Haters Gonna Hate

There are several things missing from this piece on whether a horrendous attack on a young white couple by four black people is a hate crime, but the Ole Perfesser’s keen insight is not among them:

“You’ve seen a lot of people with impeccable credentials making the point that the press does play up white-on-black crime and play down black-on-white crime,” said Glenn Reynolds, a University of Tennessee law professor who publishes political and media commentaries on his widely read Instapundit blog. “I think it’s a fair criticism. And it just empowers the crazies when the mainstream media soft-pedals this stuff.”

While these media critics and their credentials remain unspecified, I should point out that the article contains commentary related to this topic from Michelle Malkin and Charlie Daniels. I don’t have those kinds of chops, of course, but a media critic might wonder why the reporter didn’t look at what motivates people who generally oppose hate crimes legislation to try and convince the public, if not law enforcement, that these offenses were a hate crime.

Lacking that, this article almost infringes on the Instapundit brand: Find the sweet spot between superficial respectability and barking madness, and step out of the way while the immodestly deranged set to work.


Comments: 23

a different brad

This is classic projection. It’s practically old school at this point. Empowering crazies is just what Glennbot is doing by dancing with the racially biased very random chance crime equivalency.

a different brad

I guess I should call it the equivalency devil, shouldn’t I.

a different brad

Oy. I’m not even effed up, just lazy. Change “very” to “versus” up there. And now I’ll stop hogging this post.


You have to register at the Trib site … what did Malkin say? What did Charlie effin’ Daniels say?

On second thought … do I really want to know?

Trilateral Chairman

Of course, playing up black-on-white crime never empowers the crazies. At all. Really.

And then there’s this:

“[A] lot of people with impeccable credentials mak[e] the point that the press does play up white-on-black crime…”

Even if there were such a thing as impeccable credentials, what would that have to do with the validity of a particular argument? Do law schools not teach about the logical fallacy of the argument from authority?


TC – true dat. Ol’ Perfesser apparently couldn’t be bothered to look up a media study on the subject. Fuck actual numbers, it “feels” like the press plays up white-on-black crime, so there.

White-on-black crime is “clogging up the basepaths” so to speak.


You have to register at the Trib site …

Thanks to Bugmenot I’m in like Flynn at most papers.

Use the Firefox extension.


Yo, thanks for the bugmenot link. Totally happenin’.
Buncha black kids beat on a couple or three white gals in Long Beach (CA) last Halloween, apparently while shouting anti-honky stuff, and they were tried/convicted for a “hate crime.” Fair amount of fuss in the local fish wrapper (L. A. Times). Not nearly as horrible as the Knoxville horror, though. The guy was “raped” as well? Maybe it was a gay-on-straight hate crime.


There we go. I switched the link from the original Chicago Tribune, so you shouldn’t have to register now.


Bubba, does the extension work with FF 2.0?


I read that piece with horror the other day. I was moved for the first time to write to the public editor (McNulty) of the Tribune. The article made no attempt to define hate crime in a legal sense; it downplayed the interpretation of the police; it gave equal time to Malkin, Charlie Daniels, Instapundit, and the KKK; it suggested a conspiracy of PCness among the MSM; and it suggested false comparisons with the Duke rape case (which wasn’t a hate crime either for Pete’s sake). Atrocious.


…and I care what Charlie Daniels thinks about, well, anything, exactly WHY, again?

Seriously. WTF is the justification for intervewing him about this case, except as a shill to the racist cracker section of the article’s audience?


Identity politics on steroids, as Billmon would say.


Didn’t this crime happen four months ago? This is going to sound cold, but they have to stop being like Dan Riehl, who is still obsessed with Natalee Holloway. They need to get over it and move on.


Bubba, does the extension work with FF 2.0?



“[A] lot of people with impeccable credentials mak[e] the point that the press does play up white-on-black crime…�

Care to actually cite one of them? And define what you mean by “impeccable credentials”?

it downplayed the interpretation of the police; it gave equal time to Malkin, Charlie Daniels, Instapundit, and the KKK;

Just out of curiosity, did they give any time to, say, the Southern Poverty Law Center? Or anyone like them?


Nope, no one like that, Dorothy.

For an opposing viewpoint, the reporter relies on columnist Earl Ofari Hutchinson and Rev. Ezra Maize, president of the Knoxville chapter of the NAACP, who the reporter describes as “one of the few black leaders to address the case” — as if they have some responsibility to do so. An attorney in the district attorney’s office is also quoted, saying no evidence supports a hate crime prosecution.

I really don’t think the reporter understands the dynamic at play in this issue or even the relevant authorities to contact. He seems to see it as people who say it’s a hate crime versus people who say it’s not, while the reality is more complicated. The people who are pushing this as a hate crime are doing so to undermine the very notion of their existence.

That’s far more interesting, but more difficult to present, than a simple he said-she said narrative.

Hysterical Woman

The Knoxville Incident was a hate crime, therefore we should not have hate crime laws. Ergo so forth blah blah blah.


And/or the Knoxville Incident was not a hate crime, therefore we should not have hate crime laws yada yada yada yada.

I feel for the victims’ loved ones, but the Trib does them no favor with mangeling the article nor the photo caption. Although I, personally, would love for my friends to make and then sign me a home!

“Deena Christian and her husband, Gary Christian, sit with a photograph of their daughter, Channon, at their Knoxville, Tenn., home that friends made and then signed for them.”


So let me see if I’ve got this straight: there’s no evidence it was a hate crime, there’s some evidence it wasn’t, and most racially motivated crimes, which this apparently wasn’t, don’t ever make it out of the local news anyway, but because this evidently non-hate crime didn’t make the national news(except in the sense of being talked about in major non-Knoxville news sources) it tells us a lot about how the media covers hate crime. Right.


Well played on the Malkin link, Travis.

And when in the history of media has the media downplayed black-on-white crime? Just because one sensational case doesn’t make national news doesn’t imply that there’s a conspiracy. I am sure if an African American took a shotgun and killed all the whiteys he could see, there’d be just a wee bit of press coverage.


I don’t know if you guys heard about it, but there was a case in LA where a black ex-football player was arrested and tried for murdering his white wife and her friend. Typical MSM, hushing that up.


Having read some of the more horrible facts about this crime elsewhere, I would also venture a guess that the story didn’t make a bigger splash because CNN et al knew that sponsors wouldn’t be thrilled to have their products or services follow a story that involved not just rape but genital mutilation/castration as well…

(It’s Eli Roth’s world; we just live in it.)


(comments are closed)