A reader who lives near N.49th St. at Burke writes:
Yesterday (Tuesday) early evening around 7:30, I looked out my front window and saw a group of teens breaking into our car. I went out of the house and confronted about 6 boys and 2 girls. The one who was in my car ran around the block towards QFC.
I immediately called 911 and tracked them a block or so while the group got in my face yelling they didn’t do anything and proceeded to walk towards QFC on Wallingford Ave.
The police showed up in about 7 minutes and they couldn’t find the group. They did find one youngster who lived in the area who sort of fit the description of the one who ran. He had nothing on him or any priors. The police think that they likely had a car nearby, ducked into a store or live nearby.
The group was identified as 6 male African-American, 2 female African-American. If you see this group of individuals in the neighborhood, you are asked to report it to the police immediately.
[8/16/13 5:55 pm : This article has been updated in response to community concern regarding the original phrasing. No facts have been changed. We thank everyone who contributed to the conversation.]
“…if you see a group of black teens wandering the neighborhood, to call the police.”
Ugh.
Yeah, we wouldn’t want to provide any description whatsoever of the perps, would we.
“if you see a group of black teens wandering the neighborhood, to call the police.” Can we note how ridiculous this line is?
If it had been a group of white kids, would a cop ever think to say “if you see a group of white teens wandering the neighborhood, call the police?” It’s equally shameful that this blog would print this.
Imagine if you’re a black kid, or the parent of a black kid, and you read this. Would it make you feel safe walking around? What message does this send young black kids about the police?
“Black teen” is not a useful description in any way. Would “white teen” be useful? It does nothing but unfairly vilify an entire class of individuals.
This just exacerbates irrational fear, racial insensitivity, and general ignorance.
I’m quoting the reader. Doesn’t mean I agree with the description (or the lack thereof).
“I’m quoting the reader. Doesn’t mean I agree with the description (or the lack thereof).”
You still made an editorial decision regarding whether or not to publish it. You could have not published the story at all, snipped the last line, or added a note regarding the implications of this line of thinking.
This blog has a history of editorializing, so approaches proposed above would not have been out of place.
You’re correct: I made the decision not to alter someone else’s quote.
Margaret- Are standing by the posting as is, or thinking about adding an end note saying that perhaps calling the police whenever there’s a group of black teens is not the best idea? I mean, the article can still be updated. As is, it really doesn’t come across well.
All I can say is there would be a lot of criminals at large if the commenters on this post wrote APBs.
“All units be on the lookout for a human whose ethnicity is withheld, because really *any* race could have committed this crime. The suspect is old enough to know better, but not so old as to not be capable of this crime. They are relatively tall compared to a shith tzu, but short compared to a horse. They could be a little overweight, but, you know everyone’s metabolism is different, and I blame corn syrup. As you know stating their last known wherabouts violates the right to privacy, so just start at one end of Wallingford and work your way across, per usual.”
Think about it. We have an eye witness who *saw* these kids and there were 8 of them. They go home, change their clothes and come back tomorrow. What do the cops have to work from? Age, ethnicity and gender. What stands out in Wallingford?
As much as you all would like to be politically correct, if you are trying to catch a suspected criminal, you use information unique to the situation. Wallingford’s population is 2% African American and 85% Caucasian. So the odds of there being multiple unique groups of “black” teens comprising 6 boys and 2 girls in Wallingford is pretty damned low.
I don’t think there’s a problem with describing the perps as black, but I highly doubt the police suggested that anyone who sees black teens in the neighborhood call them.
I verified with the reader that it was a direct quote from the police.
It’s not about being politically correct, it’s about considering the implications of one’s actions on the broader community. By advocating for using race as the primary identifier here, you are saying that it is more important to catch a car prowler than it is to make all members of a community feel safe when walking the street. By instructing citizens to call the police when they see a group of a particular racial/ethnic background, the police are (1) telling community members to fear this group and (2) telling members of this group that the police perceive them as likely criminals. This policing model has wide ranging implications. Just because the implications are largely invisible to white people doesn’t mean that they’re any less valid.
To advance a critique focused on deploring political correctness demonstrates an ignorance of the broader implications associated with policing strategies and the associated rhetoric which are based on race/ethnicity.
Another way to look at this…
There are roughly 17,000 people in Wallingford. If it is only 2% black, that means there are 340 black people who live here. Is it more important to catch the 7 or 8 youth’s who may have been breaking into a car, or to tell the other 330 that this is a community in which their skin color makes them likely criminals.
Actually it’s 41,000. 8% are 7-18 years old. So we’re down to 3280. 2% are African American. So now we’re down to 66 in the age of 7-18. We are evenly split on M/W, so we have a pool of 33M & 33F. We are looking for a group of 8 that is 75% male. 7-18 is a wide range, and I’m sure if we look at SPS data, we’d cut that group at least in half again to get just teens. So now approx 16 M & 16 F could potentially be inconvenienced if someone called the cops on them when in a group of 8 comprising 6m+2f wandering the interior streets of the neighborhood.
And the police just said to call them if you see a group *wandering*. Not coming out of Boys & Girls Club, or Bluestar, or the QFC, etc. So again, what are the odds that that group of 8 “black teens” 6m+2F wandering in the interior streets of the neighborhood are the wrong group to be keeping tabs on?
Look, I have lived in Wallingford for over 20 years. In that time I have never, ever seen “a group of black teens” in the neighborhood. Ever. In 20 years. I have seen groups of white teens, but never more than two or three black teens in a group. 8? Never.
That’s a problem, or a symptom of a problem, because it highlights the race-tied-to-class segregation that exists in Wallingford (why does Wallingford have such a small black population?), as well as the race-tied-to-class issue that eats at the core of our country.
To pretend that is not the case is not only ludicrous, but counter-productive.
To suggest that test of whether a statement is racist is whether you could swap out references to one race with the name of another race is and still feel the same way about the sentence is foolish. It denies that there are class, opportunity and economic divisions in our country that are tied to specific races.
If there are thousand people with blue eyes and one person with brown eyes, and I’m describing someone, saying that they have blue eyes may not be helpful. Saying that they have brown eyes will likely be much more so.
Anon, are you really saying that we have to withhold useful information that could prevent robberies and improve the safety of our community, because you’re afraid it might hurt somebody’s feelings, because they misunderstand or misconstrue why you included a pertinent, useful and actionable detail? That sounds like censorship to me. Not legally mandated censorship, but socially mandated censorship, which I reject. I will speak the truths I believe.
There is not race equality in our country. When you seek to control how others use language to mask that fact, you are inadvertently ending up the wrong side of Orwell’s vision.
Not saying pertinent information should be withheld. Saying that when information is presented, it should be done with a level of awareness regarding the implications. My sense, and maybe I’m wrong, is that this information was presented in consideration of one group’s interests over another. Moreover, if you believe in heightened equality, or even greater diversity in lilly white places like Wallingford, then you must recognize the impact of statements like the one from SPD posted above.
