The Black Informant | African American Commentary, News and Community Building

I think you can take it a step further. It think there is still a little outrage when an “innocent” person is killed by black on black crime. What I mean by innocent is a child caught in crossfire or a good student or a good athlete, etc.. Not nearly as much as we have seen over Jena or Imus. But there is still a little outrage there. It is at least covered by the local news for a couple of days.

But if one thug kills another thug then you hear nearly nothing about it. And to be honest I don’t really care to hear about it. It is hard to feel sorry for someone who knows what they are doing has only two probable endings. You are either going to end up in jail or dead. EVERYONE older than two years old should know this by now. I hate to sound harsh but if that is the life you choose knowing what the outcome will be then… Oh well…

I agree, but here is the thing–

You and me calling these guys “thugs” and dismissing it as the result of bad life choices is okay. A White news commentator (for example) saying the same thing—massive protests and a rush to portray these “thugs” as innocent victims who are just too emotionally beat down from a racist American system and are unable to think straight—you know the drill.

Roughly 1/10 of the same enthusiastic participation we show in protests can be seen in things like Big Brothers/Big Sisters, 100 Black Men, etc. Just imagine what could happen with just 1/3 of that same enthusiasm in one city.

I know it sounds backwards, but sometimes the usage of the word “nigga/nigger”, etc. by some of these White headliners is sometimes way more effective in drumming up concern for the state of Black America than the average Joe that has been preaching and living it for years.

The FBI’s UCR is only “uniform” in the sense that the FBI treats the data handed to it in a fairly uniform manner. All too often localities have their own peculiar versions of reality that are skewed for various political/economic reasons.

IMO, the NCVS is a better macro measure of what’s actually going on.

“What happens when Black individuals are killed by other Black individuals?”

The same thing that happens when Whites kill other Whites — which happens far more frequently, BTW. Most people look upon such events as trivial.

You’re only describing a small part of the public’s reaction to the commercial media’s selective and biased news coverage of any topic with a racial angle. These companies aren’t running charities. They mainly distribute information that will attract a general audience that views events, people, and ideas in racial terms.

Let’s not misrepresent media coverage as a reliable indicator of what Af-Ams (or other groups) are really concerned about.

Let’s not misrepresent media coverage as a reliable indicator of what Af-Ams (or other groups) are really concerned about.

I’m not. And if you are Black, live in America, and have been around long enough, I think you know full well this is true.

Recent stories like Jena was fueled NOT by MSM, but by everyday Black folks(remember, that was the biggest complaint–that MSM was ignoring this issue) –folks with blogs and access to local media. Same goes for the Imus situation. You can also do a comparison of the outrage surrounding BET vs. outrage over these murders. MSM has been giving very little attention to the BET protests, but a significant number of folks have made this into a 911 issue. That number in most cases far overshadow those who respond in any way to the continuous string of Black on Black murders.

Misrepresentation? Naaaaah.

“I’m not”

Actually, you are.

You claim the reaction to news items like the Jena 6 wasn’t fueled by the ‘mainstream’ media, but in fact it was. Af-Ams were largely ignorant to the goings on in Jena, Louisiana until broadcasters like Tom Joyner and Michael Baisden started discussing it on their radio programs. (AAMOF, I think it was the BBC that first covered the story.) Even then, the bulk of the coverage focused on the reaction to the story rather than the story. The imagery — whether we’re talking about Imus, Michael Richards, the Jena 6, Michael Vick, etc. — suggests to the casual observer is Black people are hypersensitive about ‘race’ but not much else, as you’ve parroted here.

That’s irresponsible journalism at work.

You claim the reaction to news items like the Jena 6 wasn’t fueled by the ‘mainstream’ media, but in fact it was.

Okay, that’s bull.

Af-Ams were very aware of the goings on in Jena thanks largely to the Internet (blogs). Even Howard Witt of the Chicago Trib acknowledged this. He also acknowledged the same phenomena when his coverage regarding Shaquanda Cotton was spreading like wildfire over the Black blogosphere. Witt gave much credit to Black bloggers who kept the story going. Between these two stories, Witt has earned his weekend “Black” pass.

Af-Ams were largely ignorant to the goings on in Jena, Louisiana until broadcasters like Tom Joyner and Michael Baisden started discussing it on their radio programs.

Again, Howard Witt of the Chicago Tribune first broke the story. Baisden and Joyner jumped on it after they saw the buzz coming from Black bloggers who detailed every part of the story.

Even then, the bulk of the coverage focused on the reaction to the story rather than the story. The imagery — whether we’re talking about Imus, Michael Richards, the Jena 6, Michael Vick, etc. — suggests to the casual observer is Black people are hypersensitive about ‘race’ but not much else, as you’ve parroted here.

You are making an argument where there is none. You know as well as I know that Black folks in this country are very hypersensitive when it comes to race. This is without any interference by mainstream media. The picture may disturb you (especially coming from me, your “nemesis”), but it is very true indeed.

**UPDATE**

As for “not much else”, when was the last time you saw the Black community rally behind a cause WITH SIMILAR ENTHUSIASM as with the earlier mentioned cases that was not race-related?

I’ll work backwards on your last post. I live just outside D.C.. I was born in D.C. and have lived most of my life here. I see and read about groups of Black people holding rallies nearly every day on a variety of issues that have nothing to do with ‘race’. Many of these events are not covered by the commercial news media. This dynamic wasn’t dramatically different in other places I’ve lived.

I disagree with your belief ‘Black’ folks are, “… very hypersensitive when it comes to race”. You have the right to believe about the topic as you wish, but it isn’t supportable by fact.

Third… and I hate to break it to you… but only 3-4% of Af-Ams get their news information from blogs and other ‘alternative’ news sources. While I suspect Howard Witt as the source of the Jena 6 story’s spread through the Afrosphere, neither did he ‘break’ the story (as I wrote earlier) nor did Af-Ams nationwide learn of the story until it was discussed on nationally syndicated ‘Black’ radio shows.

I see and read about groups of Black people holding rallies nearly every day on a variety of issues that have nothing to do with ‘race’. Many of these events are not covered by the commercial news media. This dynamic wasn’t dramatically different in other places I’ve lived.

Point missed!

I never said or suggested that Black folks are not concerned about other issues. Here is what I asked you directly:

As for “not much else”, when was the last time you saw the Black community rally behind a cause WITH SIMILAR ENTHUSIASM as with the earlier mentioned cases that was not race-related?

I disagree with your belief ‘Black’ folks are, “… very hypersensitive when it comes to race”.

“hypersensitive” may be too strong a word for you, so I will leave you with any subtle descriptor as you wish. In the meantime, may I direct your attention to affirmative action?

Third… and I hate to break it to you… but only 3-4% of Af-Ams get their news information from blogs and other ‘alternative’ news sources.

That may be true in the general sense, but not in the case of Jena or Shaquanda Cotton as it was Black Bloggers that kept the story going. Mainstream media even confirmed that one. As I said earlier, Black radio shows only chimed in when they saw the traction these stories were getting in the Black blogosphere. Anyway, your point is still nill here because if anything it underscores what I said earlier about what WE value the most: Stories where there is White offense against a Black individual. As you pointed out, BLACK radio shows took the story and declared them a Black 911. This phenomena is nothing new for us as e-mail has been used repeatedly for years to point out the latest “hate crime” by a White individual (Cobb calls it “The Kwaku Network”). In all my years being part of “the network”, I do not remember seeing a series of e-mails over Black on Black crime or its effects on family members left behind. I do remember how WE burned up the Internet with blow by blow news bits surrounding Tawanda Brawley and O.J. Simpson. As you pointed out, BLACK radio shows helped fan the flames of both of these stories. Both Joyner and Baisden do good work keeping the community informed on the issues as well as with their own foundations, but I cannot remember the last time they helped organize a protest or similar level of activism against cities like Atlanta who have an over 50% unsolved homicide rate. Nor do I remember such level of activism to raise money for victims of homicide where the shooter was Black. That goes for both Black radio and other forms of Black-controlled media. As I said earlier, these poor souls are dismissed as the ‘nigga class’.

One more time–As a people, we are both interested and concerned about numbers of issues that are discussed and addressed on the regular. But at the end of the day, issues pertaining to race trumps them all—starting with this medium: The BLACK blogosphere/AFROspear.

‘With similar enthusiasm’ is a red herring, Duane. It’s not like extra credit is awarded for the degree of response. Similarly, your use of ‘hypersensitive’ is so general as to have no merit whatsoever.

“.. but not in the case of Jena or Shaquanda Cotton as it was Black Bloggers that kept the story going.”

You argued that the Afrosphere “fueled” the Jena 6 protest(s). In actuality, ‘Black’ bloggers played a complementary role to that of the commercial media, because the audience at large first learned about the story from commercial offline media. Consider too the number of ‘Black’ bloggers who are also professional journalists. The Afrosphere at this time is mostly just an echo chamber made up of Buppies. It doesn’t drive (or ‘fuel’) action on the street.

I can’t believe you’re crazy enough to believe ‘we’ were on the Internet in any considerable numbers in the early-to-mid 90′s when O.J. was on trial for murder. The Tawana Brawley story happened in the 80′s before Internet access was made available to U.S. consumers.

FWIW, I know a man, Kenneth Barnes, whose son was murdered in D.C. around 2001. Mr. Barnes started an organization, ROOT, Inc. that has regularly staged some pretty large ‘Stop the Violence’ rallies with the help (!) of the local media.

You wouldn’t know about ROOT or the rallies if it were left to the Washington Post, Washington Times, and full-power TV stations in the area.

‘With similar enthusiasm’ is a red herring, Duane. It’s not like extra credit is awarded for the degree of response. Similarly, your use of ‘hypersensitive’ is so general as to have no merit whatsoever.

LOL! Noooo, not a red herring. You just cannot answer the question. Not a red herring, just a white flag on your part.

I can’t believe you’re crazy enough to believe ‘we’ were on the Internet in any considerable numbers in the early-to-mid 90’s when O.J. was on trial for murder.

Newsgroups and e-mail! Memba that? I do. Many of the same circular debates regarding race that you see today in the Black blogosphere were present during the age of newsgroups. As far as “considerable numbers” go, it does not matter. RACE was the underlying topic then as it is today. The blogosphere today in many ways is just a continuation of that period of online communication.

Tawana Brawley

The issue first popped up in 87 and the case was heard in 88. Around this time, many Blacks who were in the IT industry at the time used newsgroups to dealve into the case. The issue popped up again in the 90′s when she refused to testify. Also, Black radio along with the rest of msm rode this story like it was no tomorrow.

Anyway man, enjoy your holiday. I may have time for one more post today, but I have to get ready for my trip with the family.

Peace!

Yes… it’s a red herring. Whatever answer myself or someone else might attempt to reconcile with your idea of ‘similar enthusiasm’ has nothing to do with the main point of your thread being a fallacy.

Newsgroups and e-mails among ‘Black’ IT professionals in the late 80s? My, my… how far down we’ve moved the goalposts. Your point was the supposedly large degree to which Afrosphere “fuels” (your term) ‘Black’ public reaction. The numbers however — then and now — plainly refute your assertion. Black folks, generally speaking, don’t really rely on the Internet as a news source.

Have a nice Thanksgiving.