The Guardian article posted by Richard in the OP is based pretty well entirely, AFICS, on comparison between a single trial in Rochdale of an organised gang who had worked in collusion, passing girls among one another &c on the one hand; and on the other a series of separate trials in Derby over a certain period [unspecified so far as I can see] of men not even acquainted with one another, let alone acting in any sort of collusion, the only connection between whom being that they had been accused of similar crimes.

I genuinely do not see the point of the comparison being made. It's as if, at the time of the Great Train Robbery, someone had objected to the press reporting of it because money gets stolen by criminals all the time.

What point of comparison, precisely, was Mr Harker meaning to draw attention to? How is the comparison, if at all viable, meant to show a proponderance of "Racism in the UK Media" [Richard's title for this thread]?

I offer no opinion as to whether such racism is to be found in our media; I am simply exercised as to how these two separate instances – an incident/a series of incidents – are supposed to illustrate it.

~M~