In NRC we ‘non-standard’ mention the origin or ethnicity of a person, like this reads the editorial code. Unless mention is relevant, for a number of topics mentioned, including crime. That importance must be made clear ‘as much as possible’.
I usually omit details about person or appearance for the court section ‘the Hearing’ for safety reasons. Stigmatization is lurking, readers pick this up flawlessly. Although you would sometimes like to give a broader impression of the suspect, you cannot ignore appearance and ethnicity. It plays a role in communication. This is crucial in a criminal hearing. Do the judge and suspect understand each other, can the judge move? Are the questions socially normative, open or suspicious?
I recently attended a hearing with a 59-year-old man whom I deliberately described in full. Place of birth: Asmara, Eritrea. It seemed possible to me that the editors would delete that. Which, by the way, didn’t happen.
Was ethnicity relevant in the image of this person and his actions? It turned out that there was a lot to tell about the man – he was the mystery with all his characteristics and disorders – he was the case. Like the judges, I have to look at suspects regardless of their ethnic or cultural background – just as if everyone is white and looks like me. Which is actually the case to a decreasing extent. Nearly 28 percent of the population now has a connection with a foreign country and often a different culture through descent.
Just like the judges, I cannot let my impression be colored by my background. And was his Eritrean origin relevant? It concerned a repeat offender who had often been punished and over whom the probation service said it no longer had any control. Someone with psychiatric problems, dependent on care, rejected for work. He appeared absent in the courtroom. It was difficult for the judges to get in touch – did he understand everything? Would criminal law still have an effect? That question hung over the case, as it so often does.
Was mention of ethnic origin relevant or stigmatizing here? Or both? A connection between his social existence and his background as a migrant seemed plausible to me. So I typed ‘Eritrea’ anyway. Keeping quiet didn’t feel good either.
The idea of the purely rational person and therefore of the rational judge is outdated
Why am I bringing this up? At the beginning of November, it became clear that there has been a widespread realization that the justice system has a discrimination problem. And that judges also (un)consciously use stereotypes, have a culturally determined view, are more likely to accept confirming information, and cannot (or cannot) distribute the benefit of the doubt evenly. As a result, suspects with a migration background are more likely to be detained. My feeling has been for some time that ethnicity and origin should therefore be mentioned more often.
LinkedIn was then created a dialogue between two experts about whether bias among judges is underestimated or overestimated. For example, because judges decide on the basis of files in which other professionals have already made many choices, possibly based on their own prejudices. And that not too much can be expected from solutions such as ‘more awareness’ and ‘more diversity’. Although “important and necessary,” it is not obvious that judges with a different background would be “less susceptible to prejudice than their colleagues with seven check marks.” Unconsciously favoring one’s own group is not reserved for one group. “It is also conceivable that they judge more severely those with a similar background.” This is what the understanding shows queen bee syndrome to be targeted: women at the top can be unreasonably critical of women who are still climbing.
You are more likely to get better justice (and journalism) if there is ingrained bias. “intellectual humility” stems from this. “Recognizing the limitations of our knowledge, judgment and rationality. This realization helps us to be less stubborn, open to new insights and to engage in more constructive conversations with others.” The idea of the purely rational person and therefore of the rational judge (and journalist) is outdated.
In my opinion, this also means that court reporting does not always have to be forced color blind. In order to identify discrimination, gender, ethnicity or origin may be mentioned. It helps you reflect on what you observe and write down. It’s better than turning on the white filter – pretending it doesn’t exist. Culture and origin are relevant in communication and in human behavior and are therefore often worth mentioning.
The journalistic principles of NRC