Is political correctness to blame for lack of coverage over horrific black-on-white killings in America's Deep South?
By David Gardner
Last updated at 10:53 AM on 16th October 2009
It was the kind of crime that strikes terror into the hearts of parents everywhere.
A bright young couple were carjacked after a Saturday night date and murdered in the most brutal way imaginable.
Christopher Newsom, 23, was tied up and raped, shot in the back of the head and then dragged to a railway track and set on fire.
His girlfriend, 21-year-old University of Tennessee student Channon Christian’s fate was even more horrific.
Her death came only after hours of torture, during which time she was raped and savaged with a broken chair leg.
She was beaten in the head and a household bleach was poured down her throat and over her bleeding and battered genital area in an attempt by her attackers to cover any evidence of rape – all while she was still alive.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220695-06D64C3C000005DC-820_468x350.jpg
Torture: Channon Christian was forced to watch the attackers rape and kill her boyfriend Christopher Newsom before she was murdered
Then she was ‘hog-tied’ with curtains and a strip of bedding and a plastic bag was wrapped over her face.
Her body was stashed inside five bigger rubbish liners and dumped in a bin, where, according to the autopsy report, she slowly suffocated to death.
On Monday, the alleged ringleader of the gang accused of the killings goes on trial in Knoxville, Tennessee.
One of the gang has already been convicted and sentenced to life in prison without parole.
But, even though the killings happened in January, 2007, they have attracted very little national and international coverage.
That’s because they do not fit into the conventional contours of an attack in America’s Deep South, where a shameful history of racial intolerance has meant assaults by whites on blacks have historically been regarded in the context of race.
In this case, the races were reversed: the victims were white and the four men and one woman charged in connection with the murders are black.
Ironically, the case has now generated more publicity surrounding the furore over whether or not political correctness was behind the US media’s decision to largely ignore the story than it did for the murders themselves.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220695-06D64A08000005DC-392_468x409.jpg
Lemaricus Davidson, centre, goes on trial in Tennessee over the murders this week. Letalvis Cobbins, top right, has been jailed for life. Eric Boyd, Vanessa Coleman and George Thomas will be tried after Davidson
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220695-06D64AA9000005DC-428_468x468.jpg
Life: Letalvis 'Rome' Cobbins was found guilty of multiple counts of first degree murder. He was also convicted of rape, kidnapping and robbery
Defence lawyers were quick to say that some of the accused dated white women and even prosecutors denied any racial overtones.
‘There is absolutely no proof of a hate crime,’ said John Gill, special counsel to Knox County District Attorney Randy Nichols.
‘It was a terrible crime, a horrendous crime, but race was not a motive. We know from our investigation that the people charged in this case were friends with white people, socialised with white people, dated white people.
'So not only is there no evidence of any racial animus, there’s evidence to the contrary,’ he added.
But that hasn’t stopped conservative critics from blaming liberal bias in the US mainstream media for failing to cover the attacks.
Columnist and right-wing blogger Michelle Malkin weighed in, saying: ‘This case – an attractive white couple murdered by five black thugs –doesn’t fit any political agenda.
'It’s not a useful crime. Reverse the races and just imagine how the national media would cover the story of a young black couple murdered by five white assailants.’
Country music singer Charlie Daniels pointed out the media frenzy that came after a black woman accused three white members of the Duke University lacrosse team of raping her.
The players were later cleared after their accuser changed her story.
But Daniels said on his website: ‘If this had been white on black crime, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and their ilk would have descended on Knoxville like a swarm of angry bees.’
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220695-06D647A7000005DC-436_468x362.jpg
Victims: Channon christian, 21, and boyfriend Christopher Newsom, 23, were carjacked and murdered after a Saturday night date in Tennessee in 2007
Much of the criticism over the scant coverage of the murders has been on the internet through blogs and websites.
University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds said the American media has a ‘template’ for covering white-on-black crime but not the reverse.
‘I think it would have gotten a lot of national play faster if it had been a black couple kidnapped and killed by five white people,’ he told the local paper in Knoxville.
White supremacists have jumped onto the bandwagon, seeking to twist the facts for their own racist agenda.
They spread false details about the murders, claiming the victims were sexually dismembered and that Channon was sexually tortured for days, neither of which is true.
‘The DA’s office is outraged they have tried to abuse the victims by using the death of loved ones for racist purposes,’ John Gill said.
‘The things that have been seized on by these hate groups are things that never happened.’
‘There are people out there that just want to make something even worse than what it already is,’ Channon’s father, Gary Christian, said in a recent interview.
But Chris’s father, Hugh, told a local TV station: ‘Would they have done that to a black couple? I don’t think so.’
‘With all the things they did to them, what else could you call it but hate?’ his wife, Mary, said.
‘I think any kind of crime like that’s a hate crime. Was it racial? No, I don’t think so', Mr Christian added.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220695-06D64AFA000005DC-734_468x590.jpg
Outrage: Campaigners believe the murders haven't received extensive media coverage because of race issues
Knox County Sheriff Jimmy Jones said: ‘I don’t believe if they’d been Mexican, Chinese or Japanese it would have mattered. I believe these people were evil.
'I believe it was a plan. These two kids just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.’
According to court testimony, Chris, a talented carpenter and former high school baseball player, and college senior Channon had gone to a friend’s home after a date at a local restaurant when they were held up at gunpoint and carjacked on January 6, 2007.
They were forced to drive to an old clapboard house in one of Knoxville’s toughest neighbourhoods, where their captors, some of them ex-convicts, subjected them to the nightmare ordeal.
Wearing glasses and dressed smartly in trousers, a collared shirt and jumper, Lemaricus Davidson, 28, looked more like a college student than an accused killer during pre-trial hearings.
The seven women and five man jury includes just one black juror. If convicted, Davidson could face the death penalty.
In a separate trial last month, Davidson’s brother, Letalvis Cobbins, 27, was sentenced to life in prison after being found guilty of multiple counts of first degree murder. He was also convicted of rape, kidnapping and robbery.
George Thomas, 27, and Cobbins’ former girlfriend, Vannessa Coleman, 21, will be tried after Davidson.
A fifth defendant, Eric Boyd, 37, is serving an 18-year prison sentence after being convicted of being an accessory to a fatal carjacking.
jfoobar
10-18-09, 10:08 AM
The correct answer is "almost certainly yes." There has been and remains a clear media bias towards reporting white-on-minority crimes versus minority-on-white crimes, even when there are clear indicators that the crime was committed for racial reasons (a factor that appears to be lacking, however, in the case you cited above). Of course, it doesn't help that the kinds of folks who usually end up complaining so loudly about this bias are the same kinds of folks who have Confederate flag decals on their pickup trucks.
Why did James Byrd's dragging death get so much media attention but Patricia Stansfield's dragging death 2 months later get virtually none? Byrd was a convicted felon. Stansfield was a nurse.
It is similar to the bias that leads the media to cover child abduction cases involving pretty blond white girls much more closely than those involving minority children.
The media sucks. What can you do?
Ky-Fi
10-18-09, 11:20 AM
"‘There is absolutely no proof of a hate crime,’ said John Gill, special counsel to Knox County District Attorney Randy Nichols."
Aside from the question of media bias pursuant to race in reporting these incidents, can ANYBODY explain to me the logic of "hate crime" legislation? Who the hell cares whether or not it there was "racial hatred" involved? What, if they raped and murdered the couple in a spirit of tolerance and racial equality, does that make the crime less heinous? Why do we need the government to inject political correctness and ideological motivation into the legal definitions of criminal offenses?
awil1026
10-18-09, 11:25 AM
"‘There is absolutely no proof of a hate crime,’ said John Gill, special counsel to Knox County District Attorney Randy Nichols."
Aside from the question of media bias pursuant to race in reporting these incidents, can ANYBODY explain to me the logic of "hate crime" legislation? Who the hell cares whether or not it there was "racial hatred" involved? What, if they raped and murdered the couple in a spirit of tolerance and racial equality, does that make the crime less heinous? Why do we need the government to inject political correctness and ideological motivation into the legal definitions of criminal offenses?
I've been saying the same thing for years.
