See the difference?

[sheshe2]

http://theobamadiary.com/2014/08/25/your-media/

[kcr]

1. It because of his soulful, brown eyes

Soulful eye privilege In another thread pointing out an occasion of racial bias, it was insisted by some that the advantage was given because the white person was a woman. They'll happily point out any other potential perceived privilege rather than acknowledge the truth. Your example perfectly illustrates the difference but I won't even be surprised to see some show up and try to explain how you're wrong.

[Baitball Blogger]

2. Whoever wrote that article on Michael Brown is a racist.

It's time to start calling them out.

[cleduc]

3. Don't accept "the difference" with the examples you gave

Yes, they're different.

But, for example, some of the first media I read on Mike Brown was describing him as a gentle giant.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/michael-brown-remembered-as-a-gentle-giant/article_cbafa12e-7305-5fd7-8e0e-3139f472d130.html

and

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/five-revelations-from-rolling-stones-boston-bomber-cover-story-20130716
"Janet Reitman delivers a riveting account of how Jahar Tsarnaev became a monster"

So cherry picking media paragraphs doesn't work for me.

Has there been some coverage on Brown that suggests some racism is behind it? Definitely.

Have we seen that level of racism against Tsarnaev? Definitely not.

If that's the point, then I could agree with that.