Also, to be clear, I did not use the word racist nor assert that that was what’s happening here. Instead, I tried to provide a frame of reference for the almost exclusive reliance on race as a descriptor. Even if the odds are high, imagine the impact it has on other people of color.
Thank you for pointing out how nasty that line is. An appeal to authority is no justification for publishing such an unhelpful statement. Seattle police are not known for their racial neutrality and I hope we all keep in mind their history of prejudice when evaluating their actions. And though it is true that you currently only have a few black neighbors here in Wallingford, by contributing to the standard that black people are “others” of whom their white neighbors should be suspicious, you are ensuring that our city remains segregated. It may seem like a tiny gesture, but the mentality that this post demonstrates and promotes has wide reaching negative consequences for us all. I am thankful for the service this site provides our neighborhood. But I would appreciate an accepting community atmosphere over one of suspicion in the name of safety. Please post with greater care in the future.
And that’s why we all openly support making John Stanford an option school, so that all of these non lily-white non-privileged kids without $400k+ homes get an equal shot at language immersion, right? Whose with me?
Whose> Who’s
Jordan: This post criminalizes being black in Wallingford. Defending it is foolish.
So to be clear, you all are making your case to Wallyhood to not relay information from the police or other public officials, without modifying it to suit your sensibilities?
You complain when they don’t act like “journalists” and then complain when they print a verified story as-is, which is what journalists do. They printed the news with a reliable source and quote. Your issue is with SPD policy and tactics, not Wallyhood.
If someone wanted to write a well researched editorial criticizing SPD’s statement, I’m sure they’d be happy to print it.
Maybe I missed it, but I didn’t see any complaints about the quality of journalism here. However, it is important to recognize that the site does have discretion in what it prints. The authors decide what to publish. While my main beef is with SPD, the editorial approach of the site in the past suggests thoughtful folks who are concerned with issues of both quality or life and larger equality. I was hoping for that thoughtfulness to accompany this post as well.
I don’t think that censoring a direct quote is the way one accomplishes that
Wallyhood and Anon are both correct. What it really comes down to is very poor phrasing on the part of the person being quoted. A description of the offenders is necessary, skin color happens to be a good descriptor.
But to ask an entire community to call the police if they see someone black is absurd, offensive and dangerous. Especially when considering the number of minorities living in Wallingford, and that there is a significant likelihood these kids live in another neighborhood. Singling out a small Wallingford minority in this way that likely had nothing to do with this (fairly common) crime will more likely lead to unintended injury than to the arrest of these petty criminals.
Again, from a police-trying-to-stop-crime perspective, there really aren’t that many minorities here in Wallingford. 85% white , 6% asian 4% mixed race, 2% African American 1% Indian, 2% other. Identifying the perps as black teens is useful even if they don’t live here. And they didn’t say “someone” black. They said a group, we know to be 8.
And to be clear, I agree philosophically with the concerns here about marginalizing or potentially villainizing any demographic of our neighborhood population. But the facts are the facts in this case and when police try to catch criminals, they use the info available to them. This isn’t racial profiling, this is an eyewitness account. SPD are, in fact, looking for a group of black teens in an overwhelmingly white neighborhood and that is useful in this instance. On Wallyhood’s side, they reported it the way it came in, with a reliable quote relayed from SPD.
If you want to change our neighborhood to match our lofty ideals, you don’t do it by bullying the media, or asking SPD to not use relevant clues. They are both in the position of reacting to what has passed. You change this by controlling what you can and lead by example.
In Wallingford 46% of us have college degrees. 22% graduate degrees. Our avg house price is $418k and 74% of our households have income in$30-75k, 23% are 75k-149k, 5% are $150k+. If you want equality in this neighborhood, you make JSIS an option school. You encourage low income housing in your neighborhood. You fight just as hard for the educational quality of Rainer Beach as you do for your “walkable” japanese immersion program. You don’t collectively contribute $100K to your own kid’s PTSA so they too can have language immersion. You give that money to after school and summer slide programs in poor neighborhoods to eventually end this disparity.
You don’t just pretend it’s getting better by wordsmithing.
>>74% of our households have income in$30-75k
Sorry, that should say “45% of our households have income in $30-75k range”
I have 2 sons, both raised in Wallingford. They are 25 and 21 and have many black friends who are often at my home. These really outstanding youth travel through the neighborhood on foot and by car, heading off to play basketball at meridian park or maybe to Dicks for a burger. It absolutely sickens me to think that in 2013 these wonderful kids are being racially profiled, ( in Wallingford ? Seriously? I thought we had a pretty educated populace here …) because that’s what that reference in the blog does. It puts any young black person at risk of being pulled over by the police without any probable cause because of the color of their skin. Appalling on so many levels.
I knew before reading that people would jump on the ethnicity descriptor.. jeepers.
Who wants their car broken into?
Who wants to give info to police and neighbors which may help us to prevent mor ecrime and possibly catch the criminals?
maybe more description would help… height, jackets, hats, saggy or not pants, carrying anything? Ethnicity does givve information. Period.
By the way a van clearly labelled an energy drink company ran a stop sign today and the driver began texting at the next light. I called his energy drink company.
Soo tired of the wining over any racial comments ever to be made. If they would have been white that’s what the officer would have said. I have had my car broken into 3 times in last 5 years. All Black Youth, all caught on video. This is a primarily white neighborhood…..having helpful information to solve crimes is pertinent. Maybe instead of having 35 million in useless bike lanes….we could have had 350 extra patrol cars. Think of that the next time you vote. I hope to heaven you don’t ever have to have a violent crime happen to you. Grow up Wallingford… Protect and look after your NEIGHBORS.
@Rebecca How is *Wallingford* racially profiling? This was a quote from SPD relayed in an article. And it was a group of teens, not one or two black kids. And it was a particular incident with an eyewitness. No one said “call whenever you see a black kid.”
And regardless of race, it’s pretty darn easy to see when a group of kids is looking for trouble by watching them for a couple minutes, no? I would assume a populace as educated as you say, and I agree, would use discretion, no?
Thanks Chris for the demographic information and reality check. You are so right on. We can all agree that racial profiling and segregation are still problems, but it does nothing to deny facts in a case. Should the report have beaten around the bush and described their hair color, eye color and everything but skin tone? Or maybe the author should have apologetically mentioned race to not cause offense? I’m pretty sure none of us want every black person walking through this neighborhood to be followed or have the cops called on them, but a group of 6 black boys and 2 girls is pretty descriptive since it’s not the norm around here. What does it mean when we have to censor pieces of information because we’re afraid of being called racist? If the neighborhood was 50/50 Black/Latino, would it be less racist to mention it was a group of 6 Latino boys and 2 girls?
