隨處可見的歧視 紐約黑人青年之死

Last week I watched a video that made me wince in horror. It showed a black teenager from the Bronx, Kalief Browder, being savagely beaten by prison officers and fellow inmates at Rikers Island prison in New York. That footage, captured by the prison’s surveillance system, was bad enough. Even more chilling was the backstory, revealed by a haunting piece of investigative reporting in The New Yorker magazine last year: Browder was in prison because, at the age of 16, he was accused of stealing a backpack and detained.

我不久前看了一個讓人不寒而慄的視頻。視頻上，來自布朗克斯區(Bronx)的黑人少年卡利夫•布勞德(Kalief Browder)在紐約賴克斯島(Rikers Island)監獄遭到獄警和其他犯人的毒打。這段由監獄監控系統拍攝下來的影像已經足夠觸目驚心，更讓人感到遍體生寒的是《紐約客》(The New Yorker)雜誌去年刊載的一篇讓人過目難忘的調查性報道揭露出來的幕後故事：布勞德之所以入獄，是因爲他在16歲時被指控偷竊一個揹包並遭到拘留。

As it happens, in 2013 he was released having been deemed innocent. But that verdict was reached only aFTer he had been in prison for three years, waiting for his day in court, a victim of a justice system whose wheels can grind extremely slowly, particularly for anyone who is poor. (Browder’s family was unable to afford the $3,000 bail to release him.)

結果他在2013年被無罪釋放。但這一裁決到來之前，爲了等待上庭，布勞德已經在監獄中度過了3年。司法體系處理案件的進度可能異常緩慢，尤其是對窮人來說，布勞德正是這一體系的受害者（他的家人付不起3000美元的保釋金）。

During his long confinement, Browder was badly mistreated because he repeatedly rebelled and proclaimed his innocence. This left terrible scars. So much so that last week, tragically, the 22-year-old Browder committed suicide, prompting The New Yorker and others to reprise the shameful tale and re-release the Rikers surveillance footage.

在布勞德漫長的監禁中，因爲多次反抗並聲稱自己是無辜的，他遭到了殘酷的對待。這給他留下了極爲嚴重的創傷，以至於22歲的布勞德最終於本月自殺身亡。這一悲劇促使《紐約客》和其他人重新提起這個可恥的故事，並再次公開賴克斯島監獄的監控視頻。

The story is horrifying on many levels. Back in the days when I was a reporter in the Soviet Union, Americans would howl in outrage at the idea that Soviet citizens could be tossed into prison for months on end without trial. Browder’s tale, however, shows that it remains a struggle to protect human rights within America’s own shores — even in a prison that lies a few short miles from some of the most gilded and liberal neighbourhoods of New York.

從很多方面來說，這都是一個駭人的故事。在我還在前蘇聯地區做記者的時候，對於未經審訊的蘇聯公民可能被投入監獄長達數月，美國人會予以憤怒的呼喊。然而，布勞德的故事表明，就在美國國內，保護人權依然是一場艱苦卓絕的鬥爭——哪怕是在距離紐約最富裕、最自由的街區短短几英里之外的一所監獄裏也是這樣。

While it would be nice to think (or hope) that the mistreatment at Rikers was extreme, criminal-justice activists insist that Browder’s tragedy was far from an isolated case — and neither was his demographic profile. Today, around 40 per cent of the more than 2 million inmates of American prisons are black, though they represent just 13 per cent of the American public. On current statistical trends, more than a quarter of all American black men can expect to enter prison at some point during their lifetime, due to a pernicious combination of poverty, inadequate education, joblessness, racism — and a Kafkaesque legal bureaucracy that often leaves poor people vulnerable to endless delays and mistakes.

我們或許能夠自我安慰地認爲（或者希望）賴克斯島監獄中發生的暴行是極端事件，但關注司法公正的活動人士堅稱，布勞德的悲劇遠非個案——從他的人口特徵來說也並非如此。今天，儘管黑人只佔美國總人口的13%，美國監獄中逾200萬入獄者中約40%是黑人。從目前的統計趨勢來看，貧困、教育水平低下、無業、種族主義及卡夫卡式法律官僚機構（經常讓窮人遭受無休止的延遲和失誤）共同造成的惡性影響，預計將使超過四分之一的美國黑人在一生中的某個時間點入獄。

Amid this shameful litany, however, there is a tiny point of light. For what the Browder tale also reminds us is that investigative journalism is not just alive and well in America and elsewhere today but has as powerful a role as ever to play in making the world a little better (or at least, less bad).

然而，在這可恥的一長串問題中，有一個小小的閃光點。布勞德的故事告訴我們，調查性新聞不僅在美國和其他地方保有鮮活的生命力，而且一如既往地在使世界變得更好一點（或者至少，變得不那麼糟糕）方面起到強大的作用。

Yes, I know that it might seem self-interested for me, an FT journalist, to point this out. But it is still worth shouting about. After all, there is a widespread perception these days that the traditional media are in terminal decline, unable to compete in a world where kittens and Kardashians dominate social media and the rest of cyberspace. But, as Michael Wolff insists in his provocative new book Television Is the New Television, the reality of modern media is far more nuanced than the cliché presumes. Yes, the Kardashians grab endless attention. But media formats that seemed to be heading for extinction a few years ago — such as television — are still flourishing too.

是的，我知道身爲英國《金融時報》記者指出這一點或許像是一種自利行爲。但這依然值得大聲宣揚。畢竟，近來普遍的看法是傳統媒體正走向末路，無法在一個小貓和卡戴珊家族(Kardashian)風行社交媒體和其他網絡空間的世界競爭。但就如邁克爾•沃爾夫(Michael Wolff)在其引起爭議的新作《Television Is the New Television》中堅持的觀點，現代媒體的現實遠比老生常談的觀點要微妙得多。的確，卡戴珊家族無休止地攫取着人們的注意力。但幾年前看似即將走向滅亡的媒體形式——比如電視——至今依然在繁榮發展。

. . .

. . .

So is investigative journalism (albeit not in such a commercially successful manner as television shows). Today, there are certainly fewer mainstream newspapers running big investigative reporting teams but non-profits have sprung up instead: to cite just one example, Bill Keller, the former editor of The New York Times, now heads the Marshall Project, a non-profit organisation focused on the criminal justice system. And investigations are still being carried out by the traditional platforms, be that The New York Times, the FT — or, as in this case, The New Yorker.

調查性新聞也是如此（儘管不像電視節目那樣享受着商業上的成功）。今天，擁有大規模調查性報道團隊的主流報紙的確減少了，但非營利性組織的興起填補了其中的空缺：僅舉一例，《紐約時報》(The New York Times)原主編比爾•凱勒(Bill Keller)現在是致力於司法公正的非營利性組織Marshall Project的負責人。傳統的平臺也依然在進行調查——可能是《紐約時報》、英國《金融時報》，或者披露布勞德故事的《紐約客》。

Of course, as a cynic might comment, it is a crying shame that it took the horrible tale of Browder to stir debate about the prison system. It is even more lamentable that reforms remain piecemeal. Although The New Yorker report helped to prod New York mayor Bill de Blasio into announcing new oversight of Rikers and changes in justice protocols, accounts of abuse continue apace.

當然，憤世嫉俗的人或許會評論，利用布勞德駭人聽聞的故事激起關於監獄系統的辯論簡直是可悲。但更加可悲的是改革依然只是零敲碎打。儘管《紐約客》的報道促使紐約市長比爾•德布拉西奧(Bill de Blasio)宣佈對賴克斯島監獄採取新的監督措施，並修改司法條例，有關監獄虐待的報道依然層出不窮。

The fact is, however, that if The New Yorker had never written about Browder’s tragic tale — and disseminated that shocking surveillance footage — few people would have known about the horrors happening on Rikers Island. That’s worth remembering this week, not least because it prompts another question: how many more Browders are still rotting in American jails; and what might we see if we could all watch those prison surveillance cameras? Or if a philanthropist were to give every prisoner a video-equipped smartphone?

然而，事實是如果《紐約客》永遠沒有報道布勞德的悲劇——併發布那段令人震驚的監控影像——幾乎沒人會獲知賴克斯島監獄上演的恐怖場景。這一點值得銘記，尤其是因爲它引出了另一個問題：還有多少布勞德在美國的監獄裏遭受折磨？如果我們能看到所有的監獄監控攝像頭，我們會看到什麼？或者如果有個慈善家給每個囚犯一部帶攝像頭的智能手機，我們又會看到什麼？