The Washington Post’s “Unconventional Wisdom” column today features a study that purports to show-according to the column’s dramatic opening sentence-that “Americans are more willing to provide extended government assistance to white victims of Hurricane Katrina than to African Americans and other minorities-particularly blacks with darker skin.” Accepting for the sake of argument the study’s methodology and results, this does not seem to me to be a fair interpretation. Those participating in the study “could give [victims] from $200 to $1,200 per month, and from a minimum of three months to a maximum of 18 months.” The survey found that the average of the former figure “was nearly the same,” regardless of the victim’s race; the average of the latter figure was 12 months if the victim shown was white and 11 months if the victim shown was black. (If the comparison was between light-skinned white victims and dark-skinned blacks, there was also a $100 a month difference for the average in the former’s favor.) So, there could have been as much as a 15-month difference, and there was only a 1-month difference; there could have been as much as a $1000-a-month difference, and there was only, at most, a $100-a-month difference. Doesn’t sound like proof of a racist society to me.
Share this story

About the Author
Roger Clegg serves on the board of the Center for Equal Opportunity, where he was formerly president and general counsel.
Advertisement
Advertisement





Comments