
If Americans resist the idea of defunding police, they’re following the lead of outlets like the Washington Post (7/21/20).
Since the May 25 murder of George Floyd by the Minneapolis police, calls across the US to defund police departments—shifting resources from law enforcement to social services—have grown louder. In June, New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio shifted $1 billion from the NYPD—at least on paper (Gothamist, 6/29/20)—and Minneapolis city council members vowed to dismantle the police department and build a new model of public safety (though the city’s charter commission kept an initiative to eliminate a requirement to maintain a minimum number of police officers off the November ballot—Washington Post, 8/5/20).
Conversations around the issue of defunding or even abolishing police have grown more complex in activist circles. However, the Washington Post’s coverage of the issue has paternalistically painted police defunding only as a radical utopian fantasy that would hurt Black communities.
In the past few months, the Post’s coverage of the “defund the police” debate has mindlessly echoed the same conservative scare tactics right-wing media have been amplifying: Black neighborhoods need more policing, not less, because Black-on-Black crime is rampant.
A July Washington Post/ABC news poll (7/21/20) found that while 69% of respondents believe Black people and people of color face discrimination in the criminal justice system, 55% of Americans oppose moving funds from police departments to social services—and 43% say they oppose it strongly.
However, with the Post’s prominence as a leading publication for political coverage, it’s no wonder Americans are resistant to the idea of defunding: The news they’re reading is telling them to resist it.

The Washington Post (7/10/20) reports that Southeast DC’s “relationship with law enforcement is more complicated and nuanced than the slogans shouted in front of the White House.”
An article headlined “On a DC Street Beset by Gun Violence, Calls to Fix Policing, Not Defund It” (7/10/20) begins with the visceral description of children marching against the death of Davon McNeal, an 11-year-old boy who was shot and killed at a 4th of July cookout in DC. The piece goes on to describe a majority Black neighborhood infested by crime:
A grandmother afraid to leave her apartment after a gunman ran by her seconds after Davon fell mortally wounded; a young boy forbidden from taking out the trash because it’s too dangerous; a mother who piled her family’s belongings in boxes, rushing to escape.
The piece shares quotes from locals justifiably upset by the violence that gripped the area, and makes clear that Blackness is not a monolith. But instead of highlighting a discussion and offering credible arguments on both sides, the Post exploits a community’s pain to deflect from the conversation about police violence.
While community members throughout the article express their anger that activists are not paying more attention to crime within Black neighborhoods, the Post fails to flank their statements with facts that debunk the “Black-on-Black crime” myth.
In reality, any person is more likely to be killed by someone in their own community than they are an outsider. Because the US is still very much segregated, a Black murder victim is about as likely to have been killed by another Black person as a white murder victim is to have a white killer—though, oddly enough, this statistic prompts no media hand-wringing about why whites don’t speak out more about “white-on-white crime.”
Yet one population does kill Black people more than it does any other: Black individuals are more than 2.5 times more likely than white people to be killed at the hands of police.
Instead of facilitating a constructive debate and introducing arguments from both the pro- and anti-defunding sides, the Post takes one community’s tragedy and weaponizes it to discredit Black people who are calling to defund the police. Those mourning the death of an innocent child killed by a fellow community member are painted as the “good Black people,” and those calling to defund the police are the angry, illogical radicals.
Another article, “DC Activists and Lawmakers Confront Challenges of ‘Defund Police’ Movement” (7/25/20) discusses the DC City Council’s Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety unanimously approving a plan to reduce the city’s $533 million police budget. Again, the Post mentions the reality of violent crime in the area without delving into the nuance of how systemic racism fuels crime in under-resourced areas, or the fact that more police does not equal less crime, research the Post itself (6/7/20) reported on the month before. The piece simply volleys the quotes and differing opinions of politicians and activists without contextualizing the arguments with facts beyond spitting back crime rate statistics.

The Washington Post (7/27/20) quotes a mayor encouraging cities to think about “how they can do things differently, but definitely not ‘defunding.’ ”
The July 27 “African-American Mayors Lay Out Plan for Police Reform Without ‘Defunding’” coverage (7/27/20) harks back to the same rhetoric used in the article about 11-year-old Davon McNeal: The fact that some Black people oppose defunding is offered as proof that defunding is unrealistic. The article makes clear that the nation’s Black mayors are outraged by the murder of George Floyd and countless others—but defunding the police is a step too far:
In interviews, the leaders of the African-American mayors’ group said they want to build on the momentum of the police reform movement ignited by the death of George Floyd—and they do not favor “defunding the police.”
The African-American Mayors Association’s proposed Peace Pact, mentioned in the article, recommends steps like revising police training, banning chokeholds and no-knock warrants, and providing transparency to communities. Although some of these proposals are constructive policy changes, the Post fails to present any challenge to the idea that in themselves they constitute an effective solution to police violence.
In fact, the Peace Pact’s ideas are not new. There have been efforts toward increased transparency and improved police policies in the past, yet police violence in the US continues to disproportionately affect Black communities. There is no mention of the fact that despite chokeholds being illegal in the NYPD, for instance, Daniel Pantaleo still killed Eric Garner in 2014 and got away with no charges.
Nor is there acknowledgement that releasing dashcam and bodycam footage does not always lead to justice. Last year, Hamilton County, Tennessee, set up a hotline for residents to report police misconduct after dashcam footage showed deputies Daniel Wilkey and Bobby Brewer beating and conducting invasive searches on a Black resident as he was handcuffed face down on the road. Sheriff Jim Hammond, who had repeatedly defended these deputies and denied that they conducted the body cavity search, is still in his position, despite calls for him to resign.
The “defund the police” debate is nuanced. There are not yet any definitive examples of police defunding success (despite misinformation about Camden, New Jersey, being a model). But radical imagination is a powerful tool in justice work; “We cannot demand that anyone try to attain justice and freedom who has not had a chance to imagine them as attainable,” author Ursula K. Le Guin once wrote. Instead of offering a critical analysis of this product of radical imagination, the Washington Post’s reporting instead upholds the status quo.
ACTION ALERT: Messages can be sent to the Washington Post at letters@washpost.com, or via Twitter @washingtonpost. Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective.





Did Olivia the “reporter” report on how many blacks die at the hands of blacks? We’re talking actual murders? She should have used actual numbers because black on black murder is FAR greater than police shootings of unarmed black men. We are talking ORDERS of MAGNITUDE MORE! It is dishonest for her not to report that fact. Blacks make up 13% of the US population. Blacks make up 50% of all murders in the US. If black men make up half of the 13% that means that 6.5% of our population commit half of all murders! Is it any wonder why cops view black men with suspicion? Cops know these statistics. Olivia the “reporter” should get some advice from the men she’s trying to get fired.
The current president, AKA individual1, is well known to have committed felonies in his attempt to secure his office. The “reporter” explained how like kills like in regards to murder statistics. As a percentage of population there’s only a few tenths of a percent difference in murder rates and pacific islanders are far more prone to murder. Perhaps the idea that people are more prone to do violence to their immediate peers is how it came to be an incompetent criminal has used political office to remain free from punishment for his crimes. How does black criminal behavior towards other blacks excuse your moral responsibility for eliminating institutional racism? Perhaps you believe only women are to blame for abortion because only women have abortions. Thinking isn’t as hard as it seems.
We can disagree on opinion, we cannot disagree on facts. The FBI publishes data on murders by race. Blacks dominate murders. Pacific Islanders may murder more disproportionately, but in sheer numbers, blacks top the list. Talking about the president here was a non sequitur. I know you’re mad that he’s the president, but that fact has nothing to do with black murders. How do I have a moral responsibility to eliminate institutional racism? I don’t even believe in the premise that there is institutional racism. Who would you blame for an abortion? I don’t see too many women being marched into Planned Parenthood at the point of a gun. If you’d like to talk about who’s at fault for the woman getting pregnant, that’s easy – both. Only a leftist can believe that the same “clump of tissue” is a baby that you can be charged with murder for killing or just a clump of tissue that has no value. That is some messed up logic. Either it has value or it doesn’t (hint: it’s a human inside another human). The woman has no right to murder that other human.
Exploiting Black voices for a whitewash
As usual the rich people in this country always have to focus on race. Black people are killed disproportionately by police because black people are disproportionately poor. And since there is broad bipartisan agreement that we should keep as many people poor as possible that isn’t about to change.
https://nonsite.org/symposium/the-surprising-geography-of-police-killings-back-of-the-napkin-calculations-on-race-region-and-violence
Four unarmed black men have been killed by police this year – throughout the entire country. In Chicago alone, 321 blacks were murdered – mostly by blacks. That is nearly two orders of magnitude more. I missed your point on the police – I got caught up with the real problem.
Hey therе would yօu mind letting me know which hosting
company yօu’re worқing ᴡith? I’ve loaded у᧐ur blog in 3 different web browsers ɑnd I must saу thiѕ blog loads а lοt faster
tһеn most. Ϲan you suggest ɑ good web hosting provider at
a honest ⲣrice? Tһanks ɑ lot, I apⲣreciate іt!
I am very left of center but “Defund police” is an extremely counterproductive slogan that is far too easy to distort and ridicule and attack.
== It sounds hostile, which is stupid beyond belief, because there are literally hundreds of thousands of voters with direct connections to law enforcement, either as employees, family members, or friends. We need their votes… and here we go with an incendiary slogan. Vladimir Putin must be grinning from ear to ear to see such a boost to Donald Trump’s chances of holding on to power.
== We need to reform police, not to threaten them with the idea of reducing police budgets. Duhhhh. There are doubtless numerous police stations that actually need more funding.
== It can so easily be caricatured into “let’s abolish police”.
== It is a slogan that does not reflect the underlying proposal of shifting some portion of police funding to social services, which is a perfectly reasonable idea. A slogan like “Restructure police” or “Reform police” is less eye-catching but conveys the meaning far better and is not so alienating to the law enforcement community. Or just that good old slogan, “End police brutality”.