Vibiana
10-18-09, 12:01 PM
I don't care what color the victims are. I don't care what color the offenders are. The only thing to be done with those animals is to put them down. Behind the courthouse. Ten minutes after the verdict is delivered. I'd be more than happy to buy the bullets.
brayzie
10-18-09, 12:23 PM
That's sickening and sad.
About the Hate Crime law, I think the supporters of it think that it will curb racist motivated crimes. Maybe it's the same reasoning that supporters of gang enhancements use. Or maybe it's to show that racist ideologies have reprecussions.
I don't think it's right though, because why should a racist get a harsher penalty than a non-racist for an equally horrific crime?
nemein
10-18-09, 12:27 PM
Aside from the question of media bias pursuant to race in reporting these incidents, can ANYBODY explain to me the logic of "hate crime" legislation?
There is no logic to HCL aside from it being "feel good" legislation aimed at correcting some sort of perceived imbalance in the judicial system. The ironic thing is, at least according to one study from a few years ago, it may actually hurt minorities more, if it is applied fairly.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=239047
One of the most glaring unanticipated consequences of hate crime legislation is that, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), there is more minority-on-White hate crime than White-on-minority hate crime. As a consequence, if hate crimes legislation is applied rigorously to all bias-motivated inter-racial crimes, far more minority members would be subjected to enhanced penalties than their White counterparts.
Disclaimers... I havent' read the above study, just found it on search and read the synopsis ;)
Dean Kousoulas
10-18-09, 02:16 PM
I don't care what color the victims are. I don't care what color the offenders are. The only thing to be done with those animals is to put them down. Behind the courthouse. Ten minutes after the verdict is delivered. I'd be more than happy to buy the bullets.
100% agreed.
pedagogue
10-18-09, 02:58 PM
Yes there is a media bias, but good luck getting anyone to actually admit it.
Baron Of Hell
10-18-09, 03:06 PM
I don't keep up with rape murder cases but the only other one I can think of this year was of female black officer being raped. And the only reason I know about that is because it his direct ties into political issues. They probably don't get much play because these types of story don't have national appeal. The truth of matter is people get rapped and murdered every day and unless it has some unusually hook it isn't going to get national play.
On a differently note I definitely agree with hate crime laws. All crimes aren't the same and shouldn't be treated as such. It is no different than the gang laws some cities have. If you do a crime you get some kind of punishment and if you do it as gang member you get extra punishment.
Ky-Fi
10-18-09, 03:11 PM
The ironic thing is, at least according to one study from a few years ago, it may actually hurt minorities more, if it is applied fairly.
Yes, but certainly the originators and proponents of hate-crime legislation never had the intention of seeing it applied evenly regardless of racial, ethnic and political affiliation.
pedagogue
10-18-09, 03:26 PM
Hate crime legislation was meant to punish those who committed crime motivate by race, sexual preference, etc.....how can anyone be against that? If they are finding certain groups are more likely to commit a hate crime (KKK v. some other random group), is that a reason to rescind them, or does it reinforce their importance because there is obviously a problem of certain groups being targeted by other groups?
My friend's partner was savagely attacked because of his sexual preference, yet the scum bag got a slap on the wrist. Hate crime legislation is meant to help prevent the "slap on the wrist" and actually punish any individual that intentionally targets a group of people and causes them harm.
Ky-Fi
10-18-09, 03:45 PM
Hate crime legislation was meant to punish those who committed crime motivate by race, sexual preference, etc.....how can anyone be against that? If they are finding certain groups are more likely to commit a hate crime (KKK v. some other random group), is that a reason to rescind them, or does it reinforce their importance because there is obviously a problem of certain groups being targeted by other groups?
My friend's partner was savagely attacked because of his sexual preference, yet the scum bag got a slap on the wrist. Hate crime legislation is meant to help prevent the "slap on the wrist" and actually punish any individual that intentionally targets a group of people and causes them harm.
So then logically you must feel that if a guy beat your friend's partner's head in with a tire iron because he was looking for money, then he should receive a more lenient sentence than if he had beaten your friend's partner's head in with a tire iron because he was gay?
jfoobar
10-18-09, 04:05 PM
Hate crime legislation was meant to punish those who committed crime motivate by race, sexual preference, etc.....how can anyone be against that?
