If you know such a place, don't give away the secret. You might as well line up the refugee intellectuals who've been lucky enough to find their way there and shoot them as to make public the name and location of their sanctuary.
Mr. Kriegman uses Roland Fryer's study as an example of lethal force across racial groups; I question his integrity because Fryer's study was incorrect!
тАЬRoland Fryer is wrong: There is racial bias in shootings by policeтАЭ
"FryerтАЩs analysis is highly flawed, however. It suffers from major theoretical and methodological errors, and he has communicated the results to news media in a way that is misleading. While there have long been problems with the quality of police shootings data, there is still plenty of evidence to support a pattern of systematic, racially discriminatory use of force against black people in the United States."
You exhibit the very ideological bias that is responsible for a good deal of the problem we find ourselves in. First, Mr Kriegman cites several sources and data sets to support his conclusions, not just Fryer's. Second, according to Glenn Loury, Fryer was incredulous of the results- enough so that he repeated the study-
I do not have the time or expertise to review academic reports or large data sets to adjudicate the disagreement between Fryer and critics. But I find the variety of sources provided by Mr. Kriegman, and the Loury article, compelling. Many espouse the same conclusions, e.g. Coleman Hughes, John McWhorter and Loury. I have not seen a data driven compelling argument that refutes them.
BLM the organization has brought additional controversy on itself, purchasing a $6M home in Ca; and supporting the disruption of "prescribed nuclear family structure requirement". Black lives matter- absolutely. BLM is harmful to pursuit of actual social justice.
In short, given that FryerтАЩs study upended unwarranted assumptions held by many people about the biased application of lethal force, itтАЩs not surprising that the study precipitated a torrent of criticism. Much of that criticism seems to be motivated, at least in part, by the political and social agendas of the critics.
That said, there are important limitations that Fryer himself notes in his original study.
The study remains, to this day, the gold standard for police bias. It was, and is, a very strong study.
Steven, you continue to bestow stupid opinions like this upon me; I think it is reasonable to conclude that you donтАЩt have the intellectual ability to do otherwise! So please excuse me if I donтАЩt always reply to you. From time to time, when I have nothing else to do, I will consider responding to your stupid opinions.
Seriously? Do you want to detail the flaws in his study? What sources are you using to reach your conclusion since you state that тАЬthere is plenty of evidence.тАЭ Citations please!
Harvard has egregiously mistreated Roland Fryer, who is considered to be the greatest economist of his generation. They have targeted him for the same reasons Zac Kriegman is being targeted. Fryer is brilliant. His studies on crime and education are top notch.
What is flawed is the attached article you provided: it claims there is systemic racism in policing bc they treat blacks differently, specifically they go after them more aggressively than whites. As an example, it states that blacks are pulled over disproportionately to whites. The reason for this is due to blacks behavior in cars (no tags, no license, speeding, taillight out etc.....) to which the police are REACTING. It is black peoples behavior that drives (no pun intended) the police encounters, not the other way around.
Roland fryer and Zac Kriegman are a gift to this nation and they are being unjustly attacked and punished. It is tragic.
slgeorge, I know this may come as a surprise to you, but your opinion isnтАЩt important to me! Just as much as IтАЩm sure, my opinion is important to you!
Thanks for the reference. I looked it over, though (it's very short and not particularly technical), and didn't find it very sensible. The author shows a definite bias in lines like "One could point out that the drug laws police enforce were passed with racially discriminatory intent..." if only because he doesn't feel the need to substantiate them.
Well if I understand correctly, a lot of drug laws were passed in exactly that spirit in this country. I donтАЩt know what it really does to the outcome of this debate but itтАЩs not a ridiculous observation to make.
I didn't say it was ridiculous, or even that it was untrue. I said it showed a bias on the part of the author that he stated this without support. Even with support it's not clear how relevant it is to the argument. This is supposed to be academic research, not polemics.
Michael, technically they say Fryer was using the wrong model, thereby invalidating his results!
тАЬEven if one accepts the logic of statistical discrimination versus racial bias, it is an inappropriate choice for a study of police shootings. The method that Fryer employs has, for the most part, been used to study traffic stops and stop-and-frisk practices. In those cases, economic theory holds that police want to maximize the number of arrests for the possession of contraband (such as drugs or weapons) while expending the fewest resources. If they are acting in the most cost-efficient, rational manner, the officers may use racial stereotypes to increase the arrest rate per stop. This theory completely falls apart for police shootings, however, because officers are not trying to rationally maximize the number of shootings. The theory that is supposed to be informing Fryer's choice of methods is therefore not applicable to this case. He seems somewhat aware of this issue. In his interview with the New York Times, he attributes his тАШsurprisingтАЩ finding to an issue of тАЬcosts, legal and psychologicalтАЭ that happen following a shooting. In what is perhaps a case of cognitive dissonance, he seems to not have reflected on whether the question of cost renders his choice of methods invalid.тАЭ
It's worth noting that his study went through a drastically more rigorous review process than the typical peer review for a journal because he anticipated how much criticism he would encounter. Many of the top researchers in the field reviewed it before it was even published.
Of course, it's entirely predictable that people will make bogus criticisms of a study that upends their unwarranted assumptions.
Don't be fooled by those criticisms. You must read his study and their criticisms carefully to figure out which is right. I've done that for myself and I recommend you do it too.
Mr. Kriegman, your article is framed around Black Lives Matter. It is dependent upon a singular report: An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force, which was not peer-reviewed. If Mr. Fryer's conclusions are incorrect, your article falls apart. YouтАЩre conflating the killing of armed black people with unarmed black people killed by the police; the killing of unarmed black people begot BLM. You spend more time denigrating BLM than the organization that fired you.
Here are some criticisms of Mr. Fryer's paper:
This is not the only misleading study cited as evidence against racially biased policing. Another prominent paper examines recorded detainments тАФ arrests and stops тАФ comparing force rates against racial groups of stopped civilians, adjusting for circumstances. It reported some racial bias in sub-lethal force, but no bias in lethal force. This study, too, suffers from an important limitation, albeit a more subtle one than that in the PNAS paper. By analyzing police detainments alone, this study commits what statisticians term тАЬpost-treatment selection.тАЭ Put differently, it fails to account for racial bias in detainment, potentially severely understating discrimination in the use of force, since force is often used in detainments that would never have occurred had civilians been white. A new study addressing this source of error shows this approach can mask substantial amounts of discriminatory police violence, potentially leading to underestimates even when analysts seek only to quantify discrimination occurring after the detainment decision.
тАЬSimpsonтАЩs Paradox is a statistical phenomenon where an association between two variables in a population emerges, disappears or reverses when the population is divided into subpopulations. For instance, two variables may be positively associated in a population, but be independent or even negatively associated in all subpopulations.тАЭ
In conclusion, there is a profusion of statistical studies showing that black people are treated differently; you have only one study that indicates otherwise. Therefore, it is only reasonable to surmise that Mr. Fryer was incorrect, and your conclusion is erroneous!
I realize that "Just me" is a troll, and not interested in a serious conversation, but for anyone who is interested in understanding the problems with the arguments raised above, I invite you to read my original post to Thomson Reuters internal collaboration forum (the one which led to my termination) where I address all these arguments and more. https://kriegman.substack.com/p/post-leading-to-termination-blm-falsehoods
You say in your linked post that there have been no properly controlled studies with contrary findings. Does that still hold true?
It seems a moderate amount of criticism postulates counterintuitive effects of police bias. I recognized Uri Simonsohn's name. He speculates that police are likely to stop low-risk Blacks more often, diminishing the apparent rate of shootings. Seems a bit of a stretch and something hard to prove or disprove. He also criticizes Fryer's data as noisy. I'm no statistician and he's one of those that identified p-hacking, so I'd be loathe to doubt him. Thoughts?
Below is my discussion of this question from that post.
-------------------------------------------
Fryer himself has discussed this limitation in his original paper and subsequently:
тАЬI totally agree that deciding who to stop in a police stop is highly problematic and there certainly may be racial bias in that decision. So letтАЩs think about the officer-involved shootings in which thereтАЩs a robbery in progress or a violent crime. Those are less likely to be plagued by selection bias in the decision of who to harass or stop. Analyzing only those cases yields similar results.тАЭ
In other words, if you are concerned that police bias in initiating encounters with suspects were driving FryerтАЩs finding that there wasnтАЩt bias in police shootings, then you can look just at encounters where police exercised no judgement or discretion in their choice of whether to initiate an encounter. For example, if police are called to a location to respond to a violent crime or robbery that is in progress, then they do not have an opportunity to exercise discretion (and therefore bias) as to whether they engage a suspect at all. But, when you look at only those cases where police do not have an opportunity to introduce bias into the encounter rates, the findings do not change: the data still do not show bias in police shootings.
ItтАЩs also worth mentioning that even if police were introducing bias in the encounter rates by stopping more non-threatening black subjects, and thereby decreasing the proportion of encounters that are at high risk of leading to a shooting, you would expect FryerтАЩs econometric analysis to control for that, at least to the extent that the 290 variables that his team coded were capable of distinguishing between non-threatening subjects and threatening ones, and thus isolating the impact of race.
Thanks for such a thorough and thoughtful reply. IтАЩm inclined to agree with your conclusions and worry about harm done by BLM but try to remain open to new information. And sadly the overwhelming majority of Black victims are killed by other Blacks. Yet one is accused of racism for pointing this out.
This is not the only misleading study cited as evidence against racially biased policing. Another prominent paper examines recorded detainments тАФ arrests and stops тАФ comparing force rates against racial groups of stopped civilians, adjusting for circumstances. It reported some racial bias in sub-lethal force, but no bias in lethal force. This study, too, suffers from an important limitation, albeit a more subtle one than that in the PNAS paper. By analyzing police detainments alone, this study commits what statisticians term тАЬpost-treatment selection.тАЭ Put differently, it fails to account for racial bias in detainment, potentially severely understating discrimination in the use of force, since force is often used in detainments that would never have occurred had civilians been white. A new study addressing this source of error shows this approach can mask substantial amounts of discriminatory police violence, potentially leading to underestimates even when analysts seek only to quantify discrimination occurring after the detainment decision.
тАЬSimpsonтАЩs Paradox is a statistical phenomenon where an association between two variables in a population emerges, disappears or reverses when the population is divided into subpopulations. For instance, two variables may be positively associated in a population, but be independent or even negatively associated in all subpopulations.тАЭ
They say that, and it may even be true, but one can't tell whether it's true from this reference. So your saying that Fryer is somehow known to be "incorrect" and that quoting him casts doubt on the integrity of the Kriegman is not supported.
I think there might be some residual of a time when a cop shooting a black person was not likely to stir the pot very much.
The cost benefit analysis was very different. So the question to me becomes how much of a residual really? I donтАЩt know. My sense is not a whole lot, but I also donтАЩt believe thereтАЩs none. Quantifying that is really important to devising the best ways of addressing it.
They are obviously very subjective cost benefit analyses, but I think most of them are very malleable to external forces.я┐╝
I.e. The cost to a cop in the rural south in 1940 killing a black person is clearly not very high cost and the benefit is completely subjective.
I appreciate that I am making a very rational argument around what is understandably a very emotional subject, but I think it is important to address the issues properly.я┐╝я┐╝я┐╝
Exactly how do you put killing a black man into the format below:
For instance, if a cityтАЩs black drivers are 50% more likely to possess drugs than white drivers, and police officers are 50% more likely to pull over black drivers, economic theory would hold that this discriminatory policing is rational. If, however, police were to pull over black drivers at a rate that disproportionately exceeded their likelihood of drug possession, that would be an irrational behavior representing individual or institutional bias.
According to FBI statistics 51% of all murders are committed by blacks. About 12% of the population is made up by blacks and the vast majority of murders are committed by male blacks or 6% of the population. Is it any wonder that there is higher per capita of black shot by cops?
It is almost too easy to debunk the BLM myth. I think the much more interesting question is why blacks are disproportionately involved in crime as you see in the statistics. I think there are societal ills including but not limited to racism that are causing that. WouldnтАЩt the more fruitful conversation start there? You could solve the supposed racist cop problem and save 18 people vs 10,000 being shot by non cops. Where would be the more fruitful place to focus?
In so many topics today the facts get lost in the narrative. The narrative gets debunked by people smart enough to figure it out. Yet the leftists love to cling to the narrative rather than have an honest conversation about what is really causing the issue. Just lots of emotional sound bites.
"I think there are societal ills including but not limited to racism that are causing that. WouldnтАЩt the more fruitful conversation start there? You could solve the supposed racist cop problem and save 18 people vs 10,000 being shot by non cops. Where would be the more fruitful place to focus?"
Absolutely yes, Gregg. The same problem exists with people who blame guns for murder and suicide because the majority of each are carried out with a gun instead of a tire iron or Drano. Guns may be the tool they chose, but it's not WHY they decided to kill themselves or others.
Addressing why people choose to shoot each other, and why such a disproportionate number of them are black (murder) or white (suicide), would save far more lives than all the "ban the gunz!!!" nonsense that passes for intelligent thought.
Same with what you and others found about shootings by police: honest numbers brings honest results, but people don't like those results. Too bad for them, we're going to tell them anyway.
I don't mean to insult you but I question your analytical skills. Do the math. If 6% of the population is committing 51% of the murders, don't you think that 6% is going to have a higher profile in the criminal world and therefore open to being shot?
Lonesome, "Just me" is a known troll. The best response is simply to not engage with him at all; just ignore him. I'm disappointed that so many people have be sucked in today.
Wait, you think the fact that it comes from Harvard is impressive? ItтАЩs become a cesspool of wokespeech. Plus you quoted a blog. No peer review, nothing. Literally anyone can write a blog and put in it any lie/misrepresentation they want.
So if this blogger wants to actually publish his тАЬstudyтАЭ let him do it. Meanwhile stop wasting our time with your bs like you normally do.
Damn, you're a broken record dude. Let's make it simple: you argue that a blog post, itself citing nothing concrete, invalidates a peer-reviewed study authored by an academic. That is a profoundly weak argument regardless of what one thinks about the current nature of peer review.
"2020 update: The specific flaws of Roland Fryer's paper have now been characterized in two studies (by other scholars, not myself). Knox, Lowe, and Mummolo (2019) reanalyze Fryer's data to find it understates racial biases. Ross, Winterhalder, and McElreath (2018) do something similar through a statistical simulation."
If that means you are going to stop commenting (since I guess youтАЩll be sleeping) then why would I wake you up? I only want to hear from people making intelligent comments.
Just Me is a troll. Usually everyone makes a point of ignoring him altogether, since Substack does not have a mute feature. I'm disappointed to see so many people getting sucked in today. Engaging with him in any way is completely pointless.
IтАЩve actually crunched the FBI data and came to the same conclusion as the author in a different way. If you simply look at the number of arrests for violent crimes and figure the likelihood that there may be some sort of violent confrontation involved. When adjusted for that the incidents of shootings were about the same proportion for blacks and whites. The group that was being shot disproportionately were of Hawaiian/Pacific Islander descent. By my calculations they should be protesting.
IтАЩd hazard I did a lot more research on this topic than you did and I did do it on MY couch. HavenтАЩt lived at home since I was 18 which was many decades ago and probably havenтАЩt played a video game in that time either.
IтАЩve had plenty of experience with Just Me on this site and they are pretty much full of crap every time they post. You might look into who youтАЩre defending as you seem new here.
You seem like a typical leftist, project, project, project.
I looked at the same numbers as you did back in the Summer of Floyd and came to the same results. The federal numbers arenтАЩt perfect, but they are better than any other numbers we have.
We both seem to have each other 180 degrees off. I am so not left. I think you might be tracking responses and comments inaccurately.
Oops... my bad... you were responding to Just Me. Sorry.
I have read and crunched the data so many times and starting so long ago that I refuse to do it again because I know what I know. What I know is that the systemic racism claim of the law enforcement is a political construct of the left that has no real basis in actual fact. When properly controlled for all the material criteria, at worst we can claim that police actions are equal between blacks and whites.
And I keep asking that question... if cops are generally so racist, why are not Asians showing up in the data as being unfairly targeted and shot?
Yep. Pretty easy to debunk BLMтАЩs entire argument. I find тАЬJust MeтАЭ just annoying for the reason stated. But thereтАЩs some history of comments on articles here that you may not have seen.
I also closely examined the Federal crime stats, Gregg, and came to the same conclusion you did.
When I first started sucking spread sheets and turgid reports off the Federal web sites I was positive cops were murdering more black people than white people.
I admire anyone who has the guts to research and come to the opposite conclusion they started with. You are so right about confirmation bias. I know IтАЩm regularly guilty of it.
I think if you consume media today itтАЩs about 90% confirmation bias and 10% facts.
You are citing somebodyтАЩs blog against a study that was peer reviewed and published in a formal scientific journal (???). Btw Roland Fryer was also a Harvard professor.
The blog post was a well written article and it added to the discussion imo. I am no expert at statistics so IтАЩm not going to be in a position to settle anything.я┐╝
I know in my heart there is racial bias in policingя┐╝. addressing that means properly understanding it. I googled the name of that article and thereтАЩs a heck of a lot of discussion and papers on the subject.
Let me quote from the blog post "Properly interpreted, the actual result from FryerтАЩs analysis is that the racial disparity in arrest rates is larger than the racial disparity in police shootings. This is an unsurprising finding, and proves neither a lack of bias nor a lack of systematic discrimination.". In real life, victimization surveys have not shown any bias in the criminal justice system.
The FBI uniform victimization surveys confirm the results of the compilation of police records. Their figures are uncannily close. This shows that neither one of them is likely to be biased or influenced by "systemic racism", as is breezily claimed by many writers. That is also shown by the fact that most of the crime reports and victimization reports are blacks reporting about black criminals and whites reporting about white criminals.
"You know in your heart"? LOL. Now there is a scientific datapoint!
I have a friend who is a social justice activist with two adopted black children (he is Jewish and white) from a family member that lost custody because of meth addiction. He claims our white college town is racist with racist cops. I asked him to give me examples. He always tried to deflect from that... so I kept on him at one point.
He said "It is the way that people look at me and my kids when I am out walking with them."
Yeah, he knows in his heart that people are racist. Talk about confirmation bias!
Okay, poor choice of words on my part. I have seen it play out live in person. IтАЩm not saying its endemic, IтАЩm not saying its systemic, IтАЩm saying that it exists and that it is nontrivial. And yes this is anecdotal.я┐╝я┐╝
Today it is trivial except in the minds of those that gravitate toward a victim mindset. Tribalism is ubiquitous but is not racism. Classism is ubiquitous but is not racism.
You people seem to think the provenance of an article, or the ЁЭСРЁЭСЯЁЭСТЁЭССЁЭСТЁЭСЫЁЭСбЁЭСЦЁЭСОЁЭСЩЁЭСа of the author, determine its truth-value. Your deference to ЁЭСОЁЭСЯЁЭСФЁЭСвЁЭСЪЁЭСТЁЭСЫЁЭСбЁЭСвЁЭСЪ ЁЭСОЁЭСС ЁЭСгЁЭСТЁЭСЯЁЭСТЁЭСРЁЭСвЁЭСЫЁЭССЁЭСЦЁЭСОЁЭСЪ indicates you have little faith in your own ability to understand the arguments being made.
You criticism is rejected. Peer review has increasingly been shown to be an inadequate quality control for research papers and has contributed (or at least not slowed) to the reproducibility crisis. Vox can get a thing right. It's happened to Daily Beast, and even Buzzfeed!
Always grade down the credibility of any study, peer reviewed or not, that supports the ideological/political bias of that institution... either because it is likely known propaganda, or otherwise the study authors and the peers that reviewed it are afflicted with blind political confirmation bias.
Freyer reported that he undertook the study with the expectation that it would confirm his bias, and yet it did the opposite. Those are always the more difficult outcomes and thus increase the credibility of the research as the study author would need a more rigorous set of arguments required to change his bias.
All academic publications warrant some skepticism. As an MD, I see woke politics invading the nation's top medical journals. Yet each report. each study, should be judged on its merits and in context. As tenured Harvard faculty, anything Fryer publishes is "from Harvard". We have a sad state of affairs and thank goodness for people like Kriegman and Fryer. Yet we who believe them should remain open to new information, even new arguments
When you are logged in at home attempting to emotionally terrorize Black Americans with horseshit propaganda about how the cops will kill them, do you wear an actual Klan robe or do you just wear like shorts and a t-shirt?
She probably is a keeper. One thing I think everyone misses is that the biggest disparity is in the REPORTING on police shootings. Yes, some races are a bigger portion of shootings by police than they are of the national population. But 40%-50% of police shootings are of white people and ~0% of those are widely reported on, which is an even bigger disparity. And it has a perverse effect to show to minority citizens people that look like them being shot and hiding the fact that the majority race gets shot regularly - it has the effect of making them feel particularly at risk, which terrorizes them. And I empathize with their reaction to that, I can see how it would be freaky and scary, and make you walk around on edge. We owe it to those people to show the correct proportions of skin colors relative to how often they get shot - that balance of data - so they can be outraged and scared in a fair measure, and not one that causes them undue suffering.
Who has even heard of Edward Bronstein of Pasadena? It was a horrible, horrible situation that happened to him and there was virtually zero reporting. Show people his reality, too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P31slglqZ1E Warning, it's an awful thing to watch, a horror story. But stories like his and Tony Timpa's provide balance to the horror story, so some people can sleep at night rather than feel hunted.
The problem is that, on a national level, journalists aren't going out and looking for these stories. The stories come to them because they are the ones which go viral on social media. And they haven't yet caught on to the reality that what they're reporting on is a technology-driven social media phenomenon rather than an actual surge in racist police activity.
You are mostly right... I do think it existed before social media tho. Journalists aren't doing the big picture story like you say, but I also think they are happy to get the eyeballs from the most salacious interpretation. If they present the counter narrative effectively, they don't have as big a story each time.
ThatтАЩs absolutely correct and the shitty thing is that the media has to know how their misleading/false reporting ends up impacting the country and donтАЩt care. Part of it is undoubtedly ratings/money based but much of it is ideologically based. The media should do some hard self examination at this point and know that their words have driven a movement that is leading to many more dead folks, especially тАШblack and brownтАЩ lives. IтАЩm thankful that there are growing numbers of black and brown people who are moving away from the white liberal worldview. Math isnтАЩt racist for example, itтАЩs incredibly racist to say that they canтАЩt learn math in ways that other people are capable of. Hidden Figures anyone? And those black women did that in a truly racist sad era of our countryтАЩs history.
I mean black women in America walk around legitimately scared of being shot by police - and I say legitimately both in the sense that they are actually, truly scared, and that their fear is legitimate because of what they are shown by the media.
But black women are shot by police at 1/8 the rate per capita that white men are. They can certainly fear for the men in their families and those they know, but they have much less reason to fear the police might shoot them than many white men have.
I couldn't help but notice that the black woman who was interviewing the "trans-Korean" man recently, and who was outraged at his trans-racial thinking was a good example. She felt that with him being white at birth he couldn't understand her oppression and emphsized to him that "how I interact with police... could result in me dying". I was stunned and felt for her, because not only is she a black woman, she was referring to her life in the UK - where approximately six men and approximately zero women are killed by police per year.
Praying you land on your feet, with a big smile on your face, in a new career opportunity where intelligence is valued and bravery is rewarded.
If you know such a place, don't give away the secret. You might as well line up the refugee intellectuals who've been lucky enough to find their way there and shoot them as to make public the name and location of their sanctuary.
Please God and donтАЩt fight with Cynthia over this itтАЩs not worth it in life all you have his your wife and your familyЁЯЗ║ЁЯЗ╕ЁЯЗ║ЁЯЗ╕
Mr. Kriegman uses Roland Fryer's study as an example of lethal force across racial groups; I question his integrity because Fryer's study was incorrect!
тАЬRoland Fryer is wrong: There is racial bias in shootings by policeтАЭ
"FryerтАЩs analysis is highly flawed, however. It suffers from major theoretical and methodological errors, and he has communicated the results to news media in a way that is misleading. While there have long been problems with the quality of police shootings data, there is still plenty of evidence to support a pattern of systematic, racially discriminatory use of force against black people in the United States."
https://scholar.harvard.edu/jfeldman/blog/roland-fryer-wrong-there-racial-bias-shootings-police
You exhibit the very ideological bias that is responsible for a good deal of the problem we find ourselves in. First, Mr Kriegman cites several sources and data sets to support his conclusions, not just Fryer's. Second, according to Glenn Loury, Fryer was incredulous of the results- enough so that he repeated the study-
https://glennloury.substack.com/p/the-truth-about-roland-fryer?s=r .
I do not have the time or expertise to review academic reports or large data sets to adjudicate the disagreement between Fryer and critics. But I find the variety of sources provided by Mr. Kriegman, and the Loury article, compelling. Many espouse the same conclusions, e.g. Coleman Hughes, John McWhorter and Loury. I have not seen a data driven compelling argument that refutes them.
BLM the organization has brought additional controversy on itself, purchasing a $6M home in Ca; and supporting the disruption of "prescribed nuclear family structure requirement". Black lives matter- absolutely. BLM is harmful to pursuit of actual social justice.
Excellent commentary Charles Carter
I addressed the criticisms of Fryer's study in detail in my original post to Thomson Reuters internal message forums. You can find a copy here: https://kriegman.substack.com/p/post-leading-to-termination-blm-falsehoods.
In short, given that FryerтАЩs study upended unwarranted assumptions held by many people about the biased application of lethal force, itтАЩs not surprising that the study precipitated a torrent of criticism. Much of that criticism seems to be motivated, at least in part, by the political and social agendas of the critics.
That said, there are important limitations that Fryer himself notes in his original study.
The study remains, to this day, the gold standard for police bias. It was, and is, a very strong study.
Did you really use Harvard as a source? Harvard has, in the past decade, lost all credibility IMO.
Steven, you continue to bestow stupid opinions like this upon me; I think it is reasonable to conclude that you donтАЩt have the intellectual ability to do otherwise! So please excuse me if I donтАЩt always reply to you. From time to time, when I have nothing else to do, I will consider responding to your stupid opinions.
I note you don't express ANY of those methodological flaws.
