ADVERTISEMENT

What was protest about?

The facts of the situation at Richmond remain unknown.

Hate Crime Hoaxes Are More Common Than You Think
A political scientist found that fewer than 1 in 3 of 346 such allegations was genuine.



By
Jason L. Riley
June 25, 2019 6:55 p.m.


thumbstrip.jpg







062519opvidum_1280x720.jpg

Opinion: Chicago Police Release Jussie Smollett Video
Chicago PD has released hours of unseen footage related to the alleged staged attack on "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett on Jan. 29, 2019. Image: AP

When I asked Wilfred Reilly about last week’s appointment of a special prosecutor in Chicago to take up the Jussie Smollett case, he was cautiously optimistic. Mr. Reilly is author of a new book, “Hate Crime Hoax,” in which he details how the initial publicity for supposed hate crimes tends all but to disappear if the allegations are exposed as fake.

So does the sustained press coverage of Mr. Smollett—the television actor who was accused of staging an attack on himself back in January, only to have all 16 felony counts against him abruptly dropped for reasons that prosecutors have never made clear—represent progress of sorts?

“It’s the archetype of a hate crime hoax. It’s one of the most flamboyant examples of the genre,” said Mr. Reilly, himself a Second City native. An openly gay black man residing in one of the country’s most liberal and diverse metropolises is set upon by two white Donald Trump supporters who brandish bleach and a noose while shouting racial and antigay slurs? “It was a situation so extreme and bizarre that I think we would have had to look at how much racial progress the U.S. had actually made had it really occurred.” The appointment of a special prosecutor, and the possibility of bringing new charges against Mr. Smollett, is a good sign, Mr. Reilly added, “but will we see the same amount of coverage when the hoax involves a less famous person?”

Mr. Reilly is a professor of political science at Kentucky State University, and his interest in hate crimes dates to his graduate-school days, when he became aware of several widely reported incidents in the vicinity of his hometown that turned out to be fake. In 2012 a popular gay bar in suburban Chicago was destroyed by fire, and the owner cited homophobia as the reason. The same year, black students at the University of Wisconsin-Parkside reported death threats from hate groups and found a noose hanging from a dorm room door. Ultimately, the owner of the bar pleaded guilty to arson and insurance fraud. And a black student at the university fessed up to sending racist threats and planting a noose.

More incidents followed, and Mr. Reilly’s skepticism grew. “This phenomenon of fake hate crimes did not appear to be small-scale or regionally based,” he writes. A gay pastor in Texas accused a Whole Foods store of selling him a cake with a slur written in icing. The store produced video evidence that the pastor was lying. A white woman in Oregon disfigured her own face with acid and claimed a black man had attacked her. Later, she admitted fabricating the entire story. After signs that read “blacks only” and “whites only” were found at bathroom entrances on the University at Buffalo campus in upstate New York, a black graduate student confessed to posting them.

Mr. Reilly eventually compiled a database of 346 hate-crime allegations and determined that less than a third were genuine. Turning his attention to the hoaxes, he put together a data set of more than 400 confirmed cases of fake allegations that were reported to authorities between 2010 and 2017. He allows that the exact number of false reports is probably unknowable, but what can be said “with absolute confidence is that the actual number of hate crime hoaxes is indisputably large,” he writes. “We are not speaking here of just a few bad apples.”

The author’s bigger concern, and rightly so, is the growing politicization of hate crimes, especially when they are directed at underrepresented groups and regardless of whether they in fact happened. The sad reality is that there is no shortage of individuals and entities with a vested interest in exaggerating racial tensions in the U.S.—from civil-rights organizations to corporate diversity officers to professors of race and gender studies.

These alleged incidents are invariably seized upon by politicians and activists looking to feed a sacrosanct belief among liberals that discrimination and oppression are the main drivers of inequality. “In the mainstream media we hear almost constant talk about scary new forms of racism: ‘white privilege,’ ‘cultural appropriation,’ and ‘subtle bigotry,’ ” Mr. Reilly writes, yet “a huge percentage of the horrific hate crimes cited as evidence of contemporary bigotry are fakes.”

If “Hate Crime Hoax” merely offered examples to illustrate the extent of this phenomenon—and the book offers nearly 100—it would be providing a much-needed public service. But Mr. Reilly has a larger point to make. The Smollett case isn’t an outlier. Increasingly, it’s the norm. And the media’s relative lack of interest in exposing hoaxes that don’t involve famous figures is a big part of the problem.

Copyright ©2019 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Appeared in the June 26, 2019, print edition.
 
Where did he get his 346 hate crime allegations that he claims only a third were genuine? How does he define hate crime?
 
His “data” strikes me as the scientific “data” that global warming isn’t a real thing. I’ll pass on giving him money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spider2020
How can you compare this to doing something stupid? As I asked in my previous post, do you really think saying that would make anyone who has been on the receiving end of racism feel any better?


DO you call it smart? Who said it would make the victim fell any better? Lot of difference between a person that is just a mean hateful racist, and some drunk college kid that wrote something stupid and mean (do you like that better?) in a moment of anger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: localspider
I hear you, but I don't know anyone who wrote racial slurs on someone's door as a joke. The kids at UR obviously know better. Now I will say that there is sometimes good-natured racial banter that can happen back and forth between friends, but in those instances it's friends who know each other REALLY well. And even in those cases, there are some things that are or should be off limits. I don't think this was that kind of joking around or else the person who did it would have immediately told the other students.

I'm willing to hear the side of whoever did this, but I'm not willing to just brush it off as a college prank, and I don't know that the explanation would change my mind about what the consequences should be.


Never said it was a joke
 
His “data” strikes me as the scientific “data” that global warming isn’t a real thing. I’ll pass on giving him money.

Your statement confuses me Nathan. The man cited numerous very specific incidences and easily verifiable facts. So putting "data" in quotation marks doesn't make any sense, unless you're actually quoting the word data, as I did.
 
Your statement confuses me Nathan. The man cited numerous very specific incidences and easily verifiable facts. So putting "data" in quotation marks doesn't make any sense, unless you're actually quoting the word data, as I did.

He mentions 6 incidents specifically.

He then mentions 346 hate-crime allegations (not mentioning how it’s defined in terms of hate crime, time frame, locations, etc) and says less than a third were genuine (also a vague term).

He then mentions 400 confirmed hoaxes in an 8 year span, but fails to mention the total number of hate-crime allegations during that span (or how he defines a confirmed hoax, or the area he used, etc).

So yes, his “data” feels cherry picked and incomplete at best (which is analogous to scientific “data” that claims Global Warming isn’t real). I’ll stand by my use of quotations.
 
Since this issue was important enough for 100 students to make their concern known at a basketball game and the media to widely report the incident when will the outcome of the investigation into the facts of the situation be made public? Of particular interest is the identity of the perpetrator. If as was posted on this board there is video of the perpetrator in action why the delay? As time passes with no further information revealed the rush to judgement becomes less plausible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Not-A-Homer
Since this issue was important enough for 100 students to make their concern known at a basketball game and the media to widely report the incident when will the outcome of the investigation into the facts of the situation be made public? Of particular interest is the identity of the perpetrator. If as was posted on this board there is video of the perpetrator in action why the delay? As time passes with no further information revealed the rush to judgement becomes less plausible.
It is odd. Are we sure the acts were caught on camera? I haven't seen that reported.
One of the victims told NBC12 that she was called the n-word several times at the Dayton game.
I don't go to many games at the RC any more, but I find this astonishing.
 
It is odd. Are we sure the acts were caught on camera? I haven't seen that reported.
One of the victims told NBC12 that she was called the n-word several times at the Dayton game. I don't go to many games at the RC any more, but I find this astonishing.
Is an act really an act, when it is caught on camera and one's face is hidden? If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, did the event actually occur?
 
in speaking with some folks on the issue, no mention of any camera was indicated which could mean nothing but just interesting that one poster stated that they had the culprit in the act. if so, would assume that student is now an ex-student if it was indeed a student. the gathering on campus to air this out was not exactly "gold" by one in attendance. if there is no camera, would be difficult to find the person unless others he or she bragged to spilled the beans, as they should. what hurts is that like at univ of mizzou, every instance of this kind of thing was done by those offended and hurt and if that might be the case, just sucks. it appears it is not known who did it and until they are IDed and punished, everything is speculation. feel all of us support all of our students not by group but just the fact that they are students at our university.
 
There is no need to rush to judgment, especially when there is no independent verification of any of these accusations.
 
Since this issue was important enough for 100 students to make their concern known at a basketball game and the media to widely report the incident when will the outcome of the investigation into the facts of the situation be made public? Of particular interest is the identity of the perpetrator. If as was posted on this board there is video of the perpetrator in action why the delay? As time passes with no further information revealed the rush to judgement becomes less plausible.
The university doesn’t publish the outcome of honor council/internal/TitleIX cases. That only happens if the complainant chooses to pursue adjudication in court which I expect is unlikely in this case. So prepare to be disappointed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nathanw19
Here is the link to the collegian article around the recent community meeting held on campus about the incidents and topic of racism on campus.
https://www.thecollegianur.com/arti...unity-meeting-to-speak-about-racism-on-campus

As mentioned above and just by reading the article - it seemed pretty unproductive. And to be honest - I don't know what you can do in these situations to make it right.
Lets be honest - UR is a predominately white school. There is no way around that. it has been for a long time and probably will continue to be for a long time. So when one student says in the article "I’m sick and tired of being marketed on the website of Richmond so that we can get more people of color" - I don't know what that student wishes the school to do. Not market any diversity to the school? Also - unless the school blatantly fabricated and published false diversity numbers or statistics (which is possible), I think some of this falls on the student - to visit the campus, walk around and take a look at the students - especially if diversity is that important to you. I am sure UR is not trying to exclude diverse students into its student body - but you also have to remember, they are "supposed" to admit students based on merit - not their color, race, religion, or financial standing. And they can only pick from the students that apply - I have no idea how many "diverse" students apply - but if it only makes up 10% of the applications, then your probably only going to see a 10% diverse campus.
Someone then went on in the article to make a comment about white greek life. I did not participate in greek life on campus, but had friends that did and can agree - its mostly white kids. But again - unless the fraternities and soririties are specifially turning away and rejecting the "diverse" population - what is the answer here?
And I do agree with the article - how do you reach the kids who don't care. The kids who didn't attend the meeting. The kids are most likely part of the majority "white" group of students and don't see this as an issue. You can hold all the meetings you want, send out all the emails, and hold all the protests, but if the majority of kids on campus don't care and they fall into the majority group - nothing will change.
For the record - i never witnesses any racism during my time on campus in the 1990's and was friends with a couple athletes and people of color. They would sometimes joke about the "whiteness" of campus and school - but that was about it at that time.
 
I think UR is very diverse.

US population. UR Enrollment

White. 62.8 % 58%
Black. 12.6%. 8%
Asian. 4.8%. 8%
Hispanic. 16.3%. 9%
International. 9%
Mixed Race & Other 8%
 
It is a non sequitur - give as much publicity as possible to the incident and clothe the investigation results in secrecy. The total lack of any transparency resolves nothing. Leaves everyone "free" to draw their own conclusion no matter how erroneous.
 
I agree. The fact that the investigation has been silent either means this is potentially a hoax or they have no idea who did these acts. A third option would be they are trying to cover it up somehow - but I find that unlikely based on their responses so far from the President and administration.

If those figures are correct in terms of population. Then I would agree - UR is about as diverse as it’s going to get. Not sure what else the school administration needs to do on that front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderK
I agree. The fact that the investigation has been silent either means this is potentially a hoax or they have no idea who did these acts. A third option would be they are trying to cover it up somehow - but I find that unlikely based on their responses so far from the President and administration.

If those figures are correct in terms of population. Then I would agree - UR is about as diverse as it’s going to get. Not sure what else the school administration needs to do on that front.
Privacy laws for universities with federal funding (see Richmond) as well as privacy policies of almost every university bar the publication of student names for these sort of instances.

I would say it’s also a bad PR move for a university to give a name. Then it looks like the University is blaming an individual instead of acknowledging a larger systemic/culture problem (as evidenced by the desire/need to have a public forum on the issue).

As a point for Richmond, I’m not sure they do themselves any favors by having a separate orientation for minority students before freshman orientation (or at least they did when I went through orientation in 2004).
 
For the VCU game or any home game of that matter - I ask please do not protest in the game in the stands. This takes away from the game. I appreciate and applaud your right and courage to protest, but think at the Dayton game - it didn't do much, especially since you emptied the seats after halftime.

I would suggest protesting outside as people walk in the game. Also be able to hand out something that explains what your protesting and why your are there. A pamphlet or summary, etc. Otherwise - everyone just sees a bunch of signs, yelling, and t-shirts and wonders - what is going on there?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT