I understand. I also understand that most media actively try to censor race from most crime reportage. They'll say something like "two males were seen fleeing in a car at high speed after the shooting". Why even say males at this point? Just say people. So, on the one hand they avoid mentioning physical descriptors like race, or age, for most violent crimes, on others, they actively highlight physical and psychological characteristics like race and mental health, and assumed bigotry.
So it's a very uneven treatment.
Also, statistics are unhelpful here. Overall whites are a maj. in the U.S. They may or may not be in the locale where the crime happened, and minorities may or may not be a majority in the place a crime happened. So it very much depends how large you want to make this "place"
> Five statistically unlikely people have been shot simultaneously
> Five statistically common people have been shot simultaneously
To say nothing of the killer's explicitly stated racial motives, historical repression, slavery, curtailing of rights, violence, et cetera. :P
See also, "man bites dog".
If the shooting had been in a predominantly non-white society, the headline could well have been what you proposed.