The MSM's unabashed censorship

By Kyle Rogers

For a long time I have been writing about the censorship of black crime by our so-called "mainstream media." I was way ahead of the curve, as now major media outlets are finally talking about the issue. I have nothing but praise for WND for its role in turning the tide against media censorship.

There has been a longtime unwritten rule in the media. Black crime, especially black-on-white crime, must be downplayed. This has resulted in the rampant censorship of the race of perpetrators. What is most troubling is when media outlets censor information about dangerous at-large suspects to hide the fact that the suspect is black. Political correctness has taken first priority instead of public safety.

It used to be a complicated uphill battle to explain this censorship. In 2007, this became a lot easier. The website for the Los Angeles Times issued a public statement admitting that it was the newspapers' policy to censor the race of crime perpetrators. Not only that, but the paper admitted that this censorship was widely practiced in the media:

"Racial information was once routinely included in news stories about crimes, but in recent decades, newspapers and other media outlets stopped mentioning suspects' or victims' race or ethnicity because of public criticism. Newspapers came to embrace the idea that such information is irrelevant to the reporting of crimes, and may unfairly stigmatize racial groups." (Los Angeles Times, June 6, 2007)

TRENDING: Georgia House passes 4 key election changes to ensure 2020 disaster never happens again

A few years later, more newspapers started admitting the same thing – the Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, New York Times, the Associated Press and more. Even the creator of the TV show "COPS" admitted that the show intentionally distorts the racial makeup of criminal offenders. The show over-represents white suspects by throwing away half their footage of black suspects.

It is now at a point where I can simply call a media outlet, and there is about a 50 percent chance they will openly admit that they censor race. There does seem to be one section of the country where the media blatantly censor black crime, but still lie about it. Milwaukee, Minneapolis and St. Paul have seen many black-on-white mob attacks in the recent past. The media coverage is usually the same. Only a tiny blip with no details or pictures. Newspapers and TV news affiliates go out of their way to provide as little information as possible. Vicious attackers are described as "youths." Innocent victims are just people "in the wrong place at the wrong time."

When I call media outlets in these cities, they still put on a charade that there is no intentional censorship. Outside of Minnesota and Wisconsin, it seems to be freely admitted now.

Two outrageous statements stick in my mind. The first was when I called the Greenville, S.C., NBC news affiliate, WYFF. I was armed with two articles from its website. Both were about attempted burglaries, where the burglar fled the scene when spotted. One had a detailed description of the perp's clothes, but no mention of race. The second had a detailed description of the perp's clothes, but started with "a white male."

The woman who answered the phone admitted right away that the WYFF staff actually holds meetings to decide which stories should be censored! She told me that she did not feel it was censorship, but "making a decision."

The real shock, however, came when I called the Newark Star-Ledger. This paper is so far to the left that locals call it the "Red Star Ledger." It is also one of the fastest-shrinking newspapers in the nation. Last May, the Red Hot Chili Peppers played at the Prudential Center in Newark. After the concert, a mob of thugs viciously attacked random pedestrians. At least five were injured, some of them badly. The police say that the attacks were not motivated by a desire to rob the victims, but a desire to cause injury. Police obtained video of some of the attacks and used it to make arrests. However, police refused to release the video.

The Star-Ledger censored all mention of race, even though the race of the suspects was listed in the police report. When I called the Star-Ledger, a young lady answered the phone. I asked her if it was the newspaper's policy to censor the race of crime perpetrators. She said she would have to check with her superior. She came back and said that it was not an official policy, but in practice the paper does omit the race of crime perpetrators.

I asked to speak to crime reporter James Queally. Right away Queally told me that it was the newspapers' official policy to censor race. He then admitted that the police report listed the race of the perpetrators, but he refused to tell me what it said. In the past, I have had other reporters admit they censored race, but would tell me the what race was listed in the police report over the phone.