To edit and not mention the color of someone’s skin is, in my opinion, more in the wrong then stating that detail as fact. Editing a description of something that is directly in front of you means that you notice the detail, you think that quality is “iffy” to say out loud, and so you self-edit. Would it have been better if they had mitigated more? “Dark skinned” instead of “black”? How does that help? It just makes us more aware that there is some issue there.
Yes, I completely agree that saying we should be on the lookout for a group of black teenagers is a touchy subject. Mostly I think it makes a lot of people (me included) question how they feel about such broad sweeps. Seriously though, I really would prefer someone say that something has occurred, no matter how spare the details. Even if just a location and an event. (for example: house broken into at corner of X and Y) That way we can be more vigilant. Better then saying nothing because the subject is too much of a hot button topic.
At any rate, I’m going to keep my eye on ANY group of teenagers I see ANYWHERE. I remember being one of those things and, I’ll just say it: Teenagers are the scariest things on earth. 8 of them in one place… WOW. I mean, it’s 6 boys, most likely trying to impress 2 girls… recipe for trouble no matter what neighborhood you’re in.
@Chris… “And regardless of race, it’s pretty darn easy to see when a group of kids is looking for trouble by watching them for a couple minutes, no?”
Are you at all aware of any of the high profile cases of the past few years that involved a person seeing a black teen who was “looking for trouble” and getting involved. In the majority of these cases they were wrong, and in many cases someone got hurt or killed as a result.
By describing minorities in this way you cause people to view them through this lens and their innocent actions can be interpreted as something else.
The language we use to describe people IS important. Yes race is a useful descriptor, but to recommend to your neighborhood that they call the cops if they see a “group of black teens” is irresponsible.
Can’t the report just state:
8 black teenagers caught attempting to break into a car.
Which are the facts. Let people do what they want with the information. Don’t interject opinion into it.
You go Chris…my car was broken into by smashing a window. The trunk was emptied out and items of no value were scattered on the sidewalk and street. By the way, the SPD have fingerprints.
Wow, they actually took fingerprints for your break-in? When my truck got broken into a few years back with hundreds of dollars worth of gear stolen, the SPD couldn’t even be bothered to come visit. There must have been a bikini barista stand that needed more investigating….
As for all the hand-wringing over the mentioning of, you know, the FACT that these kids were black: So can we infer that if you saw someone leaving your house with your valuables, your ID, and some family heirlooms, you would tell the cops what they were wearing, but not what race they were, just to avoid appearing “insensitive?” If you wanted them caught and your stuff recovered, why wouldn’t you give as many descriptors as you could?
again, more clothing and hat or not wild hair or not would provide additional identifying info
@k3ba, With all due respect, you are contradicting yourself. You said we were educated here in Wallingford which is why this is so disdainful. But yet you exaggerate SPD’s request, and translate it into your neighbors blindly calling 911 on sight of one black teenager?
The cases you mention invariably involve a racist predisposition by the witness/vigilante who assumed someone was “looking for trouble” *because* they were black. Again, do you really need to worry about this highly educated neighborhood doing this? If you do, then we have a whoooole different problem.
Personally, when I hear *any* group of teens for more than a minute or so outside my window, I take a look to see what they’re up to. Are they looking in car windows? Going up on porches to look for packages? Ringing doorbells to see if anyone was home?, etc. I don’t judge it on a mischievous look, or their race and I doubt my educated neighbors do either.
As to your post #35, it wasn’t an opinion issued by Wallyhood, it was a request from SPD relayed by the person quoted.
Chris, I totally agree with everything you have said! This sitch sort of reminds me back when we used to have two newspapers in this town (S.T. & The P.I.) and they both used to report a crime, we’d read The Seattle Times first, just to get some idea of the crime, but then we’d read the same story over at the P.I. to get a proper description of the suspects that were on the loose. The Times very rarely would report the ethnicity, much less a decent description of the suspect, but you could almost always get the information from the P.I. How helpful is it to report a crime, but not the specific details involved in order to try to prevent it from happening again? Sheesh! So everyone needs to stop raking Wallyhood over the coals for reporting facts. They would be derelict in their reporting duties if they had edited the facts of the story as told to them by the victim. For all you people that are overly sensitive, just face the fact that Wallingford is primarily white, educated and upper income. THAT’S why a group of 8 black teens stand out here (oh, and the fact they had broken into this poor woman’s car). We’re “equal opportunity” at my house as teens of all ethnicities have damaged my property 🙂 In this particular instance, the teens were black. Next time they might be white or brown or red or purple…
Wallingford, for all its “progressive” diversity loving lefty hype, is about the whitest neighborhood in Seattle. So, yes, a group of black kids would stand out. All you white folks here oozing racialist political correctness would be foolish to fail to alert to such a group. Call the cops? maybe an over reaction. Keep an eye out? A good idea. But if you are vandalized by a group of black teens who come into the neighborhood to commit crime, you can rest comfy knowing that you did your bit to be correct, acceptable, quiet, compliant.
I, along with several other commenters, believe that it is useful to include a description of a the perpetrator’s race is useful in a crime report.
However, saying, “if you see a group of [INSERT RACE HERE] teens wandering the neighborhood, to call the police” is not useful and is only perpetuates discrimination and racism by implying that this group is automatically committing crimes. And publishing this quote is irresponsible. Wallyhood could paraphrased the quote and gotten the same point across.
I agree strongly with Doug and Stacey. And, I believe that Wallyhood owns responsibility for perpetuating this discrimination.
Margaret and Jordan, please edit this posting. It doesn’t do anyone in our community any good to perpetuate discrimination.
Paraphrasing is not reporting the news. How would you like it if the White House paraphrased Obama’s speeches? How would you like it if radio stations paraphrased their music? I believe it’s called censorship and I do not support that, so Jordan and Margaret, please keep reporting the facts.
All I am saying is that there is a difference between “8 black teenagers broke into a car” and “if you see a group of black teens wandering the neighborhood, call the police”.
Phrasing matters. The first phrase profiles the group who committed the crime, the second profiles an entire minority.
It’s not about being politically correct, it’s about not being ignorant.
I emailed Wallhood as soon as I saw this article and recommended that they remove it before any harm was done. But since then, it appears they are digging in and defending publishing it rather than retracting it. They seem to be taking the stance that they don’t have editorial control over what they post which seems utterly bizarre. So any person who sends in “a story” just automatically gets it published “as is” without any thought to the subject material and its impact? I think that Wallyhood and its writers have done a great job fostering a sense of community with the things they’ve reported on, but this is clearly an error. As K3ba and others have noted above, there is most certainly a difference in how this is worded. I am surprised that they are not seeing how wrong this statement is. Even if it is a direct quote from a cop (which it is not, just someone saying what a cop said) that does not mean it should be published. Clearly, it is their blog and they can put up whatever they want and generally, I do think they have done things that are good for the community, but this is divisive and wrong. It should not have been posted.
