PressEthic

This is a generally happy, inspirational sort of article as the headline suggests: "Raising a Banner celebration." It spotlights the Boston Banner (a weekly with a focus on the African American community), running through its birth, talking about the founder, tracing its history and finally delving into the reason for the article's existence -- the 40th anniversary of the paper and tonight's celebrations in honor of said anniversary.

Seems straightforward enough. But what bothered me were some of the comments near the end of the article. For instance:

Newspapers like the Banner play a vital role, said George Curry of the National Newspaper Publishers Association, a consortium of 200 black newspapers with a combined circulation of 15 million.

''The black press is vital in protecting the interest of the African-American community, and only the black press can serve that role effectively," Curry said. ''The white-owned press is less interested in the stories about African-Americans that are not sensational, crime-based, or involve athletics or entertainment."

How sad is it that Curry believes that "only the black press can serve that role effectively"? And what's worse, he might be right. Somehow, somewhere the mainstream press (which I gather is what he means by "white-owned press") seems to be failing this community -- and others (there's no dearth of papers directed towards the Hispanic or Asian communities either).

I know this isn't a new phenomenon, but it makes me think every time I read something like this. Is there a racial/ethnic bias in the mainstream media? How wide-spread is this bias? Is it something that can be overcome? Does the press even want to overcome it?