Because it says that your friend's partner's life is more important than mine, at least under some circumstances. That's ludicrous.
If the scumbag that attacked that guy got off with a slap on the wrist and deserved more, there was obviously a flaw in the criminal justice process. However, you do not correct an inequality in the law by codifying another inequality.
Nugent
10-18-09, 04:21 PM
I don't keep up with rape murder cases but the only other one I can think of this year was of female black officer being raped. And the only reason I know about that is because it his direct ties into political issues. They probably don't get much play because these types of story don't have national appeal. The truth of matter is people get rapped and murdered every day and unless it has some unusually hook it isn't going to get national play.
On a differently note I definitely agree with hate crime laws. All crimes aren't the same and shouldn't be treated as such. It is no different than the gang laws some cities have. If you do a crime you get some kind of punishment and if you do it as gang member you get extra punishment.
I can assure you that if the colors were switched in this case and it happened in Jackson, MS it most certainly would have national appeal.
We would have Al and Jesse down here along with daily articles from the New York Times.
It is telling that this article was from the UK and not a US news outlet.
pedagogue
10-18-09, 04:29 PM
Because it says that your friend's partner's life is more important than mine, at least under some circumstances. That's ludicrous.
If the scumbag that attacked that guy got off with a slap on the wrist and deserved more, there was obviously a flaw in the criminal justice process. However, you do not correct an inequality in the law by codifying another inequality.
There are definitely flaws in the criminal justice process, though I also think that adding on additional punishment for targeting groups is a welcome addition....even if the current enforcement of the laws is often poorly done.
Suprmallet
10-18-09, 05:01 PM
Because it says that your friend's partner's life is more important than mine, at least under some circumstances. That's ludicrous.
If the scumbag that attacked that guy got off with a slap on the wrist and deserved more, there was obviously a flaw in the criminal justice process. However, you do not correct an inequality in the law by codifying another inequality.
The idea behind it is to be a deterrent. The person bashing someone's head in for being gay is probably not the same person who would bash someone's head in for money.
grundle
10-18-09, 05:10 PM
Hate crime legislation was meant to punish those who committed crime motivate by race, sexual preference, etc.....how can anyone be against that? If they are finding certain groups are more likely to commit a hate crime (KKK v. some other random group), is that a reason to rescind them, or does it reinforce their importance because there is obviously a problem of certain groups being targeted by other groups?
My friend's partner was savagely attacked because of his sexual preference, yet the scum bag got a slap on the wrist. Hate crime legislation is meant to help prevent the "slap on the wrist" and actually punish any individual that intentionally targets a group of people and causes them harm.
Then what do you think should be done to prevent the "slap on the wrist" for scumbags who commit violent crimes where hate is not a motivator?
And why not apply the same solution to the scumbag who savagely attacked your friend's partner?
grundle
10-18-09, 05:11 PM
Hate crime legislation was meant to punish those who committed crime motivate by race, sexual preference, etc.....how can anyone be against that? If they are finding certain groups are more likely to commit a hate crime (KKK v. some other random group), is that a reason to rescind them, or does it reinforce their importance because there is obviously a problem of certain groups being targeted by other groups?
My friend's partner was savagely attacked because of his sexual preference, yet the scum bag got a slap on the wrist. Hate crime legislation is meant to help prevent the "slap on the wrist" and actually punish any individual that intentionally targets a group of people and causes them harm.
So then logically you must feel that if a guy beat your friend's partner's head in with a tire iron because he was looking for money, then he should receive a more lenient sentence than if he had beaten your friend's partner's head in with a tire iron because he was gay?
Exactly.
grundle
10-18-09, 05:13 PM
The idea behind it is to be a deterrent. The person bashing someone's head in for being gay is probably not the same person who would bash someone's head in for money.
Why don't you think there should be a deterrent to people who bash someone's head in for money?
pedagogue
10-18-09, 05:16 PM
Then what do you think should be done to prevent the "slap on the wrist" for scumbags who commit violent crimes where hate is not a motivator?
And why not apply the same solution to the scumbag who savagely attacked your friend's partner?
I am hesitant to recommend mandatory sentences (as they have gone so well for repeat drug offenders), but it is a travesty that violent offenders seem to get far less time than drug offenses and other non-violent crimes.
Suprmallet
10-18-09, 05:31 PM
Why don't you think there should be a deterrent to people who bash someone's head in for money?
Make them work at McDonald's. I'm not the one proposing this legislation. I'm just providing what I feel is the likely rationale.
grundle
10-18-09, 05:49 PM
I am hesitant to recommend mandatory sentences (as they have gone so well for repeat drug offenders), but it is a travesty that violent offenders seem to get far less time than drug offenses and other non-violent crimes.
You did not answer my questions.
What do you think should be done to prevent the "slap on the wrist" for scumbags who commit violent crimes where hate is not a motivator?
And why not apply the same solution to the scumbag who savagely attacked your friend's partner?
BKenn01
10-18-09, 06:49 PM
Hate crime legislation was meant to punish those who committed crime motivate by race, sexual preference, etc.....how can anyone be against that? If they are finding certain groups are more likely to commit a hate crime (KKK v. some other random group), is that a reason to rescind them, or does it reinforce their importance because there is obviously a problem of certain groups being targeted by other groups?
My friend's partner was savagely attacked because of his sexual preference, yet the scum bag got a slap on the wrist. Hate crime legislation is meant to help prevent the "slap on the wrist" and actually punish any individual that intentionally targets a group of people and causes them harm.
Real easy, it includes pedophiles. You really think if a father kills some scumbag who molests his child that he should be charged more harshly than any other murder?
A crime is a crime. I dont care if they are gay, white, black whatever they should be treated the same.
Rockmjd23
10-18-09, 06:56 PM
"No proof of a hate crime" :lol: right
The fact that lawyers have to look at the racial dating history of defendants to determine the severity of punishment tells you all you need to know about hate crime legislation.
Nugent
10-18-09, 07:17 PM
"If races were reversed, do you think the national media would have covered this?"
That 3 people selected "Almost certainly No" as their choice is bizarre to me.
Yeah there would be zero coverage of this if 5 white thugs did this to a cute black couple below the Mason-Dixon Line. rotfl
Superboy
10-18-09, 07:21 PM
I think the severity of the crime (and the consequences to the victim) are more important when determining punishment than the motivations behind the crime (besides the usual ones, like premeditated murder)
pedagogue
10-18-09, 07:24 PM
What do you think should be done to prevent the "slap on the wrist" for scumbags who commit violent crimes where hate is not a motivator?
And why not apply the same solution to the scumbag who savagely attacked your friend's partner?
They need to enforce harsher penalties for the act (hate crime or not). I would strongly support harsher penalties, but that doesn't exclude adding additional punishment in cases where a hate crime occurred.
Superboy
10-18-09, 07:25 PM
And this article isn't indicative of "reverse-racism". It would only be indicative of reverse racism if the sentence against black people who murdered white people was lower than the sentence of white people who murder black people. And that is certainly not the case.
And it also most certainly not the case that crimes committed by black people somehow manage to fly under our radar. The proof is in the prison populations.
eXcentris
10-18-09, 07:26 PM
I'm for hate crime legislation because they preserve harmony and equality in multicultural societies. The fact that they piss off Ky-Fi is just a bonus. :D
Nugent
10-18-09, 07:30 PM
And this article isn't indicative of "reverse-racism". It would only be indicative of reverse racism if the sentence against black people who murdered white people was lower than the sentence of white people who murder black people. And that is certainly not the case.
And it also most certainly not the case that crimes committed by black people somehow manage to fly under our radar. The proof is in the prison populations.
The question had nothing to do with the sentences of the perps.
The question was would the case have received greater visibility if the colors were reversed.
Crimes by blacks being over or under reported by newspapers or the media has nothing to do with the number of blacks in prison.
Hank Ringworm
10-18-09, 07:49 PM
And this article isn't indicative of "reverse-racism". It would only be indicative of reverse racism if the sentence against black people who murdered white people was lower than the sentence of white people who murder black people. And that is certainly not the case.
