I agree with so much of what you said, including that he is trying to point out that the media are afraid to broach race and that they do have a different style of covering black on white violence versus white on black violence. Also, I don't think this is a terminable transgression.

But the fact is, he wrote an overtly racial post about blacks targeting whites when there are no data that exist to support his claim. The opposite is true; crime is decreasing. This is why I don't think that it falls under the rubric of "free inquiry" you'd expect out of a university. Controversial viewpoints should be born out of data that don't fit the conventional wisdom; this is just opinion and--apparently false--belief. Just because the main stream media covers race poorly, does he have the right to take the opposite extreme? And, I totally disagree that the word "pack" isn't loaded. This wasn't an off the cuff remark that could be a poor word choice, or taken out of context. This is a well thought out blog post. He knows what he's writing.

All that said, your question is very difficult about why it isn't huge news if a black guy kills a white guy for racial reasons. I have no idea. Unfortunately whenever the subject of race is broached by the right, people on the left scream racist, and whenever its broached by the left, the right says that the left is apologizing and making excuses for blacks, so they're the "real" racists. The end result is that its not ok to talk about it, period. It shouldn't be that way.