PressEthic

Once again, social unrest based on racial tensions rocked another country, the land down under. Apparently, this has been brewing for quite sometime now, reaching riot levels in the past few days. As I've scanned various articles about the crisis, the issue still is a bit obscure to me. One thing is for certain, the clash is between whites and those of Middle Eastern descent. But in many news stories available, the description of those who attacked the ethnic group are merely described as white,

The large-scale violence in Sydney started on Sunday, when thousands of young white men attacked people of Arabic and Mediterranean background on Cronulla Beach - apparently in revenge for a recent attack on two lifeguards.

Some articles have people quoting the perpetrators as "Anglo",

"This violence is unacceptable, as unacceptable as the violence perpetrated by Anglo elements on Sunday at Cronulla," Pell said, referring to attacks by white mobs on people of Middle Eastern appearance at Cronulla beach on Sunday.

However, upon further inspection, other reports, mainly from Australian outlets, describe the attackers as a more radicalized group of people.

The violence has been simmering for some time after two lifesavers were allegedly attacked by men of Middle Eastern appearance, which then inspired residents to come forward and complain of women being harassed on the beach by Muslim men. The tensions came to a head when white supremacists – including the Patriotic Youth League, which is widely considered to be a neo-Nazi organization – began stirring up support

The idea that white supremacists are believed to be involved in the attacks is an important detail missed by several news outlets. Most have described those involved as an angry mob of white men. This is the double standard in media. Why aren't all who were involved identified by what they believe in? If Muslims had initiated the riot against the "Anglos" on Cronulla Beach Monday night, would they be written off as fundamentalists?