor, an important center of black life, where yet more property has been battered.

The very first line by Inquirer architecture writer Inga Saffron asked whether the destruction of buildings in the riots in the city after the killing of George Floyd mattered. She claimed that the anger of the protesters was justified, but also noted that yes, those buildings did matter, too.

“People over property” is great as a rhetorical slogan. But as a practical matter, the destruction of downtown buildings in Philadelphia — and in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and a dozen other American cities — is devastating for the future of cities. We know from the civil rights uprisings of the 1960s that the damage will ultimately end up hurting the very people the protests are meant to uplift. Just look at the black neighborhoods surrounding Ridge Avenue in Sharswood or along the western end of Cecil B. Moore Avenue. An incredible 56 years have passed since the Columbia Avenue riots swept through North Philadelphia, and yet those former shopping streets are graveyards of abandoned buildings. Residents still can’t get a supermarket to take a chance on their neighborhood.

The headline that Mr Wischnowski wrote was entirely appropriate for Miss Saffron’s column, because it expressed, succinctly, what was in the article. It noted that the destruction of these buildings was going to hurt Philadelphians, black and white alike, because damage and destruction was going to cost people their jobs.

More, it was catchy, in a way that editors are supposed to write headlines, to attract people actually to read the articles. That, however, was lost on the young #woke who populate the Inquirer’s newsroom.[1]A newsroom, I would note, that moved out of its own historic building almost a decade earlier, as the then Philadelphia Media Holdings sold the old building because the company was in poor financial … Continue reading

Back to Miss Hughes’ original:

But what has happened since? If our call then was to become an anti-racist news organization, what has been done? Has the passage of a year yielded anything concrete? Is there anything that adds real meaning to the lofty and ambitious goals announced over a few tense days when we faced the deserved public criticism?

The reader can follow the link to the Publisher’s original to see what she believes has been accomplished, but what I see is far, far different. According to the Philadelphia Police Department’s Current Crime Statistics page, as of the end of Monday, May 25th, 208 people had been murdered in the City of Brotherly Love. That works out to 1.434 people being murdered every single day, and, if that figure is maintained throughout 2021, 524 homicides for the year, leaving last year’s 499, and 1990’s record of 500, well back in the rear view mirror.

Two of those 208 deaths were reported as having occurred on May 25th, the anniversary of Mr Floyd’s death. Yet, at least at 10:42 AM on the following day, there was not a single story on the Inquirer’s website main page concerning those deaths. The seven killings the Police Department reported as having occurred over the weekend[2]The Philadelphia Police Department only updates that page Monday through Friday, so the previous update, showing 199 homicides, was for 11:59 PM EDT on Thursday, May 20th. did not rate a single story on the newspaper’s website main page. A site search for homicide turned up nothing, though searching for reporter Robert Moran, who usually covers these stories, turned up two very short news articles, covering one murder on the 24th and two separate murders on the 25th.

If I have to know which reporter to search to find these stories, how am I supposed to believe that #BlackLivesMatter, at least to the news staff of The Philadelphia Inquirer?

I am not the only person who has noticed this:

On Friday, December 11, 2020, Helen Ubiñas published an article in The Philadelphia Inquirer entitled “What do you know about the Philadelphians killed by guns this year? At least know their names.”

The last time we published the names of those lost to gun violence, in early July, nearly 200 people had been fatally shot in the city.

Just weeks before the end of 2020, that number doubled. More than 400 people gunned down.

By the time you read this, there will only be more.

Even in a “normal” year, most of their stories would never be told.

At best they’d be reduced to a handful of lines in a media alert:

“A 21-year-old Black male was shot one time in the head. He was transported to Temple University Hospital and was pronounced at 8:12 p.m. The scene is being held, no weapon recovered and no arrest.”

That’s it. An entire life ending in a paragraph that may never make the daily newspaper.

Of course, Miss Ubiñas followed the Inquirer’s stylebook in claiming that these Philadelphians were “killed by guns.” No, they were killed by bad people, people who used guns as their tools. But the Inquirer doesn’t want to ever say that part.

I’ve told the truth previously: unless the murder victim is someone already of note, or a cute little white girl, the editors of the Inquirer don’t care, because, to be bluntly honest about it, the murder of a young black man in Philadelphia is not news. Unless the victim was a Somebody, the Inquirer didn’t care. If the victim is a white male, not even in the city, and the shooting was probably accidental, yeah, that merits not just one but two stories.

If the Publisher of the Inquirer really wants the paper to be, as she put it, “an anti-racist news organization,” then she needs to see to it that the newspaper, and its website,[3]I am a digital subscriber to the Inquirer. There is no getting a paper copy out in the wilds of eastern Kentucky. actually covers the news, covers the killings, follows up on the murders, and tells the truth to its readers.

References

References
↑1 A newsroom, I would note, that moved out of its own historic building almost a decade earlier, as the then Philadelphia Media Holdings sold the old building because the company was in poor financial shape. Perhaps now working in the old Strawbridge’s building was less inspiring to the staff as far as architecture was concerned.
↑2 The Philadelphia Police Department only updates that page Monday through Friday, so the previous update, showing 199 homicides, was for 11:59 PM EDT on Thursday, May 20th.
↑3 I am a digital subscriber to the Inquirer. There is no getting a paper copy out in the wilds of eastern Kentucky.