Fair, Balanced, and Unafraid?

The day after the Oregon shooting, I saw a picture of the gunman on the Internet.  He seemed to be a light-skinned black.  The next day I saw his father on TV.  This man was obviously British and white.  Meanwhile his mother was talked about, but her picture never appeared on screen.

In any event, I concluded that the shooter must be of mixed race.  Did this, I wondered, have anything to do with his motivation?  Speculation about his motives was rampant in the media and so I expected someone to bring up the subject.  Yet no one did.  The emphasis was strictly on gun control and mental illness.

At this point I was beginning to question my judgment.  But then I spoke to a colleague from another institution.  He informed me that opinions about this matter were widespread in the Blogosphere.  So why weren’t they present on cable news?

The mainstream’s news biases are well known.  But Fox?  Didn’t it brag about being fair, balanced, and unafraid?  Megyn Kelly decided not to mention the killer’s name on the grounds that would provide the fame he, and his ilk, desire.  But why did she also block out his race?

Bill O’Reilly has often demonstrated courage in discussing racial matters.   What then made this issue uniquely explosive?  Clearly the race of the South Carolina mass murderer and that of the Ferguson cop were fair game.  Why was this different?

Next there was another incident.  A professor at the University of Pennsylvania nominated Ben Carson for “coon of the year.”  People initially objected to this slur, but once it became clear that the writer was a black woman, the school’s administration rushed to her defense.  Didn’t she have a right to freedom of speech?

Clearly there is a double standard at work.  What would arouse outrage if perpetrated by a white is generally passed over in silence if committed by a black. 

The Black Lives Matter movement proves the point.  To protest a few instances of police brutality and ignore the carnage in the ghetto is worse than wrong-headed.  It is utterly racist and would be passionately denounced were it led by whites.

The fact is that Americans—including those at Fox—are so terrified at the prospect of being labeled racist that they will not treat whites and blacks the same.  Nonetheless this practice is itself racist!  In making distinctions that are supposed to help a beleaguered minority, it perpetuates their pariah status.

If we had really gotten beyond racism, we would judge whites and blacks by the identical standards.  If we meant it when we said that we were all equally human despite our physiological differences, we would use the same measuring sticks for everyone.

So why don’t we?  Ironically it is because blacks are still not believed to be equal to others.  Liberals, in particular, make excuses for African-Americans on the assumption that they have been so damaged by prejudice and discrimination that they cannot perform at the same level as others.

This is nonsense!  Blacks have just as much potential as anyone else.  Hence when we hold them to a lower level of achievement, we do them no favor.  People perform best when we demand that they perform.  Providing exceptions merely allows them to get by without trying their hardest.

We understand this in sports.  People do not become superstars in football or basketball by dogging it on the playing field.  If they are not superior performers, they may not even make the team.  The same goes for parenting.  Excessive permissiveness does not build character or promote good school grades.

So why is this wisdom ignored when it comes to black crime or academic performance?  The answer is simple.  Many people still believe that blacks are not smart or moral enough to live by the rules applied to others.

Yet this is a lie!  It is a damnable lie!  However long we perpetuate it—and for whatever reasons—it damages us all.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University