Dan Abrams, founder of Mediaite, recently expressed strong criticism of a New York Times report regarding police killings in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder.
The article, published on May 24, claimed that despite significant protests and reforms aimed at police accountability, fatalities resulting from police actions have continued to rise over the past five years.
The Times’ headline, “Since George Floyd’s Murder, Police Killings Keep Rising, Not Falling,” caught Abrams off guard.
He initially expected to see a decline in police killings, given the increased scrutiny and calls for reform following Floyd’s death. However, upon reading the article, he found the headline to be misleading.
The article referenced data compiled by The Washington Post and the nonprofit Mapping Police Violence, revealing that police killed at least 1,226 individuals last year, marking an 18 percent increase since 2019.
Abrams highlighted that the majority of those killed were reported to be armed, questioning how such context could alter the narrative presented by the Times.
As he dissected the article, Abrams pointed out that while the overall number of police killings has risen, the deaths of unarmed individuals have actually decreased.
He noted that the number of unarmed people killed by police dropped significantly from 152 in 2015 to just 53 last year. “Why isn’t that the headline?” he asked, incredulously challenging the framing of the piece.
Moreover, Abrams emphasized that the report also indicated a reduction in fatalities involving replica weapons, further complicating the narrative of rising violence against police.
He argued that instances where individuals were armed and engaged in confrontations with law enforcement should be viewed differently, suggesting that in such cases, the responsibility often lies with the individual rather than the police officers.
Abrams found the Times’ decision to bury critical data—specifically the decline in unarmed killings—indicative of a broader issue in media reporting.
He questioned the rationale behind presenting a narrative that emphasized rising overall killings while downplaying a significant reduction in unarmed fatalities.
In his critique, Abrams maintained that the public deserves accurate reporting, free from sensationalism. He called the Times’ approach “stunningly misleading,” asserting that the focus on rising total fatalities obscures the more nuanced reality of police interactions and accountability.
As the debate over police violence continues, Abrams’ comments reflect a growing concern among commentators regarding how data is presented in media narratives.
The implications of such reporting extend beyond headlines, influencing public perception and policy discussions surrounding law enforcement practices.
In conclusion, the discourse surrounding police killings remains complex and multifaceted, warranting careful consideration of the facts behind the narratives presented to the public.
[READ MORE: Enraged Trump Accuses China of Violating Tariff Truce]
