Insensitive column on Sean Taylor's death

I know Matt wrote about the murder of Redskins safety Sean Taylor during an apparent robbery earlier this week. But as a follow-up, I saw on Romenesko a Washington City Paper blog entry about the backlash against a pretty insensitive column titled "Taylor's Death is Tragic but Not Surprising" by Leonard Shapiro in the Washington Post. Shapiro said he has received an outpouring of hate e-mails about his insensitivity and even racism in the column. In the blog he was quoted as saying he did not write the headline that accompanied his piece (which he said a lot of people couldn't get past) and if he had the chance, he would have rethought some points. But he didn't apologize for what his column was trying to say. Taylor had many on- and off-field transgressions that tarnished his image, but teammates and others said he was going through a transformation to clean up his act. Shapiro asserted that due to Taylor's embracing of a "thug lifestyle," his murder was very tragic but really shouldn't have surprised anyone. I think this debacle is so interesting, especially for us as copy editors, because it shows that headlines are so important in conveying a message. Shapiro himself said people couldn't get past the insensitive headline. I don't think it matters if this is a column, writing that someone's untimely death was not surprising (that it was maybe even coming to him) is in bad taste. This man was 24 and had a newborn daughter. He had so much time to turn around his so-called thug image. The discipline problems may have worked themselves out in time. The bottom line is he was murdered, and though I understand what Shapiro was getting at, it was insensitive to Taylor's family and legacy, and victims should be treated with much more respect. What ever happened to the basic journalistic principle of minimizing harm? Though Shapiro wrote almost the same exact phrase in his column, he wants to blame the headline for the backlash. That's legitimate seeing as how prominent the headline is, but he needs to take responsibility for this mistake. However, I wouldn't call him racist after reading this. The copy editor who wrote the headline and edited the column, should have and double-checked and discussed this piece with a multitude of higher-ups before its publication. The copy editor also should have thought of a less-jarring, more sensitive headline. Both the copy editor and especially Shapiro should have taken greater lengths to minimize harm.