And it also most certainly not the case that crimes committed by black people somehow manage to fly under our radar. The proof is in the prison populations.
So an incident can only display racism or "reverse-racism" (which is simply racism) if it is racism institutionalized in the government? We're talking about racism in the media, here, not a codified racism inherent in our justice system.
Ky-Fi
10-18-09, 08:00 PM
I'm for hate crime legislation because they preserve harmony and equality in multicultural societies. The fact that they piss off Ky-Fi is just a bonus. :D
See!!? See!? He's a Ky-Fi-ophobe, and he ADMITS IT!!! I demand protected status on this forum to shield me from such hate. :helpme:
Superboy
10-18-09, 08:47 PM
The question had nothing to do with the sentences of the perps.
The question was would the case have received greater visibility if the colors were reversed.
Crimes by blacks being over or under reported by newspapers or the media has nothing to do with the number of blacks in prison.
So an incident can only display racism or "reverse-racism" (which is simply racism) if it is racism institutionalized in the government? We're talking about racism in the media, here, not a codified racism inherent in our justice system.
Ah, good. So you understand we're talking about something irrelevant, not something that's necessarily representative of actual inequalities in society. Thank you!
Nugent
10-18-09, 08:53 PM
Ah, good. So you understand we're talking about something irrelevant, not something that's necessarily representative of actual inequalities in society. Thank you!
Your white guilt must be such a burden to live with on a daily basis.
If you want to go whine about inequalities in society then go open a thread up and whine away.
You seem to have a problem discussing the obvious thread topic of non coverage of the story by the typical media outlets that would be on this like stink on shit were the colors reversed.
Hank Ringworm
10-18-09, 09:00 PM
Ah, good. So you understand we're talking about something irrelevant, not something that's necessarily representative of actual inequalities in society. Thank you!
Your statist philosophy is laughable. If it's not actually codified, it doesn't matter? Seriously? The media is as big a part of society as is government, if not bigger, so I AM talking about "actual inequalities in society."
There is an entire world out there beyond the construction of government. Some of it, you may be surprised to learn, has some sort of effect on society.
Hank Ringworm
10-18-09, 09:11 PM
I'm for hate crime legislation because they preserve harmony and equality in multicultural societies. The fact that they piss off Ky-Fi is just a bonus. :D
Haha! on the Ky-Fi zing, but how does hate crime legislation preserve harmony and equality in multicultural societies? In real life, of course. Dare I say, Link? :D
Ky-Fi
10-18-09, 09:44 PM
Haha! on the Ky-Fi zing, but how does hate crime legislation preserve harmony and equality in multicultural societies? In real life, of course. Dare I say, Link? :D
Actually, if you're talking about an official policy of Mulitculturalism (The U.K, the Netherlands)---in contrast to the policy of assimilation (The US, France)---I would say eXcentris is right, to some extent. When you don't force minority groups to assimilate into the dominant culture, and instead allow parallel societies to develop, you're going to have a huge potential for violent conflicts between various groups. One way to put the lid on that (at least for a while) is to clamp down on free speech, and to prohibit any speech that might be deemed "offensive" or "divisive" or "hateful". To a large extent, that's how the Soviet Union kept the lid on their ethnic conflicts, and that's how communist China does it today. I would argue that it's better to abandondon the idea of Multiculturalism, adopt a policy of assimilation, and keep free speech----but that's just me.
Superboy
10-18-09, 10:07 PM
Your white guilt must be such a burden to live with on a daily basis.
If you want to go whine about inequalities in society then go open a thread up and whine away.
You seem to have a problem discussing the obvious thread topic of non coverage of the story by the typical media outlets that would be on this like stink on shit were the colors reversed.
I'm not white.
And i'm not the one whining about so-called social inequalities. You are.
Your statist philosophy is laughable. If it's not actually codified, it doesn't matter? Seriously? The media is as big a part of society as is government, if not bigger, so I AM talking about "actual inequalities in society."
There is an entire world out there beyond the construction of government. Some of it, you may be surprised to learn, has some sort of effect on society.
