When I read in The New York Times today that there have been fewer than 300 homicides in New York City this year, compared with 2,245 in 1990, my first thought was that New York officials had discovered some law enforcement technique or strategy that magically brought the number crashing to earth.
After all, as of Christmas Day, Kansas City’s homicide count stood at 148, which is within shouting distance of New York City’s count of 285.
And while NYC is headed for the lowest murder rate in the city’s modern history, KC could still tie or surpass its all-time high of 153 murders in 1993.
The Times’ story was not buried down page. In fact, it was the lead story on the paper’s digital edition. That tells you the level of importance that Times editors assigned it.
The obvious questions the story triggered were: How could this possibly be? What factors were responsible for this incredible drop?
Beyond the raw numbers, however, the story, unfortunately, was woefully and exasperatingly unenlightening. It is a prime example of a reporter missing a golden opportunity to explore the reasons for a dramatic situational shift on a matter of high public interest.
Reporter Ashley Southall so buried her curiosity and her responsibility to help readers see the full picture that she, at one point, stood back in awe and allowed a source to say the reasons for the sharp decline were “utterly mysterious.”
Utterly mysterious! No clue!
Only once, for a fleeting few words, did Southall touch on a point that merited significantly more consideration and reporting. That was when she said:
“More broadly, research suggests that crime trends are closely tied to economic conditions. Interest rates, inflation and unemployment are among the macro-level factors influencing crime, according to James Austin, the president of JFA Institute, a criminal justice policy nonprofit.”
But then, in a flash, she was back on her statistical horse, reporting that the New York reductions were part of a crime-rate decline “across the country’s largest cities.”
It wasn’t until I got to the readers’ comments that I and other readers found out what’s really at the root of the declining statistics — radically altered demographics.
Take a look at excerpts from three reader comments:
CommonSense ’17, from Califronia
“Gentrification is the more likely cause of the drop in crime rate. How many 65-year-old-plus millionaires and billionaires residing in Manhattan do you know running around the streets holding up banks and gas stations (if you can find a gas station, that is)? The middle and lower classes have been pushed out by exorbitant rents and stagnant wages — which leaves the area sterilized and stripped clean of its once storied and diversified cultures.”
Worried but hopeful, from Delaware
“Seriously? Does someone need to tell this criminologist that expensive havens for the wealthy (i.e., New York in 2017) always have lower crime rates than tough inner cities (i.e., New York in 1990) do?”
Paul, from Brooklyn
“(W)hat history has taught us, imo, with all things remaining equal, crime rates, especially murder rates, go up or down for three main reasons: Demographics, Demographics, Demographics…The overall drop since 1992 was due to the aging of the baby boom pop. In recent years it has been the tremendous gentrification of minority areas in NYC and also Asian and Indian migration. The above groups do not suffer from America’s cultural abuse gun sickness that most second generation Americans do on all sides of the spectrum — black and white and Hispanic.”
A quick Google check confirmed that the Big Apple has, indeed, experienced significant demographic changes the last couple of decades.
A 2016 Huffington Post story said this:
“Gentrification has swept through two-thirds of New York City’s formerly low-income neighborhoods in the last decade and a half, according to a report released Monday…New York City has seen alarming increases in rent, stagnating incomes, a rise in the number of people paying more for housing than they can afford and other significant demographic shifts in the 21st century.”
A blog called “6sqft,” which focuses on NYC real estate and architecture said this last February:
“By now, we’re all well aware that New York City is changing, becoming ever more expensive and far less friendly to its middle and low-income inhabitants.” It then linked to a map that showed how upper-income New Yorkers had multiplied through the city’s five boroughs between 2000 and 2010 “to alter the face of the city’s demographics.”
**
A lot of workers — at least a lot of those who don’t take vacations at this time of year — sleep walk through the week between Christmas and New Year’s. And in that respect the newspaper business is no different from any other business. For that reason I really can’t blame Ashley Southall too much for mailing it in. But I do fault her editors.
Even if her main editor was walking around the office chatting it up and eating fudge, one look at that story should have been sufficient for him or her to say, “Hey, Southall, this is an interesting report, but your story doesn’t address, in any depth, the possible reasons behind the statistical drop. Take it back, make some more calls and beef it up…Okay?”
Instead, her editor reached for another piece of fudge…
Truth be told, 15 years ago it could have been me.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
Another question: If the murder rate has declined in New York City because of gentrification, has it gone up correspondingly in the places where the folks run out by gentrification have moved? If not, why not?
Let’s get Ashley on that, right after the Christmas/New Year’s somnolence has passed…
If DC is an example, developers would sweep in and buy up blocks of buildings at a time and gut them removing about 10 – 13 families per unit and then turning them into single-family dwellings. The former Black Panthers headquarters was leveled and a police station built on top of it. The residents moved out to Prince George County which became a sewer.
Also, it’s not simply the fact that rich white and Asian people don’t shoot others, it’s that they can command and receive better police protection than can poor blacks (for whom a police presence can be a double-edged sword).
Well done. Interesting insight. It reminds me of the lost culture of the 40-years-ago-newsroom. Working holidays back then at a newspaper or wire service often felt like an odd vacation…The news cycle slowed down, there were holiday treats brought in daily and maybe left overs from the office party. The newspapers were thin and the teletype machines were often idle. With this down time, conversations would spontaneously occur among normally busy staff about families, bachelorhood (very few women), military service, vacations, retirement dreams (often, quitting and buying a small town paper), college, and “the news culture.”
Often, there was holiday pay, time and half, and extra earned vacation to be had. Family men were able to escape the pressures of home and single men were able to escape the empty apartment. Sometimes a bottle would appear. Bill Vaughn wrote a column once, about the strangeness of this newspaper twilight zone, and in it suggested that it was such pleasent duty that reporters, editors and others should only receive “half-time” pay. …an era gone, like elevator operators…and now the fudge needs to be gluten free.
Great insight into exactly how the holiday slowdown played out in “the old days” at The Star.
…Boy, I wish I could find that Bill Vaughan column! Maybe it’s in his book, “The Best of Bill Vaughan.” Gotta get it.
By the way readers, Mr. 30 is a play on old newspaper lingo. On typewritten (remember Royal and Smith Corona?) stories that reporters turned in to editors — or that copy boys rushed to the editing desk page by page — they placed the number “30” at the end of the last page of their stories. That let the editors know no more pages would be coming…Fini.
Also, hashtags? Two or three, as I recall.
(Hashtags! What goes around, comes around.)
Have found myself thinking of Laura Hockaday this holiday season — imagining her comments to you, etc. …
You guys are bringing back a lot of memories! Holiday duty at the Star was all that, and more. I fondly recall Rosanne Wickman bringing her wok down to 18th and Grand and cooking Chinese dinner for everyone in the newsroom on Christmas Eve. I remember the laid-back atmosphere and people letting their hair down, engaging in great conversations and bonding over the holiday treats.
But it could all blow up in a minute. Like the Christmas Eve I covered the robbery/murder of a 65-year-old utility employee who had been pulling holiday duty on Southwest Trafficway that night. Or the Christmas Day I walked into the newsroom, looking forward to fudge and fellowship, only to be met by a wide-eyed John Dvorak who greeted me by saying “DON’T SIT DOWN!” Minutes later I was back in my car and on my way to cover another tragedy – an apartment fire in east KC that took the lives of some young children who had just spent their last Christmas Eve on earth.
Holiday duty at the Star and other newspapers was a microcosm of life – great times and awful times. We might not have been be able to make sense out of it all, especially when it was happening, but it gave us a chance to reflect and appreciate what we had – both in and out of the newsroom.
Good citation of how things can go, anytime any day, in the newsroom, Julius.
I worked several Christmas days but never recall any events like the ones you experienced.
My most vivid Christmas memory at The Star dates to my first or second year at the paper, 1969 or 1970. I was working the day shift. It was absolutely dead, and I was lonely and greatly missing being with my parents back in Louisville. At one point, a photographer and I went out either on a humdrum assignment or just “cruising,” as the editors were wont to have us do, and we decided stop for Christmas dinner. We had a hard time finding a restaurant that was open, but we landed at a place called The Snooty Fox, which was on or near the northwest corner of Linwood and Gillham, where the 7-Eleven is.
It was a very forgettable occasion and meal — I don’t even remember who I was with — but it burns in the memory.
Thanks Jim! HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ONE AND ALL!!!
Vahe Gregorian’s 12/28 paper article starts with the headline:
“WITH EVERYTHING TO PLAY FOR, MIZZOU WAS A NO-SHOW AT TEXAS” and then asks how this could happen. After all, “Starting with winning the coin toss and deferring to receive the second half kickoff and extending through a blunder-filled first half, MU (7-6) played tentatively, uptight even, instead of with the abandon that had helped it score a minimum of 45 points a game in the winning streak …
But no where in the lengthy article is mention of the obvious:
“The loss doesn’t invalidate MU’s turnaround this season, of course, and maybe some of the disconnect on offense was to be expected with the departure of offensive coordinator Josh Heupel for Central Florida.”
(from MARCELL FRAZIER SEES PLENTY TO BLAME AFTER TEXAS LOSS – Alex Schiffer’s article)
Ironically, both articles appear at the same site:
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/vahe-gregorian/article191906459.html
Worse yet, after answering the question, “What happened to Mizzou?”, Schiffer closes his article by asking “Why wasn’t it ready to play in a game it had every reason to be into?”
And yet, Schiffer has a different article online where he goes into greater depth:
(Marcell) Frazier pointed the finger at departed offensive coordinator Josh Heupel and offensive line coach Glen Elarbee who both went to Central Florida after Heupel was named head coach there. Frazier, a 6-foot-5 defensive end, said the duo left the offense “in a bad position.” (Alex Schiffers 12/28 online article).
Is this “Curiosity on Vacation” or simply the inability to think and write?