Following is the Public Editor column from Sunday, Feb. 16, 2007:

A story last week on the latest Duke sex-crime case brought a flock of new complaints about an old issue. Why does The News & Observer not identify crime suspects by race?

A news story Monday said that a female Duke student had reported being raped at a student party off-campus. The suspect was described as "being in his late teens or early 20s, about 6-foot-1 and wearing a black do-rag, a gray sweatshirt and blue jeans."

Reader Jim Darges asked why we didn't include the suspect's race, which had been released by Durham Police: "It would further narrow the suspect pool if the race is given. If you're not giving a complete and accurate description, then why do it at all?"

=> Read more!

02/19/07 at 11:55
What we see above in Ted Vaden's pathetic column is the failure of the ombudsperson concept.

Once conceived of as a "reader representative", the Ombudsperson function always degenerates (where it stil exists) into a welfare program for unemployable senior journalists who don't have the skills to be Editors or regular columnists.,

At worse, as in the case of Mr Vaden's lame work, the ombudsperson serves as an apologist for the editor and the publisher.

And it becomes a Stalinist exercise in manipulating reader's comments to the paper's own agenda (and, boy, does the N&O have one).

To whit:

Mr Drescher's action in altering the police description of a rape suspect was a sadly comical episode of political correctness run amok.

A way of concealing uncomfortable truth rather than facing it.

Just say it and be done with it.

02/19/07 at 13:53
Ted,
The DPD apparently thought that a full description of the suspect should include race/complexion; they provided the N&O with the detail and the N&O edited out the racial identifier.

You make an argument against the N&O's current policy but fail to note it; complexion. Yes, it is not just a white/black world and we are truly a multicultural society. You note the 'complexion' issue. I will note that if you could remove 'black/african american' and replace that with 'dark complexion, light complexion' etc. That would solve the racial issues would it not?

I fail to see how you feel that a head covering is more important as an identifier than race IF one is used and the other is not. You marginalize the latter to a much greater degree than the former. In reality the two are essentially meaningless.

If the purpose of these descriptions is to help law enforcement you should run what they provide you. Despite DPD's own 'issues' they apparently feel that race is an identifier that can help them. Use complexion if that would help you.

The racial Duke deal can be broadened so that you have no defence for printing it in the first place; if the world is so multicultural how can you label all of those lacrosse players 'white'? Can they all just be white (not other heritages) and can only white people be racists? I think not and you only furthered the 'only whites are racist' viewpoint which is equivalent to the 'racists' make up a good number of those who disagree with me.

Also: You Duke lacrosse 'smack down' was pathetic. They were, you say, accused of making racial remarks etc. Yes and the man that said that was the case is facing serious ethics charges. You will also note that the other 'dancer' noted that it was one individual that responded to a remark the dancer made to him (also racial). (and not one of the defendants unfortunate enough to be picked out of a rigged pick any of the lacrosse players we're going to show you' line up) .

Your article was mildly offensive in that you apparently view a number of those expressing concern about this policy as 'frankly racist'. How is it that you come to such a determination? This is by email, correct? Do you read into emails that are not explicitly racist? Would one be racist if they stated that black males were disproportionately represented in the prison population? I am trying to understand how you determine whether one is racist or not.

02/19/07 at 13:57
'The two are essentially meaningless' if they are not used together as identifiers (head covering and race). You might as well leave the former out as well.

For the record I am a local that happens to subscribe to the print edition.

I also dislike the fact that while the N&O has admitted that it left key parts of the Duke accuser's interview out of the highly sympathetic story that would have undermined both her credibility and one of the circulating charges involving the players stealing money from the accuser - rather than the other dance stealing the money... (I was upset at the deviation at the time because I could tell that it was one, ie, deviated from best practice)

That is almost like the Governor talking about Nifong in New York...The N&O can't face it's own print subscribers?

02/21/07 at 12:36
I'm gonna have to agree with the gist of the above comments. I'm not sure what all the hand-wringing, and gnashing of teeth is about since the solution is quite simple: Use what the police have in their report.

Anything else is just setting the paper up to reinforce some readers perception that that the N&O has an "agenda".

02/21/07 at 21:16
Actually, I think race and ethnic background are being
confused here. I learned a long time ago that there
are only 3 races (Caucasian, Negro and Mongoloid)
and I don't think anymore have been discovered.

African-American, Irish-American, Mexican-American,
Jamacian-American, etc are just describing an
American who isn't from America (or whose ancestors
were not). Don't forget all African Americans are not
Negros. Sen John Kerry's wife is an examp[le, she hails
from Madagasgar as I recall and had he won woulda been
the first African-American First Lady.

As far as descriptions, in my days as a LEO, I always used
the race and complexion in a description. One can be
Negro and light skinned and Caucasian and dark skinned.

So to answer the question, if the paper is gonna report
a description it should be the whole description as
put out by the agency involved, other wise just say the
the suspect is a male or female. Half a description
generally does no good.

02/22/07 at 01:48
1) The human race is the only race, and that has been proven by recent science. There are only slight variations.

2) We all come from Ethiopia.

3) This newspaper should provide the text of the police report so the public knows what the police think, not to protect its readers from what they see as stupid and simple language.

4) Ted Vaden is so obviously transparent in his defense of the newspaper and his protection of the news written that he really ought to move to a developing country and get a job as News Minister. What a ridiculous figure he cuts.

02/22/07 at 16:57
Some gentlemen have what some would consider a manly appearance, some less manly, and some can even be mistaken for ladies. Likewise, some ladies are quite feminine, while others have a less feminine appearance, and others can even be mistaken for gentlemen. And let us not forget those whom some would categorize as transsexuals, transgenders, cross-dressers, etc.

So I would expect that the N&O would not publish the gender of suspects, even if he or she is so identified in the police report. According to N&O logic, suspects should not be identified with gender descriptors unless there is sufficient additonal detail.

I find the N&O amazing.

- Jim Curry

02/22/07 at 21:46
Jim Curry is right.
The News and Observer constantly use "Black" and "White" descriptors in stories like it is no big deal. With no "sufficient additional detail".

What's more, the police are using common langage that is in the culture at hand to try to effectively find criminals. They are not in the business of changing the language of our society by being more politically correct or sensitive in their search for the suspects. That kind of change will have to happen first in the everyday race-baiting stories published regularly at this newspaper. Stories that describe people as "Black" and "White" and that cut those lines of division ever deeper.

The Nasty and Obnoxious is guilty as charged.

02/27/07 at 20:18
02/22/07 at 16:57
"Some gentlemen have what some would consider a manly appearance, some less manly, and some can even be mistaken for ladies. Likewise, some ladies are quite feminine, while others have a less feminine appearance, and others can even be mistaken for gentlemen. And let us not forget those whom some would categorize as transsexuals, transgenders, cross-dressers, etc.

So I would expect that the N&O would not publish the gender of suspects, even if he or she is so identified in the police report. According to N&O logic, suspects should not be identified with gender descriptors unless there is sufficient additonal detail.

I find the N&O amazing."

- Jim Curry

This deserves repeating. Good post!