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at the response this story is garnering from so many Wallingfordians. But considering the liberal bent of this particular community, I’m shocked that so many of you are basically advocating for censorship instead of the truth as it is told to a reporter (Margaret). What is wrong with you people? You’re blowing this up into something it shouldn’t be and you’ve got the torches and pitchforks and the villagers gathered and are ready to storm Wallyhood’s castle. We all get it: racism=bad. But reporting the facts=good. I don’t think Woodward and Bernstein would have tiptoed around the facts, do you?
Did you actually read the comments Brandon? Maybe you missed where Wallyhood wrote #15 which contained the following
“…Anon, are you really saying that we have to withhold useful information that could prevent robberies and improve the safety of our community, because you’re afraid it might hurt somebody’s feelings, because they misunderstand or misconstrue why you included a pertinent, useful and actionable detail? That sounds like censorship to me. Not legally mandated censorship, but socially mandated censorship, which I reject. I will speak the truths I believe.
There is not race equality in our country. When you seek to control how others use language to mask that fact, you are inadvertently ending up the wrong side of Orwell’s vision.”
So clearly, they chose to leave it the way it was because they felt the quote was useful, not because they don’t want to take editorial control.
As for being divisive, maybe all of us should just get together over a $4 cappuccino and an $6 artisan muffin and hash it out? If we can get at least 50 residents, statistically at least one should be black, and can give us his/her perspective on this matter.
Yes, it’s true there are few African-Americans in Wallingford and in North Seattle generally. Part of this is a long history of racism, institutional and otherwise. You can see some of it described here:
http://depts.washington.edu/civilr/segregated.htm
Part of the reason blacks didn’t move to North Seattle is because it was considered a “sundown” zone where police would harass them if they were seen after the sun went down:
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/opinion/article/Remember-Seattle-s-segregated-history-1222098.php
If the original reporter is to believed, then at least some police officers seem to think is an area where being black warrants police scrutiny, and there seem to be many here who agree with that, because there aren’t many blacks in the area. It also perpetuates the reason that there are few blacks in the area: it’s not very hospitable to African-Americans. I find this incredibly sad.
The problem with the report is that there is no detail given despite the clear opportunity of an eyewitness, beyond race and a very general age and gender. The eyewitness reports not a single other detail: height, build, hair, clothing. All of these are important to knowing that one might be seeing this group of teens or any other group of teens.
The statistics about Wallingford’s population are frankly useless. People come to our neighborhood from other neighborhoods. There is no wall around Wallingford. They are legitimately here just as I might be in Ballard or Bellevue. We’re three years from the 2010 census anyway and there has been a lot of mobility and a lot of construction in the neighborhood.
Photographs are useful the next time someone breaks into your car. Most people have a phone with a camera. Even if the resolution isn’t good in the dark, the very facts we’re missing, like build and height, probably come out pretty well.
Interesting stats Chris.. 25, 26, 27. Thank you.
It is not so easy to come here. Houses are high cost. Apartments are rarely vacant and cost more than other areas.
Well, if you see a group of black teens in Wallingford, I can guarantee they don’t live there. Sorry if the most easily identifiable characteristic of these kids is their skin color, but there it is right in front of you and like it or not this is a predominantly white neighborhood. So yes, if you see a group of black teens roaming the streets of Wallingford at night, please do call the police. Keep a close eye on groups of white teens roaming the streets as well, but no they probably don’t require the same level of scrutiny. How many teenagers in Wallingford are Black? 10?
The article is wrong because it makes it sound like we should be reporting black teenagers to the police forever more, not a specific group at a specific location and time. That’s the damaging thing I think, that the quote wasn’t put in context. Obviously young black males are disproportionately responsible for crime, but we all need to try and put aside stereotypes when dealing with each other. Anything that feeds the stereotype, however factual, needs to be carefully framed.
Who’s up for starting to contact Wallhood’s sponsors to see if we can get them to pull sponsorship? The more of us that contact them, the more influence that’ll have on them.
@Eric/#54: “Obviously young black males are disproportionately responsible for crime”.
Wait, what?
I humbly suggest “if you see someone acting suspicious around vehicles” or “please use extra caution and don’t leave valuables in the car” over calling out a particular race.
It’s these sort of postings, no matter how innocent the original intent, that leads to the loss of liberty and dignity such as seen in stop and frisk or hate crimes. No one should ever be treated with suspicion or as a second class citizen due to how they dress, or how they look.
This might be a small blog, but please act with dignity and represent your neighborhood and this city well.
After reading everyone’s feedback, here’s where I net out:
I agree with those who have raised concerns that the phrasing is inflammatory and could leave black readers with a justifiable feeling of being criminalized and all readers with an unjustified, increased sense of “black = criminal”.
Our problem is this:
1. We do want to warn the community about a specific band of people who were acting criminally.
2. I believe it is not enough to report “we believe they committed this act”, but also to issue a call to action: “if you see them, call the police”. (i.e., don’t be a passive observer, be a participant in the protection of our community).
3. The single characteristic available that would uniquely identify this band of people is their race.
If you agree with the above three points, then you tell me, what do we do? Would it assuage the concerns of those enraged if we had ended the direct quote after the third paragraph and replaced the last paragraph with:
“The reader concluded by asking you to call the police if you see this group of teenagers, who were black, in the neighborhood.”
It’s stilted and basically does the same thing. I don’t know how else to achieve the goals of a) communicating all the information available, and b) issuing an important call to action, without creating the negative racial repercussions.
Suggestions?
@Eric: The uh, first two paragraphs of the direct quote provide the context you’re looking for, no? Similarly indented and all?. I never at any time took the SPD statement as “Always forevermore call the police when you see a group of black kids.”
Cameron, how about you just stop reading Wallyhood so you don’t upset yourself any more than you have already? Jeez, organizing a sponsors’ boycott of Wallyhood? Aren’t you being a little hysterical… Do you react this way when you read something you don’t like in The Seattle Times, The Stranger, The Weekly, etc.? I’m not sure what the mission statement is of Wallyhood, per se, but it does a fine job of informing the neighborhood of all sorts of useful and entertaining information and has also reported crimes that happen in the ‘hood in an effort to help keep us all safe. I remember some time ago some people complained about the crime reporting aspect because, I guess, it was too unpleasant for them to deal with. For the rest of us who live in reality, the crime notices were helpful as some of these episodes were happening close to home! This story is news and directly affected a member of our community and Wallyhood was reporting the FACTS as they were told them. That’s the information I want to know about, not some paraphrased, censored, politically-correct version. Wallyhood doesn’t control what people say and do; to the best of my knowledge, they just report it. So, Cameron, put your torch and pitchfork down and just relax.
I find this whole “report” pretty weird: 8 (!) teenagers “break” into a car while the sun is still shining during a busy time of the evening just off 50th???? The car owner “tracks” them while they “walk” to the QFC all the while “yelling” at him/her that they did not do what the car owner alleges they did and yet the car owner provides no other description than “black”? Did anyone else in the neighborhood witness this wild event? These 8 black teenagers then melt into the neighborhood? And the only one matching the description (“black teenager”) happens to be a neighbor kid with no “priors” and “nothing on him”? Did anyone actually steal anything? Was the car unlocked or was a window smashed? Is it possible that these kids were just goofing around? I really wonder what, if anything, happened here.
Something that really did happen is that this poster got a whole lot of people alarmed about groups of black teenagers and has passed on an alleged police recommendation that Wallingford residents “call 911” if a group of black teenagers is seen. Good grief. Thank goodness for DOUG and Mo and anon and others who recognize how insidious and destructive this post is. It seems to me that one or two people are heavily and strangely invested in defending this post and in jeering at the sensitivities of other residents. What is with that?? @57 has it right; it’s not so problematic, Wallyhood.
“Sensitive” is definitely the right word, Walkinroun 🙂
@Wallyhood – I think we all, for the most part, appreciate this site and the information it provides on many topics. I personally do not hold you responsible for publishing a comment from a reader or the police, however poorly phrased. However as the publisher, and an influential group in this community I think it is fair to be concerned with the potential implications the words printed on your site can have.
I understand the concerns many of the commenters have regarding censorship, whether or not your group subscribes to them is up to you. I think at the very least a disclaimer at the bottom of the article by the writer that more eloquently states the call to action would be appropriate. If that had been in place here my guess is that the frustration in this thread would have been aimed at the police, rather than each other.
If your mission here is to foster community I’m not sure that this posting did much to achieve that, although I think this was a beneficial dialogue in the grand scheme.
I really appreciate this site and am an avid reader. Ironically though I’m a first time commenter, so maybe the mission was accomplished after all.
Lol at all the white people arguing about race on a Wallingford blog. I love Seattle.
I am curious whom k3ba .. th epublisher?? is.
I support wallyhood for printing the article. They printed a quote from a policeperson. This is a blog.
identifying criminals is a tricky business. I have repeatedly said more description would have been helpful; however if it were my car or a neighbor’s I might not be so accurate in noting jacket color or hair length as I would be in STOPPING the crime and calling police.
I do really appreciate the role that Wallyhood plays in building community. I am a community member and an avid reader of the blog. And, as a community member, I feel a responsibility to speak-up whenever anyone in our community creates an environment which could make it uncomfortable for others to be a part of the community. I believe this post would make a black person feel uncomfortable being part of this community, and therefore I feel a responsibility to speak-up.
In my opinion, using race in context with other descriptors to identify perpetrators of a crime is reasonable. I think this post lacks some of those other descriptors. However, if that’s where the post would have stopped, I would have found it unfortunate but not inflammatory. I believe where the post crossed the line was when it transitioned from fact “a group of black teens committed a crime” to encouraging racial profiling, which, as 57 so eloquently states, leads to discrimination “if you see a group of black teens wandering the neighborhood, to call the police.”
I believe that is it’s Wallyhood’s goal to build community, this call to action is counter productive and should be removed.
And, thank-you Jordan for listening and asking for recommendations.
@Michael H: thanks for posting the informative links. Especially for those of us not from Seattle, it is helpful to know the context of the conversation.
It’s important to protect our neighborhood, yes, but not with conscious or unconscious racism. Describing characteristics of suspects (including race) is OK… those are the reported facts. Encouraging readers to call the police if they see a group of black kids in the neighborhood is not OK… that’s generalization. Thanks for publishing this post, Wallyhood, but please be open to editing inappropriate content (in this post, now, and in the future).
Why should a policeman’s words be editted?
maybe many need to converse and throw criticism to the speaker. Unless the words were misinterpreted.
Another point.. if this had happened in a predominately African American neighborhood caused by 6-8 white kids.. what descriptors do you think would have been used?
Jordon,
Thank you for listening and responding to comments. I agree that having a call to action is important. However, I think you could just say, “The reader concluded by asking you to call the police if you see this group of teenagers in the neighborhood.” Then in the first paragrpah, where the reader describes the teenagers, you could easily add either add a racial descriptor in brackets or as an editor’s note. Actually, following up with the reader about approximate ages (teenagers range from 13-19) could be helpful as well.
I am a student at UW and receive emails regarding criminal activity in the U-district from UW police. I reread a few of those emails, and those emails say things like “the suspect was described as black” and “he appeared between 18-20 years old.”
Jordan, sorry for spelling your name wrong.
@Wallyhood:
Yes, the direct quote should’ve ended after the third paragraph. Your paraphrase is certainly better than what was posted.
That said, I think the final paragraph of the message you were sent should’ve raised a red flag. It was written in such an inflammatory manner that I would hope you would follow-up with the sender to get a little more information on the incident before posting it. A better description of the “suspects” would be helpful.
And I agree with walkinroun@61. This story as written is very strange and has some holes in it. That too should’ve triggered a follow-up conversation with the person who sent it to you.
You also should’ve followed up with SPD. If they’re really sending messages to the community encouraging racial profiling, that’s an issue far more important than this alleged break-in. I sent Terrie Johnston at SPD an email yesterday, making her aware of this story and asking her to verify its content. I’ll let you know what I hear back from her.
This blog is a great tool for the neighborhood, but I hope you’re not just posting any old thing that is sent to you without vetting it somewhat. That seems risky.
Wallyhood,
In response to your #58 comment, I agree that this would be a good approach. I’m not sure that the exact wording you’ve used is ideal, but it’s much better than the original sentence. I think that most (all?) of us who object to the current blog post feel that the mention of race in the description is NOT the core problem, even though other commenters (Rickvid and others) imply that all Wallingford liberals will freak out at mere mention of someone’s skin color.
One subtle but important point that deserves to be made is that the reader telling the story about the break-in has paraphrased the instructions from the police herself/himself. We do not know EXACTLY what the cops said in regards to calling the police. Consider a few possible statements, all slightly varied in the exact wording:
“If someone sees this same group of teens in the neighborhood, they should call the police.”
“If someone sees a group who matches the description of the kids who broke into your car, call the police.”
“If you see this group again, call us immediately.”
“If anyone sees any black kids in the vicinity, call the cops.”
I’m sorry, but I don’t buy the “fact” that the Seattle police necessarily said to the reader these exact words: “If you see a group of black teens wandering the neighborhood, to call the police.” While it’s possible that they did, I think it’s equally likely that the statement got distorted (slightly?) by the messenger.
Finally, Margaret and Lisa — I don’t think that leaving out the last line of a source’s story and then paraphrasing the content is not necessarily censoring or changing a quote. Suppose the reader had continued on with a rant about how all black people needed to be evicted from the neighborhood or how he/she will never shop at QFC again. Would it have been unethical to snip the story prior to the rant? Journalists “trim up” quotes all the time. It’s not practical to print everything a source says, is it? The fact that the storyteller has already paraphrased the cops’ instructions is a good reason not to use the paraphrased “facts” as a direct quote, in my opinion.
