Why report the descent of a person when committing a crime?

[donemeover]

I totally understand if the perpetrator is not yet found why their race or descent might be crucial to solve the crime and identify a person.

But why is reporting the descent and race of a criminal even mentioned by the media? It serves no purpose to the crime itself.

I'm referring to the murder of the MP, every other newspaper mentions the murderer is of Somali descent. Why?

It's very tragic the MP has been killed, but I can't help notice this is an example of how racism is so entrained in society that these subtle ways of reporting just normalise it.

Sad on both counts, the racial reporting and the murder itself.

I wouldn't want anyone to feel they're not welcome.

Sadly, there's always a few arseholes who will treat people differently, it's undeniably wrong and they certainly don't represent me or the people I respect.

At others have said the fact that he is of Somali descent and his father was involved in high level politics there, gives context to potential motivations. I work in the justice system and for the record we don't say criminal, we also don't say offender, to use your terms it's othering, personally I'd prefer a reference to labelling theory. Considering the language we use about others is important isn't it.

It pads out the story. The reporter has time/column inches to fill and very few facts available, they use whatever they can get. You are really overthinking this.

Was the person who killed Jo Cox even called a terrorist?
Was the race of the Plymouth shooter revealed in initial reports? (TBF, this was never called a terrorist attack)

Because his ethnicity is relevant to this particular crime. In the same way if a crime was suspected as mafia related the fact that the perpetrator was of Italian descent would be relevent.

Sexual abuse crimes against kids aren't usually related to ethnicity.

@NoDecentHandlesLeft

Was the person who killed Jo Cox even called a terrorist? Was the race of the Plymouth shooter revealed in initial reports? (TBF, this was never called a terrorist attack)

Yes, he was widely referred to as a 'far right terrorist'.

@ShipwreckSunset

Pretty sure when they reported Jo Cox’s murder they reported that the perpetrator was white.

Yes, and that he had been born in Scotland to Scottish parents but had lived in England from a young age.

@thinkfast

Porcupinesintherough the report I read said he is a British man, but mentioned his father was an advisor to the Somali prime minister. That doesn't deny the suspect's nationality, but the additional fact is clearly relevant when there's a suspected terrorist motive. The victim was a politician so the suspect's family having political connections is hugely relevant. That's totally obvious to me. I dont understand how you can't see that.

Can't we mention people's heritages when it's relevant?

I mean pretty much this. His father had political connections in Somalia. He killed a British politician. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that these two facts could be connected. Maybe not, but possibly. That’s why it’s being mentioned.

Obviously if he was Black British, no Somalian descent and no political connections in Somalia then it would be odd if the report traced his heritage back four generations and used that to refer to him as, for example ‘of Nigerian descent.’ Because that wouldn’t be relevant. In this case it is relevant as it’s a possible motive for the specific crime he’s committed.

I know he isn’t Nigerian by the way. I was just giving an example of a case where it would be irrelevant and therefore odd reporting. That isn’t the case here.

Isn't his descent very relevant when talking about Islamic terrorism? I'm assuming that's what it was of course.

The background origin of someone is hugely relevant in terrorism situations. It's an attack on a country, it's people and it's ideals. It shouldn't be in the least bit surprising that people find it relevant whether that attack is from someone with strong ties to another country.

People also have the desire/need to understand what drives someone to commit such an awful act. That involves understanding their past and their beliefs. It's helps us to rationalise something awful.

It's relevant that everyone knew Jo Cox's killer was a white, British, right-wing man with ideation who was largely socially isolated. It's relevant that Sir David Amess's killer has very close family links to Somalian politicians and links to religious ideation that promotes murder.

It would be absolutely no use to know his colour without heritage. That tells you nothing other than what he looks like.

In terms of the British when it suits and 'othered' when it doesn't, I agree this happens but I don't think it's surprising or just related to race. When anyone does something awful people want distance from them, they don't want to be grouped with them by association.

Most people know Sir Mo Farrah is Somali-born but he's proudly considered British because he's taken on the ideals of what that means. We all want to be associated with him (though few could ever hope to live up to what he's achieved).

Hand-wringing about the identification of the heritage of a terrorist is a perfect example of virtue-signalling and misplaced outrage. There are serious issues with racism in this country but I don't think this kind of distraction is at all helpful to solving that.

Many people have explained why to the OP but she still doesn't get it.

Maybe she doesn't want to.

Because his ethnicity is relevant to this particular crime. In the same way if a crime was suspected as mafia related the fact that the perpetrator was of Italian descent would be relevent.

Sexual abuse crimes against kids aren't usually related to ethnicity.

**Unless your of Asian descent

So when am I considered truly British then, as someone whose parents came to the UK before I was born?

It's relevant to the crime as he is a Somali terrorist with UK passport & rights. They cannot spell it out, but can point out his descent, as this is his clear motivation to being a terrorist.

If people in Belgium followed ideology that they would wish imposed in the UK, then Belgium terrorists would be highlighted as descendents from Belgium, even if they had UK passports.

@Redredwiney

So when am I considered truly British then, as someone whose parents came to the UK before I was born?

Depends. What colour is your skin, and what religion are you?

Depends. What colour is your skin, and what religion are you?

Tanned and Muslim. So I guess never?

Well I'm olive skinned and of Christian heritage but it never happened for me. My husband is English and my kids are accepted as British though

Isn't it because the murder was motivated by islamic extremism in the same way that someone who planted a bomb during the troubles would have been called British of Irish descent?

I've always referred to myself as British as opposed to English as my parents are immigrants.

@Leafyhouse

They're saying 'of Somali descent' in order to avoid saying 'Black'. You should try growing up in the 80's. Times have moved on.

No. They are saying “of Somali descent” to avoid saying Muslim.

Was the person who killed Jo Cox even called a terrorist?

yes he's an example of right wing terrorism.

people would only speculate if there is a lack of information, fill in the gaps to match their agenda

This, I think transparency is key otherwise you get people who use is an example of conspiracies.

@GreenTeaPingPong

They usually don't. For example, in my area we often have reports of drug dealers being caught and charged, and the news media only say 'from Smalltown', when it's pretty obvious from the name that they're Albanian.

In the case of the person who has today been charged with the murder of David Amess, the fact that he is of Somali descent is relevant to the case. The murder of a member of parliament is highly likely to be a political act. The alleged terrorist had already been flagged to Prevent for Islamist extremism. His motivation for this act is very likely to be linked to his religion and background. If he was of Italian descent it wouldn't make any sense - we haven't had numerous terrorist attacks in the UK by Italian-Catholics.

Exactly this.

I tend to spend more time worrying about the impact of this evil act.
Unless we address the issue of radical Islam these hideous events will continue to happen.

I do think you have a point, but I think that part of it is just them reporting what they know. Where they may not have loads of detail about someone, anything the reporter knows goes in the article.
I remember reading that Jo Cox’s murderer was born in Scotland to parents who got married after he was conceived. I remember it specifically because it seemed like such an odd detail to mention.
But broadly speaking, yes I think you’re right that they wouldn’t say “British, with Australian parents” or whatever. Although I think in this case I think it’s also being reported that his father was a senior government official in Somali, and I think that would probably be mentioned if it was a white suspect with a parent in the Australian government. Not because it would be particularly relevant, but because it’s something of note to mention about someone, especially if you don’t have a lot of other info.