The Huffington Post discontinued its editor’s note labeling Donald Trump a “racist” and “xenophobe” after he was declared the president-elect earlier this morning.

In a note to readers, the online publication opted for a “clean slate” by removing a note that appeared at the end of nearly every article documenting Trump’s candidacy, which read:

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

Ryan Grim, Washington bureau chief for The Huffington Post, explained that the site will continue to hold Trump accountable when necessary, writing:

Where we find fault in how Trump governs, we won’t hesitate to call it out. If he encroaches on the norms of our democracy, if he targets minority groups or other vulnerable elements of the population, we won’t hesitate to say so loudly and clearly. If he follows his worst instincts and caters to the klatch of white supremacists who endorsed him, we won’t flinch from calling him racist. But we have hope that the man we saw on the trail at his worst moments is not the man who will enter the White House.

POLITICO reported that Grim sent a memo to staff members that further explained the decision to remove the note.

“The thinking is that (assuming he wins) that he’s now president and we’re going to start with a clean slate,” Grim wrote. “If he governs in a racist, misogynistic way, we reserve the right to add it back on. This would be giving respect to the office of the presidency which Trump and his backers never did.”

According to some Huffington Post sources, the removal of the note was part of the outlet’s plan the entire time.

“This note was added to stories about presidential candidate Donald Trump during the election cycle,” said Huffington Post spokeswoman Sujata Mitra. “Now that the election is over, we will no longer be adding the note to future stories, as he is no longer a presidential candidate.”

The news outlet initially placed its coverage of Trump in its entertainment section instead of its politics section.

Bryan White

Bryan is an editorial intern at Law Street Media from Stratford, NJ. He is a sophomore at American University, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Broadcast Journalism. When he is not reading up on the news, you can find him curled up with an iced chai and a good book. Contact Bryan at BWhite@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Huffington Post Drops Donald Trump Editor’s Note appeared first on Law Street.

Following is the full text of the FBI’s disclaimer about the use of its Uniform Crime Reports. The disclaimer appears here in its entirety.

Variables Affecting Crime

Each year when Crime in the United States is published, many entities—news media, tourism agencies, and other groups with an interest in crime in our Nation—use reported figures to compile rankings of cities and counties. These rankings, however, are merely a quick choice made by the data user; they provide no insight into the many variables that mold the crime in a particular town, city, county, state, region, or other jurisdiction. Consequently, these rankings lead to simplistic and/or incomplete analyses that often create misleading perceptions adversely affecting cities and counties, along with their residents.

Consider Other Characteristics of a Jurisdiction

To assess criminality and law enforcement’s response from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, one must consider many variables, some of which, while having significant impact on crime, are not readily measurable or applicable pervasively among all locales. Geographic and demographic factors specific to each jurisdiction must be considered and applied if one is going to make an accurate and complete assessment of crime in that jurisdiction. Several sources of information are available that may assist the responsible researcher in exploring the many variables that affect crime in a particular locale. The U.S. Census Bureau data, for example, can be used to better understand the makeup of a locale’s population. The transience of the population, its racial and ethnic makeup, its composition by age and gender, educational levels, and prevalent family structures are all key factors in assessing and comprehending the crime issue.

Local chambers of commerce, government agencies, planning offices, or similar entities provide information regarding the economic and cultural makeup of cities and counties. Understanding a jurisdiction’s industrial/economic base; its dependence upon neighboring jurisdictions; its transportation system; its economic dependence on nonresidents (such as tourists and convention attendees); its proximity to military installations, correctional facilities, etc., all contribute to accurately gauging and interpreting the crime known to and reported by law enforcement.

The strength (personnel and other resources) and the aggressiveness of a jurisdiction’s law enforcement agency are also key factors in understanding the nature and extent of crime occurring in that area. Although information pertaining to the number of sworn and civilian employees can be found in this publication, it cannot be used alone as an assessment of the emphasis that a community places on enforcing the law. For example, one city may report more crime than a comparable one, not because there is more crime, but rather because its law enforcement agency, through proactive efforts, identifies more offenses. Attitudes of the citizens toward crime and their crime reporting practices, especially concerning minor offenses, also have an impact on the volume of crimes known to police.