And your post-modernist deconstructionist philosophy is even more laughable. You equate perceived rhetorical imbalances that only exist in your hypothetical situations as having equitable, if not greater influence, on human behavior and liberty than de jure social mores.
Nugent
10-18-09, 11:27 PM
I'm not white.
And i'm not the one whining about so-called social inequalities. You are.
And your post-modernist deconstructionist philosophy is even more laughable. You equate perceived rhetorical imbalances that only exist in your hypothetical situations as having equitable, if not greater influence, on human behavior and liberty than de jure social mores.
I think I missed the part where I was whining about social enequalities.
I just find it funny that you and others don't think this story of these thugs would be covered differently by the media were it white on black to be silly.
kvrdave
10-18-09, 11:37 PM
Some day when there is no racism and no racially motivated crimes, we will still need "hate crime" legislation around to keep people believing that racism is still alive, well, and rampant. Without that, what is the point of having the Democrat party?
eXcentris
10-18-09, 11:48 PM
I would argue that it's better to abandondon the idea of Multiculturalism, adopt a policy of assimilation, and keep free speech----but that's just me.
It's just you because ideologies cannot be reduced to black and white either/or propositions.
Superboy
10-18-09, 11:56 PM
I think I missed the part where I was whining about social enequalities.
I just find it funny that you and others don't think this story of these thugs would be covered differently by the media were it white on black to be silly.
Because you think that, hypothetically, there is some sort of incongruity in the media with regards to media coverage of blacks and whites, and that it really is relevant to the pursuit and enforcement of justice. The big question on my mind is "so?". I'm not necessarily saying that it would have been the same had the people involved been of a different skin color (hypothetically speaking, that is)... but rather,
1. you don't have any evidence other than your supposed hypothetical situation.
2. It really doesn't matter in the scheme of things, does it?
The criminals were not let go nor were the charges reduced because their crime wasn't labeled as being racially motivated by the media.
Superboy
10-18-09, 11:56 PM
Some day when there is no racism and no racially motivated crimes, we will still need "hate crime" legislation around to keep people believing that racism is still alive, well, and rampant. Without that, what is the point of having the Democrat party?
To fleece the rich, of course ;P
Nugent
10-19-09, 12:07 AM
Because you think that, hypothetically, there is some sort of incongruity in the media with regards to media coverage of blacks and whites, and that it really is relevant to the pursuit and enforcement of justice. The big question on my mind is "so?". I'm not necessarily saying that it would have been the same had the people involved been of a different skin color (hypothetically speaking, that is)... but rather,
1. you don't have any evidence other than your supposed hypothetical situation.
2. It really doesn't matter in the scheme of things, does it?
The criminals were not let go nor were the charges reduced because their crime wasn't labeled as being racially motivated by the media.
I guess you missed the entire article the thread is based on.
Ranger
10-19-09, 12:25 AM
Brutal case. I never heard about this before, it is strange, considering one of the victims being a UTenn student, and Knoxville being mostly white. I'm sure it's been a big local story for the state though. What's important is that those responsible for the murders be punished.
But I definitely agree that hate crime laws are just about political correctness and thus stupid and inconsistently enforced.
Superboy
10-19-09, 12:27 AM
I think that if the races had been reversed, the national media would have given this a lot of coverage.
Is political correctness to blame for lack of coverage over horrific black-on-white killings in America's Deep South?
By David Gardner
Last updated at 10:53 AM on 16th October 2009
Ironically, the case has now generated more publicity surrounding the furore over whether or not political correctness was behind the US media’s decision to largely ignore the story than it did for the murders themselves.
But that hasn’t stopped conservative critics from blaming liberal bias in the US mainstream media for failing to cover the attacks.
Columnist and right-wing blogger Michelle Malkin weighed in, saying: ‘This case – an attractive white couple murdered by five black thugs –doesn’t fit any political agenda.
'It’s not a useful crime. Reverse the races and just imagine how the national media would cover the story of a young black couple murdered by five white assailants.’
Country music singer Charlie Daniels pointed out the media frenzy that came after a black woman accused three white members of the Duke University lacrosse team of raping her.
