A CASE STUDY in bias through framing. “Make him white and especially right-wing, and make his line of argument right-wing anti-establishmentarian, ceteris paribus, and this very same newspaper wouldn’t be casting this story as a ‘clash of cultures.’ It would be nothing but scorn and vitriol against the person in question.”

From the article, titled “St. Charles arrest spurs a clash of cultures, law,” dated April 14:

Yahudah Ben, 28, claims he was improperly detained for 91 days. The United Nation of YisraEL is an organization of African-Americans who contend their descent from slavery grants them status as a sovereign state along with exemption from specific regulatory laws.

“We are claiming our heritage was stolen from us because we were brought here against our will. We have a right to self-determination and to declare our own destiny,” said St. Louis County resident Hadurah Baht Yacob YisraEL.

YisraEL members trace their roots in the ancient Hebrew-Israeli tribes that once roamed Africa.

The belief system growing out of that heritage clashed with 21st century secular law on the morning of Dec. 31.

A commenter points to another article from the same newspaper, titled “‘Sovereign citizen’ tax schemes land true believers in prison,” dated May 4:

Marcotte, 48, of Belleville, faced up to 20 years in prison on tax charges related to his beliefs associated with the “sovereign citizen” movement.

It’s a group bound by a denial of the government’s legitimacy, and includes people who challenge everything from municipal traffic laws to federal tax regulations. . . .

Fueled by distrust, sovereign beliefs have lured people from all walks of life . . . said JJ MacNab, who has researched the movement for more than a decade, testified before Congress and is working on a book about sovereigns. . . .

Most experts trace the roots of modern day sovereigns to the white supremacist Posse Comitatus movement of the 1970s, which recognized no government higher than the county and believed that the county sheriff had ultimate authority. . . .

MacNab said that although sovereigns believe in a “thousand different myths,” the circumstances that push them into the movement are very real.

See how the first article grants legitimacy to the movement in question, referring to a “clash of . . . law” as if adherents are actually members of a separate, sovereign nation whose borders cover the entire world and override those of actual nations. The other article puts scare quotes on a name given to the movement in question, refers to its tax “scheme,” and calls its adherents “true believers” — all in the headline.

Moreover, the first article draws quotations about the movement from a fellow adherent, whereas the second article draws from a critic, whose remarks are attributed to “most experts.” Nope, no bias here.