Make Valid Assessments of Crime

It is incumbent upon all data users to become as well educated as possible about how to understand and quantify the nature and extent of crime in the United States and in any of the more than 18,000 jurisdictions represented by law enforcement contributors to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. Valid assessments are possible only with careful study and analysis of the various unique conditions affecting each local law enforcement jurisdiction.

Historically, the causes and origins of crime have been the subjects of investigation by many disciplines. Some factors that are known to affect the volume and type of crime occurring from place to place are:

• Population density and degree of urbanization.
• Variations in composition of the population, particularly youth concentration.
• Stability of the population with respect to residents’ mobility, commuting patterns, and transient factors.
• Modes of transportation and highway system.
• Economic conditions, including median income, poverty level, and job availability.
• Cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristics.
• Family conditions with respect to divorce and family cohesiveness.
• Climate.
• Effective strength of law enforcement agencies.
• Administrative and investigative emphases of law enforcement.
• Policies of other components of the criminal justice system (i.e., prosecutorial, judicial, correctional, and probational).
• Citizens’ attitudes toward crime.
• Crime reporting practices of the citizenry.

Crime in the United States provides a nationwide view of crime based on statistics contributed by local, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies. Population size and student enrollment are the only correlates of crime presented in this publication. Although many of the listed factors equally affect the crime of a particular area, the UCR Program makes no attempt to relate them to the data presented. The data user is, therefore, cautioned against comparing statistical data of individual reporting units from cities, counties, metropolitan areas, states, or colleges or universities solely on the basis of their population coverage or student enrollment. Until data users examine all the variables that affect crime in a town, city, county, state, region, or other jurisdiction, they can make no meaningful comparisons.

Uniform Crime Report Ranking Disclaimer is from the FBI.

Click here to read more Crime in America coverage.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What the FBI Says About Its Uniform Crime Reports appeared first on Law Street.

America is a nation of lists. We rate and rank colleges and universities, hospitals, school systems, governmental entities, college football teams, movies, songs (with a bullet), and just about anything else that matters to us, from the frivolous to the most serious.

And crime is one rating that really matters to all of us.

Law Street’s Crime in America utilizes the FBI’s comprehensive collection of crime statistics from 286 American cities to provide a valuable perspective on personal safety in the United States. The FBI releases these statistics annually, and in doing so it performs a significant public service. We at Law Street are engaged in a journalistic service of our own by analyzing and further disseminating the FBI’s results.

If the past is a guide, our Crime in America rankings will be met with criticism by cities with high crime rates and welcomed by those deemed safest. Scholars who rely on the FBI data as the starting point for their own analyses will nonetheless register their objections. Even the FBI hasn’t been spared this criticism, to the point where the agency now even publishes its own disclaimer.  We, too, repeat the FBI’s disclaimer.

Criminologists have received millions of dollars from the federal government in recent years to tell the FBI how it could do a better job of crime data gathering and dissemination – you can read one such report for yourself and see whether it is worth the $4.5 million that the Justice Department paid for it. Looking at that report, one thing that stands out is that the researchers could not easily come to terms with how to make the FBI’s reporting better or more meaningful. And that is not surprising, because crime is as much about perception as it is about reality. A city with some very safe streets may still rank among the most dangerous overall. And although rankings alone cannot tell the whole story, there is still a certain validity to them from a purely qualitative level. Where do you feel safer: strolling the streets of Flint, or Irvine?

In the end, the rankings are what they are – imperfect measures, but illuminating nevertheless. And although some cities may argue against them in order to protect tourism dollars – a few years ago, St. Louis business interests spent $500,000 on a PR campaign against the crime rankings – those same cities also use the rankings to their advantage, to argue for more resources with which to fight such high levels of crime. In fact, that is exactly what is happening in St. Louis. Once ranked Most Dangerous, it was the only city in the Top 10 this year where violent crime significantly dropped.

Acknowledging the limitations of the FBI data doesn’t mean the agency’s reporting is without great value. In fact, the crime data gathered by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program is used by states and localities to target crime-fighting resources, and by the federal government to direct billions of dollars in federal taxpayer dollars to local police forces who urgently need the funding.  Without the FBI’s crime data, such federal programs could not exist; crime-fighting accountability would be weakened; and the public would be denied its right to know. That is why we rank.

Click here to read more Crime in America coverage.

John A. Jenkins

John A. Jenkins is Founder & CEO of Law Street Media. Contact John at jjenkins@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Why We Rank: The Public’s Right to Know appeared first on Law Street.