X Close

Why is the media silent about Iryna Zarutska’s murder?

Iryna Zarutska was murdered on a bus in Charlotte, North Carolina. 
Credit: X

Iryna Zarutska was murdered on a bus in Charlotte, North Carolina. Credit: X

September 8 2025 - 10:00am

A video showing the murder of 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska on public transport in Charlotte, North Carolina, has sent shockwaves round the world. It has also reignited debate over the widening ideological gulf in news reporting. The video shows Zarutska sitting alone, scrolling her phone, while behind her Decarlos Williams, a 35-year-old black man with a long history of arrest and diagnosed schizophrenia, rises to his feet and swings a knife toward her unsuspecting neck.

The incident reached viral escape velocity when Elon Musk reposted a comment on X noting the dearth of coverage in progressive outlets, a media omertà that still largely holds at the time of writing. But this relative silence is perhaps unsurprising. Every detail of the incident cuts against the received progressive worldview, on so many angles and with so total an absence of confounding counter-narrative, that no Left-wing outlet could report on it without fearing its weaponization by the Right, within the perennially sensitive topic of American race politics.

This unhappy subject could — and does — fill whole libraries, but is especially bitter where crime statistics are concerned. Debate over the reality, etiology, and proper response to documented per-capita disparities in criminal violence between white and black Americans is itself too bottomless a source of partisan online discourse to be readily summarized. But this subject periodically bubbles up in the culture war: among other recent controversies, this topic shaped partisan interpretations of George Floyd’s death in 2020, the subsequent Black Lives Matter craze, efforts to “defund the police”, and ongoing debates over urban homelessness, drug use, and shoplifting.

Latterly, too, it provided the subtext to high-profile incidents such as the death of Jordan Neely, who was black, while restrained on a NYC subway by white military veteran Daniel Penny. Penny was later tried for homicide, and finally acquitted. It also fueled public debate around the death by stabbing of 17-year-old high school athlete Austin Metcalf, who was white, by black fellow student Karmelo Anthony at a school athletics event.

In addition to alleging a racialized disparity in propensity to criminal violence, the Right also claims that the progressive press seeks methodically to report cases so as to invert this disparity. That such violence is preponderantly and unjustly perpetrated by white people, especially police officers, against black Americans, was the animating claim that drove the Black Lives Matter protests and subsequent calls to “defund the police”. In a similar vein, there are dozens of New York Times articles on the Daniel Penny trial, while I could find none on the death of Austin Metcalf.

It is hardly surprising, in this febrile context, that Zarutska’s murder has been so widely reported by Right-wing outlets, not just for its shocking brutality but also as an example of this media bias in action. The victim’s slenderness, youth and prettiness makes her the perfect martyr. Nor should we be surprised that the progressive press has struggled to frame the attack. Unlike the Daniel Penny incident, there is no ambiguity over what happened: the video shows an unprovoked and senseless attack on a defenseless lone white woman by a black man with a knife. Worse still, the victim isn’t even the privileged white woman of progressive demonology, but a refugee who, in a different context, would automatically elicit progressive protective instincts.

Putting all this together, there is simply no obvious way to make her murder intelligible within American race politics in a way that does not serve Right-wing narratives. It thus appears that those outlets which most zealously oppose such narratives have either not registered it as having occurred, or opted not to report it.

The world is full of stories, and no publication can document them all. But the difficulty today is that all such selection mechanisms now coexist online, in readily searchable form; anyone who so wishes can toggle back and forth between perspectives, and draw their own conclusions about how, and from what ingredients, the sausage of “news” is made. For those who set any stock at all in the need for a polity to inhabit an at least somewhat shared reality, this is not a reassuring picture.

Especially in the age of viral AI slop, no one should celebrate or seek to hasten the disintegration of a shared reality or commitment to truth in the media. Notwithstanding any putative political bias, my sense is that this is well understood across the legacy press, including the progressive side. Such outlets would do well to consider that a reputation for objectivity turns not just on how a story is reported but also if it is — especially where a story challenges comfortable ideological narratives.


Mary Harrington is a contributing editor at UnHerd.

moveincircles

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

July 1 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam