Archive link.
CNN cites mother jones' article to come up with the following figures:
77% of mass shooting commited by white males.
(Note that mass shootings are usually done by men regardless of race, and whites make up 73% of the population. This fact is not mentioned.)
By itself this would already be noteworthy as derogatory and inflammatory considering that it's broadly aligned with the population, however, the figures are also highly misleading.
To arrive at the 73% figure, global warming denial selectivity is used, with a specific time frame analyzed. Widening the time frame slightly either side shows different figures. The figures are from 1982 to 2012. If the dates are expanded to 2017 (and thus, made actually relevant to the present day), they tell a different story.)
The author of the mother jones article (Which has been updated regularly, and is not from 2012.), and CNN by publishing it as a source, have deliberately ignored the last 5 years of data. My guess as to why would be that this would bring the figure to 59% of mass shootings commited by whites, showing they are actually underrepresented in mass shootings.
That this kind of article is published should tell you something about the current acceptability of racism towards whites in the west, and the ultimately spurious grounding for defending that racism as merely criticism of white supremacy. (If it were that, it wouldn't so frequently be misleading lies clearly designed to disparage a racial group.)
Naaz Modan is a content editor for Muslim Girl, a publication focused on Muslim women's issues and empowerment. The views expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
Considering that CNN has frequently backed progressivism and no-platforming shenanigans, I don't think a defence of it being an opinion piece applies, unless a concession that they are ultimately duplicitous and hypocritical is given. By their own standards, this would make CNN a racist news site for hosting the article.
What does it say about the current state of the west where this article and others like it can trump up slander against white people, but correctly noting actual statistics about the disproportionate level of muslim perpetrated violence, actually backed by statistics, would be regarded as racist?
In my opinion It says that our institutions have been overrun with Xenoconservatives under the delusion they are left wing, arguing for racism of a different color, traditionalism of a different continent, etc.
(A second example, a second instance of data fudging to slander.)
https://www.vox.com/world/2017/10/2/163 ... rism-islam
This narrative is being pushed in the wake of the recent shooting, with no care for accuracy, by left wing news sites and blogs, and on television.
Consider the article that claimed "you're more likely to be killed by a republican than a muslim", while:
ignoring 9/11 and the Orlando shooting, counting every attack by a white male as a republican, even when they explicitly weren't (Which adds a second layer of fuckery to this), not actually counting deaths, but the number of attacks (so 9/11 would only have added 1 to their figures, not the 3000+ who died), and ignoring how there is a lot less muslims in the USA than republicans/whites in order to present this as a "cultural" problem with the group.
The actual stats when all these deliberate fuckups are corrected for, put you at a 1,202.4 times more likely to die from a muslim than a republican in the USA, and 42,678.3 times more likely to be killed by a muslim than a white person, assuming one of each was in front of you, and they were representative samples of their group. (Not withstanding that this is "Killed in a mass-attack" rather than "Killed." for which the stats would be different again, but the article made this mistake also.)
And yet, the progressive narrative continues, in spite of facts, in spite of the clear hypocrisy, and in spite of the interests of the public, both to avoid untrue and inflammatory defamation of racial groups, AND to actually focus on cultural improvements where they are needed, instead of where problems are invented to justify racist caricatures. The urge these people have to defame white people, western culture, and western institutions is not based in any legitimate concerns about public welfare, it seems to be born purely out of hatred for whites. This is the only explanation that can account for all the duplicity, frequent slip ups, and the inconsistency of standards. (This analysis performed on muslims would never be done and accepted, as an example.)
