2015 New York Times coverage of unarmed persons by race

The Washington Post police shootings database as of January 4, 2016, indicated that on-duty police officers in the United States shot dead 91 unarmed persons in 2015: 31 whites, 37 blacks, 18 Hispanics, and 5 persons of another race or ethnicity. The database updates; the screen shot below is the data as of January 4, 2016.

WaPo UM

The New York Times search engine restricted to dates in 2015 returned 1,281 hits for "unarmed black", 4 hits for "unarmed white", 0 hits for "unarmed Hispanic", and 0 hits for "unarmed Asian":

nytimesUnarmedBlack

nytimesUnarmedWhite

nytimesUnarmedHispanic

nytimesUnarmedAsian

Tagged with: , , , ,

7 Comments on “2015 New York Times coverage of unarmed persons by race

  1. Based on population percentages, African Americans (13% of pop) are overwhelmingly over-represented in police shootings and whites (63% of the pop) are overwhelmingly underrepresented. I'm guessing if it was the other way around, and if there was the same history in this country of police brutality against whites as there is against blacks, there would be way more stories in the NYT about unarmed whites being killed by cops.

    • Hi bp,

      I think that newspapers should present an accurate picture of the world as it is right now, so that readers of the newspapers have an accurate sense of reality and can modify their beliefs and policy preferences accordingly; this accuracy doesn't require that the distribution of newspaper coverage of police killings by race be identical to the distribution of police killings by race, and it is reasonable to have some imbalance to reflect the possibility that police killings of blacks are more newsworthy because outside factors such as protests make them more newsworthy or, as you alluded to, because of a belief that historic discrimination against black Americans makes contemporary police killings of blacks more newsworthy. But I think that a ratio of 1,281:4:0:0 is too imbalanced for a reader to get an accurate sense of the contemporary distribution of police killings by race.

      • If the individual is a white man does the newspaper report it as "unarmed white man" or just "unarmed man"? (Evidence suggests the latter I suppose) And how would one interpret that result? It would require database access, but it would be interesting to see what terms most commonly follow "unarmed".

        • Hi Jacob,

          I haven't conducted a detailed analysis, but I'd guess that the variation is partly because the New York Times is more likely to cover certain police killings, partly because the New York Times is more likely to report more stories about certain police killings, and partly because the New York Times is more likely to note the race of the killed and/or killers for certain police killings.

          For example of the latter type, the New York Times published multiple stories about the police killing of 6-year-old Jeremy Mardis, but the text of the stories did not note Mardis' race (white) or the police officers' races (black); however, the New York Times' website published photos of Mardis and the police officers that revealed their respective races.

          There are multiple ways to interpret the variation in usage of "unarmed", but a charitable interpretation might be an increased likelihood of highlighting black disadvantage due to a concern about racial inequality.

          ---

          The New York Times database permits searches without a subscription that provide a sense of the context of the use of "unarmed" (e.g., here). The first page of results for a search I just now conducted ran from June 20, 2016, to June 28, 2016, and the word after "unarmed" was a variation of "black" or "African American" in five of the ten cases, with "terrorist", "dissident", "Mexican", "Iraqi", and "man" as the residual words.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.