Irish or Gypsy, you can decide

It was brought to my attention yesterday that a particularly interesting comment was left online in response to a story I wrote on May 7.
It concerned a self-proclaimed Gypsy who allegedly kidnapped an elderly Long Beach man at gunpoint from his front yard last fall and forced the victim to withdraw thousands of dollars from two different Orange County bank branches.
The accused is being charged with felony kidnapping, armed robbery and elder abuse, and police said the suspect identified himself as a a Gypsy and as a member of a criminal organization, often referred to as "gypsies or travelers."
Typically when I write about crimes involving members of the Gypsy community, I am reminded that it is a an ethnic group -- which I have previously reported, and that police recognize -- that can be found in almost every country and most Gypsies live peaceful, law-abiding lives.
This story generated that usual responses, but it also prompted another reader to post, anonymously of course, that all people of Eastern European descent should be barred from the United States. It went on to say I was undoubtedly of such descent and new to the US and accused me, and the Press-Telegram, of being part of the "Soviet threat" to America, along with a lot of other nonsense.
I debated whether to reply, and finally decided I would let the clearly worried reader know that my last name -- presumably what made the reader assume I was Eastern European -- is German and my family lineage traces from Germany and Ireland predominantly, with some English and Native American tossed in there.
If I were Eastern European I would happily identify myself as such, but I thought it might make the reader rest a little easier to know that all my kin hail from Western Europe and not the area of the world he seems to fear.
I also enjoyed updating the reader on the whole "Soviet threat" issue being sort of silly since the Soviet Union hasn't existed formally since 1991, and arguably since the mid 1980s when it began to collapse.
The anonymous comment, while disturbing in its hatred toward a whole swath of the world, was also cause for some mirth in the newsroom and at home (my husband has taken to calling me Natasha and asking me to speak in a Russian accent, thanks a lot).
But it also illustrates an issue that comes up nearly ever day for me and my fellow reporters: that is, the belief that reporters write stories, or don't cover issues, based on their background, beliefs or personal grudges.
Frequently, I am accused of saying someone was a criminal when they are not, or accusing someone of a crime when they are innocent.
When people e-mail me directly, not anonymously, or call me and leave information where I can contact them, I will explain every story includes attribution. It's a long word that means the information doesn't come from me, or the newspaper, it comes from a reputable source. So I am not saying they are a suspect, the Press-Telegram isn't charging someone with a crime, it's the authorities who give out the information and take the action.
Often, especially at the start of an incident, the sources are just the authorities, be it law enforcement, the courts, and/or first responders.
Because victims and suspects are not always identified, or reachable if they are hospitalized or incarcerated, it is difficult to get their side of the story. I, and my colleagues, am always willing to talk to anyone about about the issue if they are willing to contact me or I can track them down. Unfortunately, that doesn't always happen.
Also, reporting the other side doesn't mean I can ignore what the authorities say or that I'm not going to ask questions based on what they released, as uncomfortable as those questions can be. I can't leave out details that people may not like -- such as an individual's criminal history -- if those details are germane to the story.
I'm also frequently accused of reporting about certain groups of people because, a reader assumes, I don't like them. Sometimes it's racial, sometimes it's related to gangs; I can assure everyone that I have written about every ethnicity and nearly every gang -- at least the larger, core groups -- in the greater Long Beach area. I don't know if readers have read all those stories; I suspect they haven't based on their reactions.
A relatively recent example involved a parent with a child who attended Dominguez High School who was upset about me me writing about a series of robberies tied to a ring of students who attended the Westside school.
She told me she and other parents at the school had done a "background check" on me, they knew I was a graduate of Poly High School and that was why I never wrote bad stories about Poly and always wrote negative stories about Dominguez. She wanted to know why I hadn't been at the school to write about them doing well in what, if my memory serves, was a pretty big music competition.
I explained to her that, first, her background information was false, I'm a Millikan grad -- Go Rams!
Second, I have written as many, if not more, articles about high profile crimes related to Poly. Trust me, parents and staff at that school will tell you I'm not popular there either.
Really, it's never good when a crime reporter shows up on your doorstep. And I should note I've written crime stories related to all the other local high schools, and some junior highs. Examples that come readily to mind are white supremacist tagging at Millikan High, the mother of a Wilson High student selling heroin to his classmates next to the campus and the arrest of gang members at Jordan for crimes including assault, robbery and attempted murder.
Finally, I didn't cover the music competition because my beat is cops, courts and fire, not education or features. I also added that had she, or anyone at the school, contacted our education reporter or city editors they would have either covered the competition, or reported on it after the fact.
The conversation, which started out pretty testy, ended pleasantly, as most do.
Some readers, however, never accept that a crime reporter most likely isn't going to write a feel-good story. Although, I would also note that when I do get positive news tips I like to cover them because they offer a nice break from what can be a very bleak job.
I willingly admit that I, and members of my profession, make a lot of mistakes. In my opinion we often don't live up to the standard that should be met. But I have to tell those who see conspiracy or malice in what they read that they are giving me, and the media, far too much credit.
I merely offer this to readers who might think that we don't care that such is not the case.

I offer the explanation of how my beat -- and many other beats -- work so that maybe some of you will better understand why we cover certain stories.

The debate over how some stories get so overblown while other stories that deserve coverage never see light of date is a great one, but a different matter for another day.
I'll end by addressing the online reader, who fears I am at the heart of a Soviet/Gypsy/Easter European/War Criminal conspiracy, and admitting I am guilty of many things and have been called many names, but I don't think any of those apply. I mean, if I were a member of such a group, why would write about one of my comrades getting busted?
But thanks for taking the time to read my stuff, and the PT.