racist newsroom pioneer William A. “Bill” Hilliard perverted the oregonian, turned the daily from a newspaper to an anti-newspaper and, as a career criminal, was an accessory in thousands of violent crimes

[“publisher Lachlan Murdoch, editor-in-chief KeithPoole, and three others at the new york post, and Alesia Cullen at abc news, have all won a major journalism award, with more awardees possibly to come!”]

By Jerry PDX
tuesday, june 25, 2024 at 11:24:00 p.m. edt

First black editor of the oregonian was William A. Hilliard, who retired in 1994 and died in 2017.

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2017/01/william_a_hilliard_former_edit.html

The media sang his praises after his death about how he “broke” barriers, suffered from horrifying racism his entire life (BS), yada yada...but what I will always remember him most for is that he is the editor that instituted the policy of not reporting the race of suspects in crimes. It was quite controversial at the time and provoked a heated debate, even the local media addressed the issue.

That is in marked contrast to nowadays where the subject comes up on listener comments and such but the mainstream media is notably silent. In the article the oregonian ran after his death they devoted one paragraph to the issue:

“within the paper, Hilliard pushed to change the way minority communities were covered and described. reporters had routinely written that police were looking for a suspect described as ‘a 6-foot black man.’ Hilliard said the description was so generic that it was useless, and only served to perpetuate stereotypes.”

I couldn’t find anything else about Hilliard and his racist bias online but remember the arguments back in the day that went on over this. Hilliard was being dishonest and disingenuous here because before Hilliard the paper gave you the best available information, they’d post a composite if they could and give you as much detail about the perp as possible. But sometimes all a person had was sketchy details in which race was the most obvious and easy descriptor they could supply. If the perp was black, then the description eliminated 95% of the population which narrowed things down and increased the chance you could apprehend him, or her.

But Hilliard didn’t care. Like all black supremacists today, he sympathized with his “brothas” & “sistas,” no matter how heinous and evil they were. He wanted to camouflage the disproportionate amount of crime his brethren committed, especially sexually-related offenses.

I remember one incident in particular the oregonian ignored. A young woman was brutally gang-raped by four negroes downtown around 1980 or so. She went directly to the Oregon Journal, a local paper that was a rival to the Oregonian for a while. She told the reporters that she knew the oregonian wouldn’t report her story but knew that the Journal would. She told what happened in harrowing detail, and told exactly what they looked like, which enabled the police to apprehend them. The oregonian, with Hilliard at the helm, would never have done that. The Journal went defunct not long after that incident. It just wasn’t toeing the line for politically correct reporting and lost its advertising base. What I remember is that the oregonian refused to report the story at all, even with race-sanitized details. There were stories of rapes by negroes but Hilliard had a quota on how many the paper would report, so as not to “stereotype.” Makes me wonder how much this stuff happened back then, or even now, that we don’t even hear about.

It seems almost surreal to think that there was a time media outlet heads like Hilliard would actually address the subject of race-omission but nowadays, as we know, the likes of Hilliard just do it and don’t respond to any questions as to why. They’ve learned that they are in a position of power to do whatever they please and push their woke politics on the world with no need to justify.

N.S.: When I wrote, in my hed, that William Hilliard “was an accessory in thousands of violent crimes,” I was talking about what Jerry PDX wrote. When Hilliard ordered his reporters and editors to cease and desist from physically describing criminals, he did so, in order to aid and abet black criminals, who then had many more opportunities to commit crimes. That made him an accessory after the fact, i.e., a criminal, as well. It also made him an accessory before the fact, as Whites traveled with their guards down (which Hilliard wanted), and were more easily victimized by portland’s racist, black thugs.

Media operatives consider themselves “allies” of black and hispanic criminals, deliberately aid and abet them, while deliberately harming innocent Whites, and thus are criminals.

A specific strategy these criminals use was also cited by Jerry: lying, and saying that police would typically provide a description that was “generic,” and thus of no value. First of all, the example Hilliard gave, of a “6-foot black man,” anything but generic. The typical black man is not six feet tall. Plus, the victim would tell police things about the perp’s face, distinguishing marks, voice, etc.

Yesterday, the new york post initially aided and abetted a black, would-be alleged rapist. Outrage by the few readers whose comments the pc daily’s Gauleiter permitted through, persuaded its publisher Lachlan Murdoch and editor-in-chief Keith Poole to permit the suspect’s physical description to be added in a revised version, though they lied, in refusing to note that the story had been updated.

We’ll never know how many people have been murdered, due to such accessories.