@wallyhood: blacks are incarcerated at 6 times the rate of non-blacks. There’s a lot of reasons for that, but some part of that number is that blacks commit more crimes per capita (there’s a lot of reasons for that as well).
@chris: you’re right, but the quoted remedy is not scoped to the crime. It dredges up all those years when being black in a neighborhood was a crime in and of itself.
this is what you guys all sound like.
http://booyoutube.com/watch/?v=oOEuY5lWENg
Just to clarify – yes, multiple neighbors witnessed this happening, and while it was minor, yes, multiple items were taken from the car. There are no holes in the story unless you’re just trying to cause trouble.
I would much rather they report direct quotes than selectively edit. Get over yourselves.
Not to pee in the group-think punch of a group of highly privileged white people talking about racism, but how do anybody’s suggestions change anything other than getting the “black” reference in the call to action out of your face?
All of the suggestions to essentially reword the call to action to just “if you see this and only this specific group” fail because the only description provided was 6M+2F black teens.
How do any of your suggestions make a black person feel more welcome and safe? You are still telling the community to be alert for these perps, who are described only as 8 black teens. How DOES one look for *this and only this* group of 8 black teens?
The fact is, no matter what Wallyhood could write or omit, you would need to use your own discretion as to when it makes sense to call the police when you *think* you see “this same” group who committed “this same” prowling or not. Statistically, we are all very educated, I presume we don’t act on impulse and can count out 6m+2w= 8 as a first gate on a decision.
Writing this so you spread the description around so the explicit call to action never actually says “call the police if you see a group of 8 black teens” just makes it implicit and therefore MORE dangerous and keeps the status quo. In fact, removing the call to action doesn’t help anything. If I read this article without a call to action, and I saw 6m+2w black teens roaming, I would probably watch them a bit to see if it’s reasonable they might be the suspects and if I should call 911. If I were racist, I would just call regardless.
No wordsmithing or omission by Wallyhood can change the fact that we are uncomfortable to recognize the disparity in our own neighborhood. The fact that seeing a group of 8 black teens would be unusual enough in Wallingford that it probably *is* the perps is embarrassing, and is the real issue. Making sure the 2% of blacks that live here feel comfortable is admirable, but I am fairly certain black people aren’t choosing to live elsewhere because we don’t welcome diversity here. In fact prior to NSAP, many opted to put their kids on a bus for 2+ hours a day so they could attend school up here presumably because the schools are better and safer.
If this article made black readers uncomfortable, please speak up! We should hear your POV.
If this article made white readers uncomfortable, do something to fix your neighborhood, not this article. The first thing you can do is stop placing a premium on language immersion through the price you paid for your home and trying to make it a neighborhood school. This creates a greater disparity in our public schools and steals resources from the special programs needed to truly address the issue.
(You realize that NSAP sent all of the black kids that were going to school in Wallingford home, right? That was due to all of the white people flooding the neighborhood to get into JSIS, so we had to fill BFDay with neighborhood kids.)
So in summary, walk the walk Wallingford, don’t just talk the talk until you feel better.
There is no amount of “fair-trade” organic espresso you can buy to solve this problem in your lifetime.
Wallyneighbor, we both agree that direct quotes are good, in general. For example, I think that directly quoting details of the incident from a first-hand witness is very useful here.
However, directly quoting a paraphrased statement from the police that becomes inflammatory/racist in its regurgitated form (at least to the ears of some readers) is different.
Doug, I’m glad you contacted SPD and I’ll be eager to hear the response. If they really did give instructions to “call them if any one sees a group of black teens wandering in Wallingford,” I would like to know this. Once we get a DIRECT QUOTE from the police on the matter, I hope that the direct quote is printed here.
Chris, as a professional statistician, I am uncomfortable with your postings here.
Numbers and calculations that get filtered through assumptions (such as your implication that all the concerned commenters here are White) and judgments (your view of racism is more valid than that of the other “highly-priviledge white people” expressing a different opinion than yours) are problematic. (I could either quote or paraphrase the saying about lies and statistics here, I suppose.) For example, why are you so hung up on the exact count and gender balance of the group? I.e. 6m+2w=8 teens, etc… The blog post told us to call the cops if a “group of black teens wandering the neighborhood” is observed. This is the exact phrase that has many of us uncomfortable. I don’t see the relevance of any statistical gymnastics related to the 6m+2w=8 likelihood.
It did make me smile that you were applying the concepts of Bayesian statistics, sort of… Thanks for that smile! Please stop lecturing an unknown group of people, however, without better understanding our arguments.
@Chris- you are missing the point entirely. It is important that we address groups who are outside of our own in a respectful and considerate way, whether that pertains to race, gender, sexuality, etc. I want to live in a Wallingford where everyone feels safe to walk down the street, not just the wealthy, white males.
If you can’t understand the difference between “8 black teenagers broke into a car” and “if you see a group of black teens wandering the neighborhood, call the police”, then I don’t know if I can help you. The first states only the facts and a “highly educated” person would know what to do with this information. The second singles out an entire minority and ties them to a crime solely based on their race.
And frankly the fact that you or other people in Wallingford are “highly educated” doesn’t make me feel any safer. There are plenty of people with degrees who I wouldn’t trust to babysit my pet rock, let alone make an unbiased decision in a heated moment.
“However as the publisher, and an influential group in this community I think it is fair to be concerned with the potential implications the words printed on your site can have.” from k3ba..
Regarding educated people…. the above quote implies that k3 is the publisher. The inappropriate placement of the pronoun is a terrible travesty. Implying that one is th epublisher when in fact he/she is not while chastizing an entire community of readers and commenters has it’s own synchronicity and karma.
Thanks Christine, I don’t think my judgements of racism are more valid, and consider myself in that highly privileged group 85% of us are in. I was hung up on the count because that makes the group even less likely to be *any* group of 8 black teens, and I took the SPD quote *in the context of the incident* described in the paragraphs above, not a blanket call to profile. I could have done the probability on the permutations of a set of 6m and 2w out of a group of approx 13m and 13w. Intro to Probability blue and red balls in a jar stuff. (and fwiw, I majored in math as well and have seen business plans get funded on assumptions made with less rigor than my stats here. 🙂 )
Please tell me how I used the stats incorrectly? I never used an assumption on the commenters being white in the approximation of the probability a group of 8 black teens in Wallingford.
I did make an assertion that the majority of the commenters are white based on those stats, and the composition of our neighborhood schools and the fact that despite complete anonymity, no one has volunteered otherwise. I keep calling for someone who is a minority to please state such and comment as I do feel the opinions of those impacted matter more than those guessing (including myself).
My other comments have been about really addressing the issue, not just tending to this one turn of phrase.
