• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Reuters data scientist fired after he disproved BLM talking point (1 Viewer)

GummyVitamins

GummyVitamins

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2020
Messages
7,541
Reaction score
5,435
Location
ve, ver, vis, vis, verself
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
bariweiss.substack.com

I Criticized BLM. Then I Was Fired.

The data about police shootings just didn't add up, but no one at Thomson Reuters wanted to hear it.
bariweiss.substack.com bariweiss.substack.com

I'll make a short story shorter. A data scientist at Reuters investigated the BLM claim that police officers are more likely to unjustly kill black suspects due to racism.

He investigated this by looking at the percentage of people killed by police officers and took note of the percentages based on race. Black men were killed at a higher rate than their percentage of our population. He then looked at the race of people who murder police officers. This was used as the equalizer to determine the risk associated by each race.

What he found was that the race of individuals killed by police officers matched the likelihood of their race killing a police officer. Thus, black individuals were killed by police at an equal rate of their killing police officers. He also did this same exercise based on sex and found the numbers lined up as well.

He posted his findings to an internal "Hub." HR pulled in by their Chief Diversity Officer who told him he had to remove any reference to systemic racism. He received a lot of abuse from his peers who were not reprimanded to his knowledge since their abusive statements were allowed to stay up. A few days later they fired him.
 
Pretty much all of BLM talking points have been proven wrong. Nevertheless, the Black Lesbian Marxists who started it sure made off with a haul.
 
GummyVitamins said:
bariweiss.substack.com

I Criticized BLM. Then I Was Fired.

The data about police shootings just didn't add up, but no one at Thomson Reuters wanted to hear it.
bariweiss.substack.com bariweiss.substack.com

I'll make a short story shorter. A data scientist at Reuters investigated the BLM claim that police officers are more likely to unjustly kill black suspects due to racism.

He investigated this by looking at the percentage of people killed by police officers and took note of the percentages based on race. Black men were killed at a higher rate than their percentage of our population. He then looked at the race of people who murder police officers. This was used as the equalizer to determine the risk associated by each race.

What he found was that the race of individuals killed by police officers matched the likelihood of their race killing a police officer. Thus, black individuals were killed by police at an equal rate of their killing police officers. He also did this same exercise based on sex and found the numbers lined up as well.

He posted his findings to an internal "Hub." HR pulled in by their Chief Diversity Officer who told him he had to remove any reference to systemic racism. He received a lot of abuse from his peers who were not reprimanded to his knowledge since their abusive statements were allowed to stay up. A few days later they fired him.
Click to expand...

So he said white people are less likely to murder cops because they're white and people thought it was racist?

Sounds accurate.
 
GummyVitamins said:
Reading comprehension failure.
Click to expand...
No, i think i understand the statistic and you don't. Here's his formula.

White people killed by police officers / police officers killed by white people = risk of getting killed by a cop (white person)

That's the statistic. You posted it. That's extremely racist.
 
Dang!

That "scientist" ain't very smart.

Didn't he get the message?

There are certain things that you simply do not say in 2022 America, lest you lose your job or get banned on many Internet websites.

Like it or not, that is just how the cookie crumbles.

So that "scientist" should have kept his mouth shut and just agreed with the politically correct stance that we are all expected to regurgitate.
 
Read his work and memorize the statistics. Use them to disprove the false narratives about cop and black crime.
 
Acadia said:
Read his work and memorize the statistics. Use them to disprove the false narratives about cop and black crime.
Click to expand...

The statistic is irrelevant for obvious reasons. You can't suggest that the color of a person's skin is correlated to their perceived risk to a police officer. But this statistic goes beyone not making sense. It's pure gibberish. The elementary, extremely stupid equation he used ( x/cops killed = risk of death during cop encounter ) is comically bad, but it's even worse. You can easily take the number of encounters black people have with the police instead. Even that's a horrible statistic and I was going to say why but I googled it, I am saying nothing original.

Consider two extremes of police encounters: traffic stops and active shooter scenarios. Suppose, hypothetically, that a white suspect is killed by police in one out of 100,000 traffic stops and nine out of 10 shootings. And imagine that Black suspects are killed by police after 20 out of 1,000,000 traffic stops and in 10 out of 10 active shooter incidents. In each kind of incident, Black suspects are killed more often than white suspects. In aggregate, though, the percentage is higher for white people: 10 out of 100,010 white people are killed vs. 30 out of 1,000,010 Black people, because the white people tend to encounter the police in more grave situations.

Then this dude posted his made up statistic on a work website? A WORK WEBSITE? For just his coworkers?! Wow. What a whining victim child, crying because he's an idiot?
 
GummyVitamins said:
bariweiss.substack.com

I Criticized BLM. Then I Was Fired.

The data about police shootings just didn't add up, but no one at Thomson Reuters wanted to hear it.
bariweiss.substack.com bariweiss.substack.com

I'll make a short story shorter. A data scientist at Reuters investigated the BLM claim that police officers are more likely to unjustly kill black suspects due to racism.

He investigated this by looking at the percentage of people killed by police officers and took note of the percentages based on race. Black men were killed at a higher rate than their percentage of our population. He then looked at the race of people who murder police officers. This was used as the equalizer to determine the risk associated by each race.

What he found was that the race of individuals killed by police officers matched the likelihood of their race killing a police officer. Thus, black individuals were killed by police at an equal rate of their killing police officers. He also did this same exercise based on sex and found the numbers lined up as well.

He posted his findings to an internal "Hub." HR pulled in by their Chief Diversity Officer who told him he had to remove any reference to systemic racism. He received a lot of abuse from his peers who were not reprimanded to his knowledge since their abusive statements were allowed to stay up. A few days later they fired him.
Click to expand...

The bugs in his AI algorithm are obvious.

But it’s more complicated than that. Police are authorized to use lethal force only when they believe a suspect poses a grave danger of harming others. So, when it comes to measuring cops’ racial attitudes, it’s important that we compare apples and apples: Black suspects who pose a grave danger and white suspects who do the same.

Unfortunately, we don’t have reliable data on the racial makeup of dangerous suspects, but we do have a good proxy: The number of people in each group who murder police officers.
Click to expand...

The bugs in the above omit the ‘suspect’ being unarmed (but included BLM’s claim) and his measure of posing “a grave danger of harming others” excludes all perils except the successful killing of a police officer (by an ‘unarmed’ suspect).

His left out the most important thing: total encounters between police officers and unarmed suspects. The only such encounters that he considered statistically significant resulted in the death of either a ‘suspect’ or a police officer.

If the chances of having a police/suspect encounter were equal for unarmed black and white suspects (a huge statistical improbability - without racial profiling) then the opportunities for being shot by police should be equal (by race).

What BLM and any sane observer realizes is that if 13% of the general population accounts for 34% of unarmed suspects shot by police then that portion of the population has almost 3X the chance of being assumed (declared?) to have posed a grave danger to ”others”.
 
The singular fact of being "unarmed" does not mean the use of force was not necessarily justified.
 
SuperDS77 said:
The singular fact of being "unarmed" does not mean the use of force was not necessarily justified.
Click to expand...

True and the assumption that a given suspect (armed or not) posed a grave danger to you or others is also not necessarily justified.
 
GummyVitamins said:
bariweiss.substack.com

I Criticized BLM. Then I Was Fired.

The data about police shootings just didn't add up, but no one at Thomson Reuters wanted to hear it.
bariweiss.substack.com bariweiss.substack.com

I'll make a short story shorter. A data scientist at Reuters investigated the BLM claim that police officers are more likely to unjustly kill black suspects due to racism.

He investigated this by looking at the percentage of people killed by police officers and took note of the percentages based on race. Black men were killed at a higher rate than their percentage of our population. He then looked at the race of people who murder police officers. This was used as the equalizer to determine the risk associated by each race.

What he found was that the race of individuals killed by police officers matched the likelihood of their race killing a police officer. Thus, black individuals were killed by police at an equal rate of their killing police officers. He also did this same exercise based on sex and found the numbers lined up as well.

He posted his findings to an internal "Hub." HR pulled in by their Chief Diversity Officer who told him he had to remove any reference to systemic racism. He received a lot of abuse from his peers who were not reprimanded to his knowledge since their abusive statements were allowed to stay up. A few days later they fired him.
Click to expand...

The right: "Private companies should be able to do whatever they want and employ whomever they want. People should be allowed to not associate with people who they don't want to associate with!:

Also the right: "How DARE a private company fire someone they don't want on their payroll!"
 
GummyVitamins said:
:ROFLMAO:

Oh, you were serious?
Click to expand...
Yes. Alway support your insanity with real links if you wish to be taken seriously. Otherwise you run the risk of being dismissed outta hand, like this.

Bye.
 
Typical racist victim narrative. "The white people are the real victims!"
 
Gateman_Wen said:
Yes. Alway support your insanity with real links if you wish to be taken seriously. Otherwise you run the risk of being dismissed outta hand, like this.

Bye.
Click to expand...
It's a first hand account from an employee. The author wrote the article in the first person. What are you complaining about? You need MoveOn.org to summarize what he said for you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom