Okay, I'm being a little inflammatory here. I think the reason we don't cover poor black children is because a fair number of people don't find them as cute, and they don't make the people with the money think "oh my! That could be my baby."
Note to mods--go ahead and delete me
*covers head in shame*
Not just inflammatory, insulting. You're making a real generalization about a whole lot of people without really considering the facts. China's made a massive business out of exporting unwanted children, so apparently, SOME American people who aren't Chinese are able to look at a minority baby and say "how cute, that could be my child". The same goes with couples, majoritively white, BTW, who adopt kids from India, Africa, and South America, or even adopt minority children from right here in the United States. Hasn't the complaint always been that the 'authorities' are more willing to place minority children with white parents than to place white children with minority parents?
And that's not even taking into consideration all the people who give to charities to support children in non-white countries. When I lived with my parents and had a little extra cash to spare, I sent 24$ a month to help a little girl in Singapore pay for clothes and school supplies.
I agree with the people who have asserted that the reason inner city violence doesn't get as much attention is A) it's on an individual basis, one person or one home, and this is 400 people, and B) we DO hear about it, and we hear about it so much that it's old news to us. Also, it is C) sensational, with all the cult-ish trappings. The news reports what grabs peoples' attention, not necessarily what happens. If you want news that reports on every possible story regardless of how interested the public is, go to Japan.
I also disagree with the assessment that the lack of news coverage (BTW, I live in Columbus, and we most definately DO see it in the news whenever there's a report of domestic violence or a murder regardless of the color of the person's skin, as long as that someone deigned to call reporters they'll be there) means people don't care. You're disregarding the number of people who volunteer their time, talents, and even money for homeless shelters, youth centers, women's shelters, and those organizations (don't know if they have a blanket name) that train people for job interviews and get them good clothing so they can make a good impression and compete in a competitive market. You're forgetting the Big Brother/Big Sister program, the Salvation Army, and the vast number of churches who hold food drives and give free counseling or very inexpensive classes to youths, largely minorities, who are in need. When I was in youth group, we spent six weeks out of our summer working for a program similar to Habitat for Humanity, except instead of building homes, we were gutting and RE-building homes that had been deemed unsuitable for human habitation so that families could move into them once they were refitted. I didn't spend my summer breathing black dust and tar fumes on a hot roof, getting sunburned and wielding a sledgehammer nearly as big as I was, because I didn't care. I didn't do mission work in Kenya and New Orleans because I didn't care.
Don't confuse sensationalist media coverage with the attitudes of the people. The system is corrupt, and the American People as a whole are corrupt, but there are plenty of them who are trying to do the right thing.