What’s different about Trayvon Martin?

Published March 26, 2012 4:00am ET



If you watch the news in any large city, you are probably desensitized to stories about crime involving young black men. Most nights there are reports about several of them getting shot; often, more than one dies. Tragedy has become routine. Too many young black men die on our streets; too many rot in our prisons.

Two weeks ago, the Chicago Tribune reported that at least 10 people, including a 6-year-old girl, were killed in weekend shootings in Chicago.

The media love these stories because they up the ratings and spike newsstand sales. “If it bleeds, it leads” is the familiar saying in the news business. Politicians use these horrific stories as an opportunity to pontificate for the cameras. They all deplore the violence, denounce it and demand its end, their outrage well timed for the 10 o’clock news.

Rev. Al Sharpton frequently inserts himself into these situations, crying for “justice.” In the case of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, justice is likely to come without Sharpton’s help, given the multiple levels of government involvement in the investigation.

The facts in this case are not yet fully known, but that has not stopped people from thinking they have them. It has given some an excuse to resurrect racial templates from the past. The Washington Post featured this headline last week, “Florida Shooting Stirs Memories of Civil Rights Era.”

Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by George Zimmerman, a member of a neighborhood watch group. Whether Zimmerman was an official member or a cop-wannabe is one of the questions investigators are asking. Zimmerman has yet to be charged. This is presumably because officials are trying to sort out whether a Florida law known as “stand your ground” — which gives Florida residents the right to protect themselves with deadly force — applies in the Martin case. That hasn’t stopped nearly 1 million signers of an online “petition” from reaching conclusions before investigators and a grand jury have completed their work.

I will leave the questions about this tragedy to those looking into it, but the politics of it is worthy of comment.

In light of the number of young black men who are gunned down on America’s streets, what’s different about the Trayvon Martin case? Is it the fact that he was killed in a gated community and not in an alley in Detroit? If Zimmerman, a white Hispanic, were black, would we have the current controversy? If Martin were white, or any other race, would the president of the United States have called for “soul searching”? He made no comment about the Chicago shootings.

Would Al Sharpton have made the trip to Florida if Martin had been white? Not likely. Sharpton apparently hopes people have forgotten the 1987 Tawana Brawley incident during which he waved the “racism” flag in support of the African-American teenager’s false contention she had been raped by six white men. The New York prosecutor whom Brawley had accused as one of her alleged assailants successfully sued Brawley and her three advisers, including Sharpton, for defamation.

The media bear some responsibility for exacerbating racial tensions. By too often featuring stories of violent young black men they appear to promote the very racial stereotyping they deplore. Why don’t we see more stories about young black men making right choices, staying in school, rejecting drugs and getting married before having children? They do exist. Can’t the media find them?

The steady drumbeat of crime and violence in the media and their association of race and crime with certain parts of town feed into the often irrational fears of white people. I’m not suggesting these stories shouldn’t be covered. I am suggesting that local news ought to tell more stories of young black men who make good decisions. Or have we forgotten what “good” looks like?

Trayvon Martin should not have been killed, but Zimmerman shouldn’t be the only one facing indictment.

Examiner Columnist Cal Thomas is nationally syndicated by Tribune Media.