3 ms·

This is not the strangest self-censorship cleveland.com has engaged in. The strangest I'm aware of is publishing otherwise full physical descriptions of wanted

This is not the strangest self-censorship cleveland.com has engaged in. The strangest I'm aware of is publishing otherwise full physical descriptions of wanted criminal suspects while omitting their race.

kenjackson 8y ago
If you have a full physical description then isn’t race redundant?
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  I'm guessing they meant traits like hair color, eye color, height, distinguishing tattoos or marks, gender, but not skin color.
  - justin66 8y ago
    Precisely. Hence my use of the phrase "otherwise full physical descriptions." cleveland.com meant well and thought that this omission would help fix a problem they had, a high volume of blatantly racist postings in the largely unmoderated comments section of their paper in reaction to stories about crime. This solution did not work. It's as if racists aren't driven by sober and precise readings of the newspaper text, or something...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
danso 8y ago
Do you have examples? Many media outlets have a policy of not including race unless there are n (usually 5-7) other physical descriptors.
- justin66 8y ago
  > Do you have examples? I do not possess any examples. The policy is described in a rather facile way here, however: https://www.cleveland.com/readers/index.ssf/2014/07/the_complex_issue_of_identifyi.html https://www.cleveland.com/readers/index.ssf/2014/07/the_comp... Possibly the policy has changed recently, I don't read cleveland.com much anymore. (I don't think much of the author of that article or the paper's senior editorial staff, for a lot of mostly unrelated reasons) > Many media outlets have a policy of not including race unless there are n (usually 5-7) other physical descriptors. That sounds about right, I guess. In addition to skin color I'd expect an eyewitness with a decent view of a crime to describe - although not necessarily to recall correctly! - build, height, gender, hair color, and clothing. Some of the other common identifying factors (voice, eye color, gait, scars and tattoos, etc.) seem like they might be a bit of stretch.

kenjackson 8y ago

If you have a full physical description then isn’t race redundant?

oh_sigh 8y ago
I'm guessing they meant traits like hair color, eye color, height, distinguishing tattoos or marks, gender, but not skin color.
- justin66 8y ago
  Precisely. Hence my use of the phrase "otherwise full physical descriptions." cleveland.com meant well and thought that this omission would help fix a problem they had, a high volume of blatantly racist postings in the largely unmoderated comments section of their paper in reaction to stories about crime. This solution did not work. It's as if racists aren't driven by sober and precise readings of the newspaper text, or something...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

danso 8y ago

Do you have examples? Many media outlets have a policy of not including race unless there are n (usually 5-7) other physical descriptors.

justin66 8y ago
> Do you have examples? I do not possess any examples. The policy is described in a rather facile way here, however: https://www.cleveland.com/readers/index.ssf/2014/07/the_complex_issue_of_identifyi.html https://www.cleveland.com/readers/index.ssf/2014/07/the_comp... Possibly the policy has changed recently, I don't read cleveland.com much anymore. (I don't think much of the author of that article or the paper's senior editorial staff, for a lot of mostly unrelated reasons) > Many media outlets have a policy of not including race unless there are n (usually 5-7) other physical descriptors. That sounds about right, I guess. In addition to skin color I'd expect an eyewitness with a decent view of a crime to describe - although not necessarily to recall correctly! - build, height, gender, hair color, and clothing. Some of the other common identifying factors (voice, eye color, gait, scars and tattoos, etc.) seem like they might be a bit of stretch.