The players were later cleared after their accuser changed her story.
But Daniels said on his website: ‘If this had been white on black crime, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and their ilk would have descended on Knoxville like a swarm of angry bees.’
‘I think it would have gotten a lot of national play faster if it had been a black couple kidnapped and killed by five white people,’ he told the local paper in Knoxville.
But Chris’s father, Hugh, told a local TV station: ‘Would they have done that to a black couple? I don’t think so.’
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/15/article-1220695-06D64AFA000005DC-734_468x590.jpg
Outrage: Campaigners believe the murders haven't received extensive media coverage because of race issues
The seven women and five man jury includes just one black juror. If convicted, Davidson could face the death penalty.
In a separate trial last month, Davidson’s brother, Letalvis Cobbins, 27, was sentenced to life in prison after being found guilty of multiple counts of first degree murder. He was also convicted of rape, kidnapping and robbery.
George Thomas, 27, and Cobbins’ former girlfriend, Vannessa Coleman, 21, will be tried after Davidson.
A fifth defendant, Eric Boyd, 37, is serving an 18-year prison sentence after being convicted of being an accessory to a fatal carjacking.
No, I read the article, I just don't think suppositions are equitable with hard evidence.
Also, in case you didn't realize the problem with this article in the first place, it's saying that the lack of media coverage of this crime is indicative of liberal bias. Despite the fact that this event is now being politicized to portray whites as victims of political correctness. Simply because Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton weren't at the front lines on this one, that it doesn't immediately mean that there's some sort of large scale effort in the media to suppress these types of stories.
And even the most substantive extension of those arguments, which is that the politicization of events lends to changes in the enforcement of laws, is apparently not true in this case.
wm lopez
10-19-09, 02:36 AM
Yes there is a media bias, but good luck getting anyone to actually admit it.
I admit it.:bdance:
wm lopez
10-19-09, 02:40 AM
Then what do you think should be done to prevent the "slap on the wrist" for scumbags who commit violent crimes where hate is not a motivator?
And why not apply the same solution to the scumbag who savagely attacked your friend's partner?
Something like that JESSICA'S LAW that prevents liberal judges from giving those slap on the wrists sentences.
Hank Ringworm
10-22-09, 03:51 AM
And your post-modernist deconstructionist philosophy is even more laughable. You equate perceived rhetorical imbalances that only exist in your hypothetical situations as having equitable, if not greater influence, on human behavior and liberty than de jure social mores.
Nice words, dude. "Mores" does not need, does not want, actually, the adjective "de jure." The two are kind of antithetical.
I offered no hypothetical situations, only commentary on a very real situation. Also, the very real fact that our society is constructed by many things other than written laws. You are blind to that fact.
Ask Rush Limbaugh whether or not de facto social constructs lead to real discriminatory results.
Hank Ringworm
10-22-09, 04:05 AM
Also, I'm pretty sure you have absolutely no idea what "post-modernist deconstructionist" means.
Superboy
10-22-09, 03:21 PM
Nice words, dude. "Mores" does not need, does not want, actually, the adjective "de jure." The two are kind of antithetical.
Those two terms aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
I offered no hypothetical situations, only commentary on a very real situation. Also, the very real fact that our society is constructed by many things other than written laws. You are blind to that fact.
Yes, okay, so what is the result of this reverse-racism in the media?
Are blacks less likely to get sentencing that is equal to whites in similar situations?
You'll find that the opposite is true. Blacks are more likely to receive harsher punishments than whites. Especially in the case of black-on-white and white-on-black crimes.
Ask Rush Limbaugh whether or not de facto social constructs lead to real
discriminatory results.
Yeah, except Rush Limbaugh always makes everything up. He cites statistics that are always wrong, distorted, or simply fabricated. He sells his opinion as fact.
Also, I'm pretty sure you have absolutely no idea what "post-modernist deconstructionist" means.
And you got this from...?
My point was, if this had any measurable effect on society or was indicative of inequalities in society, there would be measurable consequences in society. Even Foucault and Butler were trying to examine the root causes of perceptible inequalities in society that actually had measurable results.
Buy: