Jack Straw's comments that some UK Pakistani men see white girls as "easy meat" for sex abuse has really set the debate over what is taboo and what isn't alight.
Two of his Labour colleagues have rounded on him for "stereotyping" an entire community. The former Home Secretary has urged the Pakistani community to be "more open" about the abuse which exists. He told Newsnight that:
"These young men are in a Western society, in any event, they act like any other young men, they're fizzing and popping with testosterone, they want some outlet for that, but Pakistani heritage girls are off-limits and they are expected to marry a Pakistani girl from Pakistan, typically."
Earlier that week the media had picked up on the Times story "Revealed: conspiracy of silence on UK sex gangs" which, if you haven't read, unfortunately, you'll have to pay for the privilege - but that's another story.
On the face of it, the article was a brilliant piece of investigative journalism.
The Times had evidence that:
"17 court prosecutions since 1997, 14 of them during the past three years, involving the on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16 by groups of men. The victims came from 13 towns and cities and in each case two or more men were convicted of offences"
and that:
"In total, 56 people, with an average age of 28, were found guilty of crimes including rape, child abduction, indecent assault and sex with a child. Three of the 56 were white, 53 were Asian. Of those, 50 were Muslim and a majority were members of the British Pakistani community."
Furthermore, the article quoted Detective Chief Inspector Alan Edwards as saying:
"No-one wants to stand up and say that Pakistani guys in some parts of the country are recruiting young white girls and passing them around their relatives for sex, but we need to stop being worried about the racial complication."
And before I end quoting the Times, it also said it had seen a briefing document from UCL's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime which said:
" 'most central offenders are Pakistani', warning that 'race is a delicate issue' that needs to be 'handled sensitively but not brushed under the carpet' ".
Now you can't argue about a well researched piece of work, can you?
Except you can - because as journalists I believe we have a responsibility to put things into context.
I believe that no subject should be taboo - as long as we shield ourselves with the cloak of accuracy, fairness, balance and impartiality ... and context.
I agree completely with the Chancellor of the University of Lincoln, Lord Adebowale, that it's a bit deeper than that. Let the facts speak for themselves and ask pertinent questions until we arrive at sensible, unspun, logical conclusions, free from bias, assumptions and personal prejudices, which fit the evidence, no matter how uncomfortable, without fear or favour.
There's nothing complicated about that. As academics we do it all the time, don't we?
Denial
Except, critics say, when it comes to race. Then all the bets appear to be off and we appear to tread on egg shells. In 1997, Kamlesh Patel, now Lord Patel of Bradford, produced ground-breaking research which showed without a shadow of a doubt that there was a massive drugs problem in the South Asian communities.
There was a culture of denial among so-called community leaders and he had to fight to get his voice heard. Now, South Asian men and women are being treated for their drug habits when once they would have been sent to the South Asian sub-continent to get better by concerned parents, who didn't realise that not only would they get worse, but they would forge routes and contacts to smuggle in heroin and other Class A substances.
I reported on the racial divides in Oldham and how mainly Pakistani young men were trying to create no-go zones for white people.
Greater Manchester Police rejected the idea, community elders rejected it ... and six weeks later Oldham went up in flames. I was roundly condemned by some BBC colleagues for playing into the hands of the BNP - and called other names too - even though in every conversation I put in the caveats that it was a minority and possible bravado.
The result was a summer of disturbances, three national inquiries and at least four reports - one from the former head of the Commission for Racial Equality, Lord Ouseley, who warned that across the towns and cities of Britain we were living parallel lives.
The outcome is that Oldham Council is trying its level best to make sure that segregation becomes a thing of the past.
My point is that good can often come from bringing things out into the open.
If we castigate people for speaking out, no matter how uncomfortable their perception, we end up with frustrated people without a voice. And that means we end up with sensible people in a desert seeing a mirage. And that mirage is extremists waiting to groom young Muslims to blow themselves up on packed commuter trains in rush hour and white men collecting arsenals of weapons to make nail bombs because they hate immigrants.
In this country we have the right to challenge, the right to debate and the right to argue. So let's challenge, debate and argue so there is an outlet for misunderstandings, misconceptions and misheard convenient and easy truths. It's one way to counter problems without resorting to violence.
Context
So what do I mean by context?
I mean facts and figures which are incontrovertible. The UK prison population as of 7 January 2011 is: 82,991. This means that 99.9% of us in this country are law abiding. Now that's got to be worth some sort of celebration, hasn't it?
But what happens if it's controversial evidence? In 2008, there were 8,106 male sex offenders, according to research carried out by Sheffield Hallam University. And here's where you come to the real context part: once you read the entire report, you get a more rounded picture of how Black Minority Ethnics account for only 18% of male sex offenders ... but are over represented because BMEs account for about 8% of the UK population.
This means there could well be cause for concern and it follows that we need a conversation, an open, unfettered debate to find out why this is happening to get at anywhere near the truth.
But what about the context for the research quoted in the Times.
Ah, you see, if you'd watched Newsnight on Friday 7 January 2011 you would have heard Helen Brayley, one of the researchers who carried out an independent study into sex trafficking and whose findings were quoted by the Times, say:
"The main problem is that it's been taken out of context. We were looking at two police operations both very close geographically. Based on that data we did find that there was a large Pakistani contingent in the offenders and the victims were predominantly white.
However, when you look at the census data for the demographics in that area, there were some Asian and black victims and they were actually over-represented when you look at the sheer percentages."
She continued:
"The problem is that when you jump in and think about race too quickly, you can miss a whole load of other things that are happening in other areas.
By racially stereotyping this, early on, without a national scoping project, we don't know what the situation is around other areas around the country; that you might be leaning towards a self-fulfilling prophecy or if people are looking for Asian offenders they will only find Asian offenders. And offenders of other ethnic groups might develop a sense of impunity to this."
The big problem is that journalists and journalism deal in shorthand.
How do we put the war between Jews and the Arabs into context? It takes far too long and with shorthand we risk leaving something out, so we don't bother. And that's what causes problems.
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with shorthand - but it's when journalists throw accuracy to the wind or bend facts to fashion their own version of the truth, that's when I want to shout at the top of my voice: 'I feel cheated and I'll never trust you again.'
Letting go
In 2004 the former editor of the Today programme, Kevin Marsh, was asked to speak to the Society of Editors about what makes a good journalist. He said:
"The ability to grasp the big truths - with the humility to let them go again when the facts don't fit."
It was a wonderful moment of clarity for me and made me realise that I was allowed to work on a story for months and months and not feel disappointed or a failure when the facts didn't fit and I couldn't run the story.
No-one is suggesting for one moment there isn't a problem with young Pakistani men. But I bet there are just as many problems with young white men, black men, Indian men.
Few shout that we shouldn't talk about these problems for fear of causing offence. But the many want the chance to talk and say things without being labelled a racist.
And when it comes to journalism, the first draft of history after all, surely we owe it to ourselves, our audiences and our future generations to make sure we deal in facts and get them right, on what we know, at that moment, on the evidence we have seen, to the best of our abilities.
This post, by former BBC journalist Barnie Choudhury, is reproduced with permission from the Experts Comment Blog of the University of Lincoln.
