My concern is more with the fact that the article left off a description that (probably) disagrees with their narrative than with the race of the perpetrators. More than race goes into a description: height, weight, clothing. All of this would normally be included in a story, but for some reason, it was all left out.

That reason, as the other guy has already noted, is probably that the attackers were not white, and the publication had some sort of interest in leaving the description out. It's possible that the victims did not give an accurate description, but I think the article would have mentioned that.

This is important to me not so I can justify some believed stereotype, but because I believe it to be hypocritical, and in this case racist, for journalists to be so selective about the information they publish. Journalists should impartially distribute information; not allow race to dictate what story they tell.

A description would have been important, as the other fellow states, so readers in the area can be aware and keep their eye's open for possible suspects. No, we aren't going to go out and try to solve the crime, but a lot of crimes are solved by concerned citizens calling in tips. Look at it this way: if the crime were kidnapping, and the article only mentioned that a child was kidnapped by a teenager, that wouldn't help anybody. You'd want a description, so you know to look for a 300 lb Caucasian teen with short blond hair and a purple hoodie. If it were a stabbing, you'd want to know to avoid a 7 ft tall, bald asian man with a yellow rain coat.

You are aggressively claiming that we are racist for being annoyed by this anomaly, yet we have said nothing racist. I don't think you actually know what racism is. It would be racist if we had said something like "probably black kids because you know how violent they are." No one ever said anything like that. That was not my thought process, and I doubt it was the other guy's.