Queally boldly insisted that it was his job to decide what information the public got to see and what should be censored. He also said he interviewed some of the victims, but refused to tell me what race they are. Queally, who is white, is a true believer in the dogma of political correctness. He apparenlty sees himself as a real-life "Ministry of Truth."

A few days later, the "Red Star Ledger" published fake and easily debunked statistic claiming the Prudential Center was safe. A few days after that, gangbangers shot and killed a juvenile corrections officer across the street from the Prudential Center.

There is another major issue besides the censorship: The relentless agitation-propaganda coming from our media when it comes to race and crime. The constant hyping of radical left-wing groups. The treatment of outrageous and incendiary claims by professional race hustlers as real grievances. Constant racial agitation against white people. The vilification of police officers for doing their job.

I see this constantly in my own daily paper. The Charleston Post & Courier (P&C), the second-largest newspaper in South Carolina, has become notorious for running racial agit-prop editorials as news. In fact, I have found that P&C "crime reporter" Glenn Smith appears to be more interested in vilifying the police than reporting crime. In 2006, Smith even received an award for co-writing an entire series of articles vilifying local law enforcement.

Recently, a North Charleston police officer shot himself. When fellow officers arrived, the wounded cop invented a fictional attacker. He said a man in black, with gloves on, attacked him from behind. Since the accident took place in an overwhelmingly black neighborhood, in a city that is half black, the first officer on the scene apparently assumed the assailant would be a black male.

The officer who shot himself has been suspended without pay and is facing criminal charges. However, that did not stop the P&C from running multiple editorials as "news items" to demonize the entire police force and incite racial animosity.

In fact, the paper ran an incendiary attack piece on the North Charleston police force on the front page of the July 15 Sunday edition. The piece was titled "Officer's lie widened racial divide." Glenn Smith contributed to the story. This front-page editorial hammers the allegation that the entire force engages in "racial bias," all based on the fact that one individual 21-year-old police officer apparently assumed that if someone is attacked in a black neighborhood, in a city where a large majority of all violent crime is committed by black males, the attacker would be black.

Running left-wing political editorials as "news" is nothing out of the ordinary for the P&C. However, this front-page assault on the police wasn't even the first racial-agitation piece the paper wrote about the incident.

The P&C first wrote about the incident on July 6, with no political editorializing. Then, on July 9, the paper ran a follow-up article to pump up the local NAACP. The article trumpets the NAACP's demands for "sensitivity" training for the North Charleston Police Department.

The local North Charleston NAACP is then quoted as comparing the incident to the Susan Smith case. The Susan Smith case took place in upstate South Carolina in 1995 and has nothing whatsoever in common with the shooting. After running the July 9 pro-NAACP agitation piece, the paper had a July 12 follow-up piece repeating the alleged need for "sensitivity" training. As if three articles weren't enough, the paper still felt the need to run a front-page editorial July 15 with their incendiary headline. The piece included almost no new factual information that the paper had not already reported.

If the racial divide has indeed widened, it is certainly not due to the North Charleston Police Department. It is due to the aggressive racial agitation by the P&C.

The reality is far different. The North Charleston Police Department has dramatically cut crime in the city. In 2006, North Charleston was listed as the seventh-most dangerous city in the United States. In 2007, it was ranked as the 10th. Black gang violence was the driving force. Since then, the city police have adopted aggressive new tactics that have dramatically reduced violent crime.

By 2010, North Charleston was no longer ranked in the top 25. Crime also fell in 2011. North Charleston is now probably one of the safest cities in the nation with such a large black percentage of its population. There have been dramatic decreases in murders, rapes, robberies, assaults and auto thefts since the 2006 peak. The tactics of the North Charleston Police Department are now a model for the rest of the state.

Think of all the young black lives that are being saved now. I suppose the NAACP and the white leftists at the P&C prefer the good old days when black gangbangers in North Charleston could slaughter each other with much greater ease.