As Matt noted below, reader representative James Campbell has a post on his weblog explaining why the Chronicle often doesn’t report a suspect’s race:

Race matters to some readers, particularly when the Chronicle doesn’t report the race of a crime suspect. A couple of e-mails I received from readers best illustrate the consternation (and I’m being kind) that some readers feel when we don’t report the race of a suspect. …

Political correctness does not prevent the Chronicle and other news media organization from routinely reporting the race of a suspect. Actually, the reason is more practical than it is PC. Ted Vaden, the public editor for the News & Observer newspaper in Raleigh, N.C., aptly addresses his paper’s policy for when it is appropriate to report a suspect’s race. …

The implication that the Chronicle aids and abets criminals when we don’t report the race of a suspect is off the mark. Readers sometime forget, the Chronicle’s writers and editors are citizens, too, and are as concerned about public safety as our neighbors. As a former police reporter, I routinely tried to get as much information from police about a suspect in a case as they could give me. I drew the line at generic descriptions that did little but stereotype.

I understand that some readers like to keep score, particularly on matters of race. But when it comes to crime reporting providing readers with a detailed description of a suspect - identifying marks, hair color, clothes, etc. - is far more useful toward nabbing the bad guy than race alone. That’s hardly "PC." It’s practical.

What say you?

Here’s what I say: When I initially read Campbell’s response, it sounded superficially reasonable. But then I thought about it further, and realized what a load of horse dung this is.

Let’s be clear — No newspaper reports only that information in crime stories that has the potential to help solve the crime. The Chronicle will report, for example, that a crime took place on a certain side of town, or in a certain neighborhood, or even on a certain street, notwithstanding the fact that this information 1) is not very useful to actually solving the crime, 2) might create or reinforce a stereotype of the area’s residents as lowlifes and criminals. They’re making a point by singling out race.

The Chronicle will also report on a crime even if the story gives virtually no useful information for citizen involvement. What’s the purpose of the story then? Should the Chronicle have just ignored the crime? No — they report what they know, because the people have a right to know. We don’t need our information filtered through the Chronicle for content because they’re worried about "stereotyping." Contrary to what Campbell says, this is political correctness. Ted Vaden, another editor that Campbell links to, openly admits this. Campbell simply won’t.

It isn’t the Chronicle’s or any other papers job to manage public perceptions of various races by refusing to report facts. We won’t come to a better racial understanding because the Chronicle kept us ignorant. We aren’t children; the Chronicle only proves its own juvenile view of society when it refuses to report the basic facts it has, especially when they’re few and far between.

[Via BlogHouston]