The FBI released data this week that showed a continuing rise in hate crimes across the country in 2016, with 6,121 total incidents, compared to the 5,850 reported the year before.
There was a 19 percent rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes — the largest jump against any group — since the previous year, which also saw a precipitous rise.
But the data are also misleading. There are so many gaping holes in the data that it is difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain the true scope of bias-related crimes in America.
To start with, it’s impossible to conclude that hate crimes are being prosecuted on a large scale. The FBI’s data set is composed of crimes that state-level agencies have determined meet the federal definition of a hate crime.
That doesn’t mean they were charged as such. In most cases, they’re not, with prosecutors either failing to identify bias in the motive or choosing to pursue simpler charges such as assault and vandalism.
Hate crime statutes also vary from state to state and don’t exist at all in Wyoming, Indiana, Arkansas, Georgia and South Carolina. And the FBI’s data set includes no notation of how many of the 6,121 incidents last year resulted in arrests or specific hate crimes charges.
It’s also impossible to say where most hate crimes are being committed. FBI data shows roughly half the hate crimes in the country occur in just six states: California, New York, Ohio, Michigan, Massachusetts and Washington. One might think that California, the location of 931 hate crimes last year — more than any other state, according to the FBI — is the worst place to be black, gay or Muslim.
But that would be the wrong conclusion, says Brian Levin, a criminologist who heads the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University-San Bernardino. It just means California is better than most other states at reporting hate crimes.
Hate crime reporting varies widely by state. The statistics compiled by the FBI each year depend on thousands of U.S. law enforcement agencies voluntarily submitting their data to their state’s uniform crime reporting agency, which then categorize the crimes — deciding, for example, what crimes meet the federal hate crime definition. Those state agencies then voluntarily submit their data to the FBI.
In California, less than 30 percent of law enforcement agencies submitted data. In Massachusetts, which Levin considers one of the most thorough states in reporting hate crimes, less than a quarter of the agencies submitted.
Hawaii, for example, didn’t submit data. In Arkansas, Pennsylvania and New Mexico, only 1 percent of law enforcement agencies sent in their hate crimes statistics.
More than 80 U.S. cities with more than 100,000 residents either reported no hate crimes or simply ignored the FBI’s request for data. The result is a compilation of numbers that is startlingly arbitrary.
“We have a variety of states that are just not meaningfully participating,” said Levin.
Some of the states with the highest percentages of African-American residents — such as Mississippi and Alabama — reported very low numbers of hate crimes, even though half the hate crimes reported last year by the FBI targeted African-Americans. That’s an indication that the data is skewed, Levin said.
“Massachusetts has the highest per capita rate of hate crimes — which doesn’t mean they’re all haters,” he added. “It means they’re paying attention.”
Victims also underreport the crime, according to experts.
Minority groups, particularly recent immigrants, often fail to report being victims of hate crimes for a variety of reasons, ranging from fear and mistrust of the police to language barriers and poor understanding of the laws.
“If you’re an immigrant from an undemocratic nation where the police are not to be trusted, you would never call the police,” said Michael Lieberman, the Washington counsel for the Anti-Defamation League.