@Wallyhood, as a suggestion since you asked, you could have provided the full comment verbatim, and then simply included an editorial note including a quote from the SPD explaining that they really don’t want the residents of Wallingford calling 911 every time they see black people. Pretty sure your reporter/writer could have obtained such a quote with a simple phone call or email to the SPD.
Also where Margaret defends the quote by saying that her unnamed source said it was a direct quote from unnamed officers… That’s coming off pretty thin. Understandably a neighborhood blog has limited resources, but a simple follow up call to the SPD seems warranted. Especially if you defend this post as promoting public safety. I do assume you mean public safety for all including the black teens living here who shouldn’t have to feel targeted because of their race.
The solution isn’t that hard. People are right to complain that the piece felt off.
So if I see a group of black teenagers eating at Dicks or Tutta Bella I’m supposed to call the cops. Got it. Makes sense.
As if I needed more reasons to entirely ignore this blog. I visit only rarely and came this time because this idiotic kerfuffle was linked on Slog.
I believe I saw the same group last week (they were on 43rd and Wallingford). 3 teen boys, 2 girls, they were lifting handles on cars and looking under them. As soon as I walked up, they moved along.
Incidentally, I have two black women that live in my house (including one mixed child). Please do not call the police if they are seen “roaming” their own neighborhood.
The Stranger wrote about this post today:
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/08/16/no-cops-arent-bopping-about-wallingford-telling-residents-to-call-911-on-black-teens
The Stranger actually contacted SPD. An SPD spokesperson says that calling in a group of black teens would not really be useful, and is skeptical that the resident was actually told to do this, for that reason.
They also called this post racist.
This is the response I got from Terrie Johnston, SPD’s North Precinct Crime Prevention Coordinator, when I asked if she could verify the officer’s quote in Wallyhood’s initial post:
“I cannot for the life of me even think of one SPD employee who would even think of such a message and no one would ever ever say such a thing.
“The bottom line is that is a racist comment and is simply untrue and a waste of anyone’s time.
“Having been a community organizer for over 25 years with the Seattle Police Dept. working in every neighborhood in this City except for West Seattle, our message is unchanged. We encourage the reporting of anything or anyone SUSPICIOUS to 911. Neighbors are our eyes and ears and we rely on the watchfulness of our communities. Color is not of significance; it’s the behavior.”
#88, thanks for looking into it. In my earlier comment (#10), I expressed my doubt that SPD would be stupid enough to say something like that. In comment #11, Margaret states she verified the quote with the reader, which means nothing whatsoever. I’m not a professional blogger/news writer/whatever, but I know enough to know that if you’re going to verify a quote, you ask the person who supposedly said the quote, not the person who quoted them. Come on Wallyhood, be better. And whoever this reader is should be ashamed of themselves for trying to convince a community that the police want people to call 911 if black teens are seen in the neighborhood.
To Wallhood et al:
The most upsetting thing about all this is that you have dug your heels in and insisted that the course you took with posting this email was the correct one. It was not. Period.
This posting is essentially triple hearsay. We are taking Margaret’s word that she received this anonymous email, we are taking the email’s word that this event happened, and we are taking the email author’s word that the police officer said what he/she said. The truth is that this article was posted without even the slightest attempt to verify any of the information in it, and that is absolutely wrong. Apparently I could send an anonymous email to Wallyhood saying that a black woman with a stroller stole my mail, and that the police said to tell everyone to call the police if they see any black woman with a stroller in the neighborhood, and then Wallyhood would post it as though it was true.
I guess Wallyhood should have a giant disclaimer reading: “WARNING: we make absolutely no attempt to verify any of the information that we post. In our opinion, it is more important that our readers hear everything as opposed to only hearing the stuff that is true.”
Where was the attempt to contact SPD to ask if there was a police report matching that description? To ask if the responding officer said the quote in question? This is the basic of journalism. You get a scoop, and then you verify it. Verify does not mean asking the person who gave it to you, “really?” It means getting actual third party verification.
I think that it is obvious from the email itself that the police officer did not say what the email author says was said. That has been supported by both the SLOG and DOUG from the comments (specifically comment #88). The game of telephone probably turned the statement, “[Aonymous email author], will YOU please call 911 if YOU see THIS group of teenagers in Wallingford again,” into “Everybody should call 911 if they see any group of black teenagers in Walingford.”
And here’s the final thing that irks me. Even if you did verify the statement with the SPD, and you chose to post it, the responsible thing to do would have been to add some editorial comment to the post. “Despite the statement from the SPD, Wallyhood would like to remind everyone that is not illegal to be a teenager while black, even in Wallingford.” You chose not to, and instead posted an incredibly inflammatory statement credited to the SPD without verification and without comment. Disgusting.
This whole thing was just really irresponsible and really terrible journalism. You should thank the SLOG and DOUG for doing your work for you, and you should post a new blog entry acknowledging that this post was in error.
Period.
To DOUG:
Thank you for doing what this blog is apparently unwilling to do: fact check.
I am not a professional lawyer or writer, but I hav ebeen told one thing by a city official and another by another.. mor ethan once. It’s likely that wither the officer was mis-speaking( amazing- it can happen) (there’s a story in the Stranger about just that a week or so ago) or the victim mis-heard the comment and made a mistake in what he/she thought they heard.
@yesyes,
Do you really think any officer told this person to tell Wallyhood that everyone should call the police if they see a group of black teenagers? What officer would be so stupid and reckless as to give that advice?
@anon: I believe it. Just because the spokesman knows what to say doesn’t mean every beat officer does. I’ve had them tell me some shit that left my jaw dropping.
Okay, so you believe this particular quote. Doesn’t it fall into the category of “jaw dropping,” at at least deserve some sort of comment from the blog? In that case, perhaps the real story here is that the SPD gave such inflammatory and racist advice to a community.
Either way, the quote requires verification. Can’t the author of the email provide the officer’s name? There must have been a report.
Yes, I do. People mis-speak. Th e police maybe implied or meant to imply if someone saw a group of black teen sup to trouble or a group in trouble…
read the story in the Stranger about the reporter who was threatened to be followed onto his job by a policeman. the tv report said no such thing would ever be said by an officer.
Same kind of thing as here.
Type, I meant “…and at least…”
You can find this in the Seattle online police reports (http://www.seattle.gov/spd/records/):
GO 2013-291683 ( INACTIVE)
2305 – 0 THEFT-CARPROWL
General Offense Information
Operational status : INACTIVE
Reported on : Aug-13-2013 (Tue.) 1951
Occurred on : Aug-13-2013 (Tue.) 1951
Approved on : Aug-13-2013 (Tue.) by : 4376 – HARRIS
Report submitted by : 6935 – JONES
Org unit : NORTH PCT 3RD W – V/RELIEF SQUAD
Location : 49XX BLOCK OF BURKE AV N
Municipality : SEATTLE
District : J Beat : J3 Grid : 322
Offenses (Completed/Attempted)
Offense : #1 2305 – 0 THEFT-CARPROWL – COMPLETED
Location : STREET/HIGHWAY/ROAD/ALLEY/SIDEWALK
So the police officer who allegedly made this statement (which personally I find rather unlikely) would be officer Jones #6935.