HR got your tongue? Dare you sign your name?
Seriously? Do you want to detail the flaws in his study? What sources are you using to reach your conclusion since you state that тАЬthere is plenty of evidence.тАЭ Citations please!
Lhfry, are you addressing me? If so, where did I say there is plenty of evidence?
Harvard has egregiously mistreated Roland Fryer, who is considered to be the greatest economist of his generation. They have targeted him for the same reasons Zac Kriegman is being targeted. Fryer is brilliant. His studies on crime and education are top notch.
What is flawed is the attached article you provided: it claims there is systemic racism in policing bc they treat blacks differently, specifically they go after them more aggressively than whites. As an example, it states that blacks are pulled over disproportionately to whites. The reason for this is due to blacks behavior in cars (no tags, no license, speeding, taillight out etc.....) to which the police are REACTING. It is black peoples behavior that drives (no pun intended) the police encounters, not the other way around.
Roland fryer and Zac Kriegman are a gift to this nation and they are being unjustly attacked and punished. It is tragic.
slgeorge, I know this may come as a surprise to you, but your opinion isnтАЩt important to me! Just as much as IтАЩm sure, my opinion is important to you!
can i pay you to leave ?
?
Thanks for the reference. I looked it over, though (it's very short and not particularly technical), and didn't find it very sensible. The author shows a definite bias in lines like "One could point out that the drug laws police enforce were passed with racially discriminatory intent..." if only because he doesn't feel the need to substantiate them.
Well if I understand correctly, a lot of drug laws were passed in exactly that spirit in this country. I donтАЩt know what it really does to the outcome of this debate but itтАЩs not a ridiculous observation to make.
I didn't say it was ridiculous, or even that it was untrue. I said it showed a bias on the part of the author that he stated this without support. Even with support it's not clear how relevant it is to the argument. This is supposed to be academic research, not polemics.
Michael, technically they say Fryer was using the wrong model, thereby invalidating his results!
тАЬEven if one accepts the logic of statistical discrimination versus racial bias, it is an inappropriate choice for a study of police shootings. The method that Fryer employs has, for the most part, been used to study traffic stops and stop-and-frisk practices. In those cases, economic theory holds that police want to maximize the number of arrests for the possession of contraband (such as drugs or weapons) while expending the fewest resources. If they are acting in the most cost-efficient, rational manner, the officers may use racial stereotypes to increase the arrest rate per stop. This theory completely falls apart for police shootings, however, because officers are not trying to rationally maximize the number of shootings. The theory that is supposed to be informing Fryer's choice of methods is therefore not applicable to this case. He seems somewhat aware of this issue. In his interview with the New York Times, he attributes his тАШsurprisingтАЩ finding to an issue of тАЬcosts, legal and psychologicalтАЭ that happen following a shooting. In what is perhaps a case of cognitive dissonance, he seems to not have reflected on whether the question of cost renders his choice of methods invalid.тАЭ
He wasn't using the wrong model. I discuss the criticisms of Fryer in more in my original post (the one that led to my termination): https://kriegman.substack.com/p/post-leading-to-termination-blm-falsehoods.
It's worth noting that his study went through a drastically more rigorous review process than the typical peer review for a journal because he anticipated how much criticism he would encounter. Many of the top researchers in the field reviewed it before it was even published.
Of course, it's entirely predictable that people will make bogus criticisms of a study that upends their unwarranted assumptions.
Don't be fooled by those criticisms. You must read his study and their criticisms carefully to figure out which is right. I've done that for myself and I recommend you do it too.
Mr. Kriegman, your article is framed around Black Lives Matter. It is dependent upon a singular report: An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force, which was not peer-reviewed. If Mr. Fryer's conclusions are incorrect, your article falls apart. YouтАЩre conflating the killing of armed black people with unarmed black people killed by the police; the killing of unarmed black people begot BLM. You spend more time denigrating BLM than the organization that fired you.
Here are some criticisms of Mr. Fryer's paper:
This is not the only misleading study cited as evidence against racially biased policing. Another prominent paper examines recorded detainments тАФ arrests and stops тАФ comparing force rates against racial groups of stopped civilians, adjusting for circumstances. It reported some racial bias in sub-lethal force, but no bias in lethal force. This study, too, suffers from an important limitation, albeit a more subtle one than that in the PNAS paper. By analyzing police detainments alone, this study commits what statisticians term тАЬpost-treatment selection.тАЭ Put differently, it fails to account for racial bias in detainment, potentially severely understating discrimination in the use of force, since force is often used in detainments that would never have occurred had civilians been white. A new study addressing this source of error shows this approach can mask substantial amounts of discriminatory police violence, potentially leading to underestimates even when analysts seek only to quantify discrimination occurring after the detainment decision.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/science-blogger/claims-that-policing-not-racially-biased-rest-on-flawed-science/
тАЬSimpsonтАЩs Paradox is a statistical phenomenon where an association between two variables in a population emerges, disappears or reverses when the population is divided into subpopulations. For instance, two variables may be positively associated in a population, but be independent or even negatively associated in all subpopulations.тАЭ
https://www.eva.mpg.de/fileadmin/content_files/ecology/pdfs/Ross_et_al_2018_resolution.pdf
тАЬThe Lancet: More than half of police killings in USA are unreported and Black Americans are most likely to experience fatal police violenceтАЭ
https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-more-half-police-killings-usa-are-unreported-and-black-americans-are-most-likely
In conclusion, there is a profusion of statistical studies showing that black people are treated differently; you have only one study that indicates otherwise. Therefore, it is only reasonable to surmise that Mr. Fryer was incorrect, and your conclusion is erroneous!
I realize that "Just me" is a troll, and not interested in a serious conversation, but for anyone who is interested in understanding the problems with the arguments raised above, I invite you to read my original post to Thomson Reuters internal collaboration forum (the one which led to my termination) where I address all these arguments and more. https://kriegman.substack.com/p/post-leading-to-termination-blm-falsehoods
You say in your linked post that there have been no properly controlled studies with contrary findings. Does that still hold true?
It seems a moderate amount of criticism postulates counterintuitive effects of police bias. I recognized Uri Simonsohn's name. He speculates that police are likely to stop low-risk Blacks more often, diminishing the apparent rate of shootings. Seems a bit of a stretch and something hard to prove or disprove. He also criticizes Fryer's data as noisy. I'm no statistician and he's one of those that identified p-hacking, so I'd be loathe to doubt him. Thoughts?
As far as I am aware, there have still been no properly controlled studies with contrary findings regarding police bias.
Also to this point of yours: "He speculates that police are likely to stop low-risk Blacks more often, diminishing the apparent rate of shootings."
I actually address this in my original post to Thomson Reuters' internal forums (which got me fired): https://kriegman.substack.com/p/post-leading-to-termination-blm-falsehoods
Below is my discussion of this question from that post.
-------------------------------------------
Fryer himself has discussed this limitation in his original paper and subsequently:
тАЬI totally agree that deciding who to stop in a police stop is highly problematic and there certainly may be racial bias in that decision. So letтАЩs think about the officer-involved shootings in which thereтАЩs a robbery in progress or a violent crime. Those are less likely to be plagued by selection bias in the decision of who to harass or stop. Analyzing only those cases yields similar results.тАЭ
In other words, if you are concerned that police bias in initiating encounters with suspects were driving FryerтАЩs finding that there wasnтАЩt bias in police shootings, then you can look just at encounters where police exercised no judgement or discretion in their choice of whether to initiate an encounter. For example, if police are called to a location to respond to a violent crime or robbery that is in progress, then they do not have an opportunity to exercise discretion (and therefore bias) as to whether they engage a suspect at all. But, when you look at only those cases where police do not have an opportunity to introduce bias into the encounter rates, the findings do not change: the data still do not show bias in police shootings.
ItтАЩs also worth mentioning that even if police were introducing bias in the encounter rates by stopping more non-threatening black subjects, and thereby decreasing the proportion of encounters that are at high risk of leading to a shooting, you would expect FryerтАЩs econometric analysis to control for that, at least to the extent that the 290 variables that his team coded were capable of distinguishing between non-threatening subjects and threatening ones, and thus isolating the impact of race.
Thanks for such a thorough and thoughtful reply. IтАЩm inclined to agree with your conclusions and worry about harm done by BLM but try to remain open to new information. And sadly the overwhelming majority of Black victims are killed by other Blacks. Yet one is accused of racism for pointing this out.
Here are some criticisms of Mr. Fryer's paper:
This is not the only misleading study cited as evidence against racially biased policing. Another prominent paper examines recorded detainments тАФ arrests and stops тАФ comparing force rates against racial groups of stopped civilians, adjusting for circumstances. It reported some racial bias in sub-lethal force, but no bias in lethal force. This study, too, suffers from an important limitation, albeit a more subtle one than that in the PNAS paper. By analyzing police detainments alone, this study commits what statisticians term тАЬpost-treatment selection.тАЭ Put differently, it fails to account for racial bias in detainment, potentially severely understating discrimination in the use of force, since force is often used in detainments that would never have occurred had civilians been white. A new study addressing this source of error shows this approach can mask substantial amounts of discriminatory police violence, potentially leading to underestimates even when analysts seek only to quantify discrimination occurring after the detainment decision.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/science-blogger/claims-that-policing-not-racially-biased-rest-on-flawed-science/
тАЬSimpsonтАЩs Paradox is a statistical phenomenon where an association between two variables in a population emerges, disappears or reverses when the population is divided into subpopulations. For instance, two variables may be positively associated in a population, but be independent or even negatively associated in all subpopulations.тАЭ
https://www.eva.mpg.de/fileadmin/content_files/ecology/pdfs/Ross_et_al_2018_resolution.pdf
тАЬThe Lancet: More than half of police killings in USA are unreported and Black Americans are most likely to experience fatal police violenceтАЭ
https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-more-half-police-killings-usa-are-unreported-and-black-americans-are-most-likely
A lot to weigh, yes. But donтАЩt you thinkтАЭmisleadingтАЭ as opposed to тАЬpotentially flawedтАЭ suggests bias, maybe a closed mind.
They say that, and it may even be true, but one can't tell whether it's true from this reference. So your saying that Fryer is somehow known to be "incorrect" and that quoting him casts doubt on the integrity of the Kriegman is not supported.
It feels to me reading this ^, that there is some sense there.
I think there might be some residual of a time when a cop shooting a black person was not likely to stir the pot very much.
The cost benefit analysis was very different. So the question to me becomes how much of a residual really? I donтАЩt know. My sense is not a whole lot, but I also donтАЩt believe thereтАЩs none. Quantifying that is really important to devising the best ways of addressing it.
Tell me whatтАЩs the benefit of killing a black man in your cost-benefit analysis!
They are obviously very subjective cost benefit analyses, but I think most of them are very malleable to external forces.я┐╝
I.e. The cost to a cop in the rural south in 1940 killing a black person is clearly not very high cost and the benefit is completely subjective.
I appreciate that I am making a very rational argument around what is understandably a very emotional subject, but I think it is important to address the issues properly.я┐╝я┐╝я┐╝
I was referring to the cost benefit analysis theorem proposed in the link that you posted. ThatтАЩs all.я┐╝
Exactly how do you put killing a black man into the format below:
For instance, if a cityтАЩs black drivers are 50% more likely to possess drugs than white drivers, and police officers are 50% more likely to pull over black drivers, economic theory would hold that this discriminatory policing is rational. If, however, police were to pull over black drivers at a rate that disproportionately exceeded their likelihood of drug possession, that would be an irrational behavior representing individual or institutional bias.
I think the argument addressing that issue was made in the linked article. I donтАЩt care to repeat it here.
According to FBI statistics 51% of all murders are committed by blacks. About 12% of the population is made up by blacks and the vast majority of murders are committed by male blacks or 6% of the population. Is it any wonder that there is higher per capita of black shot by cops?
It is almost too easy to debunk the BLM myth. I think the much more interesting question is why blacks are disproportionately involved in crime as you see in the statistics. I think there are societal ills including but not limited to racism that are causing that. WouldnтАЩt the more fruitful conversation start there? You could solve the supposed racist cop problem and save 18 people vs 10,000 being shot by non cops. Where would be the more fruitful place to focus?
In so many topics today the facts get lost in the narrative. The narrative gets debunked by people smart enough to figure it out. Yet the leftists love to cling to the narrative rather than have an honest conversation about what is really causing the issue. Just lots of emotional sound bites.
"I think there are societal ills including but not limited to racism that are causing that. WouldnтАЩt the more fruitful conversation start there? You could solve the supposed racist cop problem and save 18 people vs 10,000 being shot by non cops. Where would be the more fruitful place to focus?"
Absolutely yes, Gregg. The same problem exists with people who blame guns for murder and suicide because the majority of each are carried out with a gun instead of a tire iron or Drano. Guns may be the tool they chose, but it's not WHY they decided to kill themselves or others.
Addressing why people choose to shoot each other, and why such a disproportionate number of them are black (murder) or white (suicide), would save far more lives than all the "ban the gunz!!!" nonsense that passes for intelligent thought.
Same with what you and others found about shootings by police: honest numbers brings honest results, but people don't like those results. Too bad for them, we're going to tell them anyway.
I too hate the тАЬban the gunsтАЭ talk. Bumper sticker slogans like that solve nothing.
Lonesome, youтАЩre whataboutism is not relevant!
Instead of a platitude, how about a point-by-point rebuttal of my post?
Lonesome, IтАЩll assume your statistics are correct. Now show me statistically why cops shoot more Blacks!
I don't mean to insult you but I question your analytical skills. Do the math. If 6% of the population is committing 51% of the murders, don't you think that 6% is going to have a higher profile in the criminal world and therefore open to being shot?
Lonesome, "Just me" is a known troll. The best response is simply to not engage with him at all; just ignore him. I'm disappointed that so many people have be sucked in today.
ItтАЩs not a matter of what I think; itтАЩs a matter of what is. Prove your supposition!
With your head in the sand, please inhale deeply!
You really need to change your handle to тАЬJust WrongтАЭ IтАЩm pretty sure IтАЩve never seen a comment from you that is factually correct.
I was thinking тАЬJust MaoтАЭ
Gregg, I quote and cite Harvard, and you think Harvard is wrong?
Harvard is often wrong, and seriously woke.
Harvard is more wrong than you can fucking imagine.
Wake me up when you have something intelligent to say!
That you can't see the intelligence in that statement, well that reflects on you, dear.
Harvard thinks the ocean is going to be in my living room ten years ago.
OMG Kevin!!! You mean Harvard stole the secret to time travel from MIT ЁЯШо
I am flabbergasted.
More coffee! I need a Kleenex. ЁЯШВЁЯШВЁЯШВ
Stop it. I hate coffee in my nose! ЁЯдг
Wake me up when you have something intelligent to say!
wake up and post something that makes sense . is your computer or phone interpreting your snores and typing these responses
Wait, you think the fact that it comes from Harvard is impressive? ItтАЩs become a cesspool of wokespeech. Plus you quoted a blog. No peer review, nothing. Literally anyone can write a blog and put in it any lie/misrepresentation they want.
So if this blogger wants to actually publish his тАЬstudyтАЭ let him do it. Meanwhile stop wasting our time with your bs like you normally do.
Wake me up when you have something intelligent to say!
Damn, you're a broken record dude. Let's make it simple: you argue that a blog post, itself citing nothing concrete, invalidates a peer-reviewed study authored by an academic. That is a profoundly weak argument regardless of what one thinks about the current nature of peer review.
"2020 update: The specific flaws of Roland Fryer's paper have now been characterized in two studies (by other scholars, not myself). Knox, Lowe, and Mummolo (2019) reanalyze Fryer's data to find it understates racial biases. Ross, Winterhalder, and McElreath (2018) do something similar through a statistical simulation."
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-018-0110-z
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3336338
If that means you are going to stop commenting (since I guess youтАЩll be sleeping) then why would I wake you up? I only want to hear from people making intelligent comments.
And yet all you can do is personal insults and nothing posted that backs you claim.
Next time get off your mom's couch, put down the game controller and write something meaningful. If you are capable. Which I am guessing you are not.
Just Me is a troll. Usually everyone makes a point of ignoring him altogether, since Substack does not have a mute feature. I'm disappointed to see so many people getting sucked in today. Engaging with him in any way is completely pointless.
I use Just Me as a straw man for leftist argument. Fits the bill perfectly. Points out the absurd ways they try to defend their many causes.
IтАЩve actually crunched the FBI data and came to the same conclusion as the author in a different way. If you simply look at the number of arrests for violent crimes and figure the likelihood that there may be some sort of violent confrontation involved. When adjusted for that the incidents of shootings were about the same proportion for blacks and whites. The group that was being shot disproportionately were of Hawaiian/Pacific Islander descent. By my calculations they should be protesting.
IтАЩd hazard I did a lot more research on this topic than you did and I did do it on MY couch. HavenтАЩt lived at home since I was 18 which was many decades ago and probably havenтАЩt played a video game in that time either.
IтАЩve had plenty of experience with Just Me on this site and they are pretty much full of crap every time they post. You might look into who youтАЩre defending as you seem new here.
You seem like a typical leftist, project, project, project.
I looked at the same numbers as you did back in the Summer of Floyd and came to the same results. The federal numbers arenтАЩt perfect, but they are better than any other numbers we have.
We both seem to have each other 180 degrees off. I am so not left. I think you might be tracking responses and comments inaccurately.
Oops... my bad... you were responding to Just Me. Sorry.
I have read and crunched the data so many times and starting so long ago that I refuse to do it again because I know what I know. What I know is that the systemic racism claim of the law enforcement is a political construct of the left that has no real basis in actual fact. When properly controlled for all the material criteria, at worst we can claim that police actions are equal between blacks and whites.
And I keep asking that question... if cops are generally so racist, why are not Asians showing up in the data as being unfairly targeted and shot?
Yep. Pretty easy to debunk BLMтАЩs entire argument. I find тАЬJust MeтАЭ just annoying for the reason stated. But thereтАЩs some history of comments on articles here that you may not have seen.
I also closely examined the Federal crime stats, Gregg, and came to the same conclusion you did.
When I first started sucking spread sheets and turgid reports off the Federal web sites I was positive cops were murdering more black people than white people.
Confirmation bias can be a world wide bitch.
I admire anyone who has the guts to research and come to the opposite conclusion they started with. You are so right about confirmation bias. I know IтАЩm regularly guilty of it.
I think if you consume media today itтАЩs about 90% confirmation bias and 10% facts.
Thank you. Great reply
You are citing somebodyтАЩs blog against a study that was peer reviewed and published in a formal scientific journal (???). Btw Roland Fryer was also a Harvard professor.
A tenured Harvard Professor
Age, are you addressing me?
Yeah I know he is or was.
The blog post was a well written article and it added to the discussion imo. I am no expert at statistics so IтАЩm not going to be in a position to settle anything.я┐╝
I know in my heart there is racial bias in policingя┐╝. addressing that means properly understanding it. I googled the name of that article and thereтАЩs a heck of a lot of discussion and papers on the subject.
Let me quote from the blog post "Properly interpreted, the actual result from FryerтАЩs analysis is that the racial disparity in arrest rates is larger than the racial disparity in police shootings. This is an unsurprising finding, and proves neither a lack of bias nor a lack of systematic discrimination.". In real life, victimization surveys have not shown any bias in the criminal justice system.
The FBI uniform victimization surveys confirm the results of the compilation of police records. Their figures are uncannily close. This shows that neither one of them is likely to be biased or influenced by "systemic racism", as is breezily claimed by many writers. That is also shown by the fact that most of the crime reports and victimization reports are blacks reporting about black criminals and whites reporting about white criminals.
"You know in your heart"? LOL. Now there is a scientific datapoint!
