The Far Out Lounge & Stage
Why Did the 'Chronicle' Attack the 'Statesman' Statistics?
RECEIVED Tue., Feb. 24, 2004
Dear Editor,
I love the Chronicle. I have the greatest respect and admiration for Louis Black.
Thus, I am totally mystified by the pissing contest you've gotten into with the Austin American-Statesman, for whom I hold no affection, over their alleged misuse of "statistics" involving the police and minorities ["Page Two," Feb. 13 and "Austin@Large," News, Feb. 13].
You state (regarding the death of Sophia King) ["After 18 Months, APD Releases Report on King Shooting," News, Feb. 20], "Of 14 fatal police shootings since 1990, seven have featured a white officer and a black or Hispanic suspect." That is exactly 50%. It's a statistic. Is it possible my math is wrong here? Or are you playing with statistics, too?
So what exactly is your problem with the Statesman's reportage? You seem to be suffering from a schizophrenia of sorts, praising the integrity of Austin police officers while mounting a "let's get them" attack on the Big Brother official city newspaper. Lucius Lomax's devastating article sheds another light on the police use of deadly force, which clearly seems disproportionately high when directed at non-Anglos. You can't have it both ways!
Is your attack on the Statesman's attempt to expose a horrible portrait of injustice and racism in our city just an effort to make the Chronicle seem more journalistically pure? You screwed up badly (and were gracious enough to admit it) when you blindly accepted the "10 mug shots" lie, and you're just digging yourself deeper into a hole when you acknowledge that 50% (your statistic) of fatal police shootings involve white officers killing members of minorities, which seems to contradict your objections to the Statesman's series.
I know your heart is in the right place, but this issue is far too serious to be reduced to a childish, playground skirmish between two newspapers. Historically, I have always accepted the Chronicle's version over anything printed in the Statesman, but I'm beginning to wonder what precisely your point is here.
I love the Chronicle. I have the greatest respect and admiration for Louis Black.
Thus, I am totally mystified by the pissing contest you've gotten into with the Austin American-Statesman, for whom I hold no affection, over their alleged misuse of "statistics" involving the police and minorities ["Page Two," Feb. 13 and "Austin@Large," News, Feb. 13].
You state (regarding the death of Sophia King) ["After 18 Months, APD Releases Report on King Shooting," News, Feb. 20], "Of 14 fatal police shootings since 1990, seven have featured a white officer and a black or Hispanic suspect." That is exactly 50%. It's a statistic. Is it possible my math is wrong here? Or are you playing with statistics, too?
So what exactly is your problem with the Statesman's reportage? You seem to be suffering from a schizophrenia of sorts, praising the integrity of Austin police officers while mounting a "let's get them" attack on the Big Brother official city newspaper. Lucius Lomax's devastating article sheds another light on the police use of deadly force, which clearly seems disproportionately high when directed at non-Anglos. You can't have it both ways!
Is your attack on the Statesman's attempt to expose a horrible portrait of injustice and racism in our city just an effort to make the Chronicle seem more journalistically pure? You screwed up badly (and were gracious enough to admit it) when you blindly accepted the "10 mug shots" lie, and you're just digging yourself deeper into a hole when you acknowledge that 50% (your statistic) of fatal police shootings involve white officers killing members of minorities, which seems to contradict your objections to the Statesman's series.
I know your heart is in the right place, but this issue is far too serious to be reduced to a childish, playground skirmish between two newspapers. Historically, I have always accepted the Chronicle's version over anything printed in the Statesman, but I'm beginning to wonder what precisely your point is here.
With all due respect,
David Weems
David Weems