Thank you, everyone for this conversation. I appreciate the tone and approach everyone has taken, as well as the concern that everyone has shown for their neighbors of all races.
We have updated the text of the original article. I hope the updated phrasing addresses the concerns expressed here while still staying true to the intent of this blog and the author.
@Michael, this comment appeared in the Slog article you linked to:
“A few months back a cop in Capitol Hill asked if I’d seen a group of black kids (I was walking my dog, he was in his patrol car). When I said no, he told me to call 911 if I saw them. I think this is something some cops actually do.”
SPD official spokesmen are very careful in how they choose their words. SPD beat cops, maybe not so much. I think you’re barking up the wrong tree on this one.
Am I reading the term “carprowl” correctly? In other words, the door to the car was unlocked? That fits in with the comment that someone saw some kids checking car doors.
Here’s an idea: locking your freaking car doors. This isn’t Pleasantville. This requires no racial profiling at all.
In my experience SPD uses the term “car prowl” to refer to any sort of suspicious activity around cars or theft from the cars. It doesn’t necessarily mean the door was unlocked in this case.
Any group of “kids” is gonna be a threat to public property, regardless of ethnicity, and especially if there are two girls.
That they were “all black” seems unusual (I come from the CD), but perhaps that is why got described that way.
A far greater threat to Wallingfordiens is drunken frat boys.
Eric – please see Michele Alexander’s The New Jim Crow. Maybe this work will help disabuse you of the notion that black folks, particularly males, are disproportionately responsible for crimes. Disproportionality is a legitmate issue, but not for the reasons that you cite.
As to folks who claim that no black folks post, and that few black folks live in Wallingford, let me disabuse you of that notion as well. We, and a number of other black and interracial families live in Wallingford, and find this post patently offensive.
And finally, my family and I are grateful to the thoughtful insights and sensitivies conveyed by so many of our neighbors in “Wallyhood”. Thank you.
legitimate
sensitivities
apologies
I’m not sure the article as re-written is still really correct. From what Michael H posted above about the case shows its status as “inactive”. Based on that and the info Doug and the Stranger blog received from the SPD, it appears that there is no open case and the police are not looking for anyone to call if they see a group of 8 African American teenagers is seen in the neighborhood. A better ending to the article would be a more general call to action like “This serves as a reminder to everyone to keep an eye out for suspicious activity and immediately report it to the police.”
I agree with Brandon. The rewrite still sounds like it is recommended to call the police if there is a group of 8 teens in Wallingford Walking (Around) While Black. Glad for the insight from Michael H; thank you for posting the link to SLOG. Cody and Doug, thank you for keeping it real and reminding us that all this hysteria was brought about by an anonymous email in which the recommendation of the police was (hopefully) misquoted due to the racism of the anonymous emailer and without adequate fact checking.
As a mother of a mixed-race child (I’m white, she’s also Hispanic and native) who has been on the receiving end of racist slurs and unfair suspicion (though she is a gifted student and premier soccer player) I am seriously disappointed that even after being called out by readers and other media that you wouldn’t own up to the proof that this is indeed a poorly written article that reflects ignorant privilege if not outright racism.
To those saying that “black people commit more crime, look at the statistics!” I submit this video showing how the public reacts to a white guy, black guy and pretty girl stealing a bike: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge7i60GuNRg
Disclaimer: While I looked at the Wallingford neighborhood, I actually just moved to Mt. Baker/Rainier Valley. I love that I can walk down my street and hear multiple languages being spoken, and see people in every shade. I found the people to be friendlier, and that we are being looked out for by our neighbors. Posts like this make me and my non-white child less likely to live or spend money in Wallingford.
I’m so glad I got out of Seattle.
Sounds like the place is both racist and succumbing to crime and decay.
So forget about that this women had a crime committed against her, and forget about the fact that these youths were stealing. I guess its OK for me to come to your house and check the lock and if it’s open steal your stuff. Maybe I should even paint my face black so it won’t be so invasive. Go ahead and call 911 these days, it’s 45 minutes to an hour unless your being stabbed. These people risk their lives with little thanks. Do most of you work on the east-side and live in Seattle so you can prove your Urban Dwellers. Seemingly if your a transient or a minority the concessions are endless. Isn’t that racism in itself. Oh and Jordan your Blog rocks……
@ So Really
Nobody is saying it is okay to for people to steal or is defending the actions of the actual alleged perpetrators. However, people are rightfully upset over the call for what amounts to fear based racial profiling.
So I had a garage sale today and over 130 people stopped by… 2 were African American, 4 were Japanese, 1 Chinese… approx 123 were caucasian…
the only person who was rude was caucasian
@anon @ mucho inter
Shame on you two. You both seem to have racial problems, more such than those who are truly honest about theirs. Once again Wallingford is 2nd in line to have car and house burglaries within the city. Regardless of race can my neighbors take a look out for anything suspicious? I don’t care about the color or wealth of the assailant either……
@So Really,
Keeping an eye out for suspicious activity is fine. Defining suspicious activity as black people is not okay.
I live in Tangletown. For 30 years I have had a diverse block including any number of (non-white) kids grow up across the street. Their friends often came for activities. It always pleased me to live on this block. It pains me to think if those kids were now walking down to the corner store to get ice cream and were not engaged in active suspicious activity, all eyes would be on them looking for signs of suspicious behavior.
There is a new beautiful family with a number of younger kids, bright, active and engaged in joyful outdoor kids activities. May things be better for them … in a few years may they walk freely about their community without undo suspicion.
I am racist because I give you an observation? How about this one? Everyone who lives in the apt building where I RENT and have no management power is caucasian.
[I stopped reading at about comment #80. BTW, last year there was a black man over 30 and a younger white man trying to sell me carpet cleaner and visibly open the front door of a neighbor across the street. I emailed all the neighbors and described their race because I thought it would be helpful for folks in case they came to their front door.]
I skimmed it all for entertainment.. we have a bunch of quick to namecall commenters.. funnier than the soaps.. its summer and I as a sub teacher, have time fo rfun, silliness and relaxation.
Entertaining discussion! Speaking as one who actually had the opportunity to hear and see the action as it was unfolding, and as many of us who were outside on that lovely warm evening were just trying to figure out what the hell was taking place……
I will refrain from repeating the words as expressed by two of the teens, directed (apparantly) to all of those gazing upon what was taking place, while hoping that Sean was not going to be physically assaulted. It was fairly caustic at the time, took a while to process, and somewhat funny in retrospect. Younger teens, yes. Innocent? no. Caught red-handed? yes. Embarrassed, probably.
The SPD didn’t word it well. That’s for sure.
Small business owner making under $30,000 per year
substitute teacher in Seattle, making under scary scary 18,000 a year before taxes