I have a friend who is a social justice activist with two adopted black children (he is Jewish and white) from a family member that lost custody because of meth addiction. He claims our white college town is racist with racist cops. I asked him to give me examples. He always tried to deflect from that... so I kept on him at one point.
He said "It is the way that people look at me and my kids when I am out walking with them."
Yeah, he knows in his heart that people are racist. Talk about confirmation bias!
Okay, poor choice of words on my part. I have seen it play out live in person. IтАЩm not saying its endemic, IтАЩm not saying its systemic, IтАЩm saying that it exists and that it is nontrivial. And yes this is anecdotal.я┐╝я┐╝
Today it is trivial except in the minds of those that gravitate toward a victim mindset. Tribalism is ubiquitous but is not racism. Classism is ubiquitous but is not racism.
By the way "peer review" is no longer a credible standard. https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2016/11/29/13770988/peer-review-bias-authors
Neither is VOX.
I HOPE that's a joke because Vox is NEVER a credible standard.
It is if the article linked is credible.
You people seem to think the provenance of an article, or the ЁЭСРЁЭСЯЁЭСТЁЭССЁЭСТЁЭСЫЁЭСбЁЭСЦЁЭСОЁЭСЩЁЭСа of the author, determine its truth-value. Your deference to ЁЭСОЁЭСЯЁЭСФЁЭСвЁЭСЪЁЭСТЁЭСЫЁЭСбЁЭСвЁЭСЪ ЁЭСОЁЭСС ЁЭСгЁЭСТЁЭСЯЁЭСТЁЭСРЁЭСвЁЭСЫЁЭССЁЭСЦЁЭСОЁЭСЪ indicates you have little faith in your own ability to understand the arguments being made.
You criticism is rejected. Peer review has increasingly been shown to be an inadequate quality control for research papers and has contributed (or at least not slowed) to the reproducibility crisis. Vox can get a thing right. It's happened to Daily Beast, and even Buzzfeed!
Well let's put it this way.
Always grade down the credibility of any study, peer reviewed or not, that supports the ideological/political bias of that institution... either because it is likely known propaganda, or otherwise the study authors and the peers that reviewed it are afflicted with blind political confirmation bias.
Freyer reported that he undertook the study with the expectation that it would confirm his bias, and yet it did the opposite. Those are always the more difficult outcomes and thus increase the credibility of the research as the study author would need a more rigorous set of arguments required to change his bias.
Thanks for this link.
It just gets more complicatedтАж
B Civil, my pleasure; I wonder how many people took this article at face value?
Any "study" from Harvard today should be treated with the utmost suspicion of being a left-wing propaganda piece. Fryer has much more credibility.
All academic publications warrant some skepticism. As an MD, I see woke politics invading the nation's top medical journals. Yet each report. each study, should be judged on its merits and in context. As tenured Harvard faculty, anything Fryer publishes is "from Harvard". We have a sad state of affairs and thank goodness for people like Kriegman and Fryer. Yet we who believe them should remain open to new information, even new arguments
When you are logged in at home attempting to emotionally terrorize Black Americans with horseshit propaganda about how the cops will kill them, do you wear an actual Klan robe or do you just wear like shorts and a t-shirt?
You hit the nail on the head Penny. Circling the Harvard wagons. Integrity be damned!
Roland Fryer was railroaded out of his position. If he toed the leftist line thereтАЩd be protests at Harvard for firing him.
Penny, do people really reply to your rubbish?
Golfer, I see you popped your head out of the rabbit hole today; I hope your attempt at being witty makes you feel better.
i see you pooped your head out of your a$$ today ,go run along your check is in the mailbox JM
ttertat being twitty jm
Ad hominem again.
I see you are back trolling.
Wake me up when you have something intelligent to say!
P.S. Your wife sounds like a keeper!
She probably is a keeper. One thing I think everyone misses is that the biggest disparity is in the REPORTING on police shootings. Yes, some races are a bigger portion of shootings by police than they are of the national population. But 40%-50% of police shootings are of white people and ~0% of those are widely reported on, which is an even bigger disparity. And it has a perverse effect to show to minority citizens people that look like them being shot and hiding the fact that the majority race gets shot regularly - it has the effect of making them feel particularly at risk, which terrorizes them. And I empathize with their reaction to that, I can see how it would be freaky and scary, and make you walk around on edge. We owe it to those people to show the correct proportions of skin colors relative to how often they get shot - that balance of data - so they can be outraged and scared in a fair measure, and not one that causes them undue suffering.
Who has even heard of Edward Bronstein of Pasadena? It was a horrible, horrible situation that happened to him and there was virtually zero reporting. Show people his reality, too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P31slglqZ1E Warning, it's an awful thing to watch, a horror story. But stories like his and Tony Timpa's provide balance to the horror story, so some people can sleep at night rather than feel hunted.
facts are meaningless made up white suppression . bwahaha
The problem is that, on a national level, journalists aren't going out and looking for these stories. The stories come to them because they are the ones which go viral on social media. And they haven't yet caught on to the reality that what they're reporting on is a technology-driven social media phenomenon rather than an actual surge in racist police activity.
You are mostly right... I do think it existed before social media tho. Journalists aren't doing the big picture story like you say, but I also think they are happy to get the eyeballs from the most salacious interpretation. If they present the counter narrative effectively, they don't have as big a story each time.
ThatтАЩs absolutely correct and the shitty thing is that the media has to know how their misleading/false reporting ends up impacting the country and donтАЩt care. Part of it is undoubtedly ratings/money based but much of it is ideologically based. The media should do some hard self examination at this point and know that their words have driven a movement that is leading to many more dead folks, especially тАШblack and brownтАЩ lives. IтАЩm thankful that there are growing numbers of black and brown people who are moving away from the white liberal worldview. Math isnтАЩt racist for example, itтАЩs incredibly racist to say that they canтАЩt learn math in ways that other people are capable of. Hidden Figures anyone? And those black women did that in a truly racist sad era of our countryтАЩs history.
I mean black women in America walk around legitimately scared of being shot by police - and I say legitimately both in the sense that they are actually, truly scared, and that their fear is legitimate because of what they are shown by the media.
But black women are shot by police at 1/8 the rate per capita that white men are. They can certainly fear for the men in their families and those they know, but they have much less reason to fear the police might shoot them than many white men have.
I couldn't help but notice that the black woman who was interviewing the "trans-Korean" man recently, and who was outraged at his trans-racial thinking was a good example. She felt that with him being white at birth he couldn't understand her oppression and emphsized to him that "how I interact with police... could result in me dying". I was stunned and felt for her, because not only is she a black woman, she was referring to her life in the UK - where approximately six men and approximately zero women are killed by police per year.
Google Sarah Everard