Argumentation of the two distinguished American authors E. Herman and D. Petersen is analyzed in the text with reference to the American duplicity regarding the politics of human rights protection, so-called 'humanitarian interventions' and the question of qualifying war events and crimes as 'genocide'. Even in 1973 Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman designed a 'typology of bloodshed', based on interests of the Government of USA. Therefore, they point out the difference between 'good and bad bloodsheds', where the former should be ignored and the latter judged in maximal extent. The following is ranked among the 'good bloodsheds': a) constructive, which are made by the USA or which contribute to their direct and strategic interests, and b) benign, which are made by American allies and clients. Chomsky and Herman included among bad bloodsheds the following: c) criminal, made by the states that are opposed to the USA, and d) mythological bloodsheds, as a subvariety of criminal bloodshed, to which a mass publicity is given in media and public in general, regardless the relevant evidence that they had happened at all. On basis of applied methods for quantitative analysis of text contents in the most important American written media and on comparative method, with regard to the typology of bloodshed made by N. Chomsky and E. Herman even in 1973, almost four decades later Herman and Peterson have made a classification of crimes performed throughout the world, which at the same time has the role of verificatory research of Chomsky-Herman typology. Their research shows existence of a significant prejudice regarding qualifying different events as 'genocide', which is conditioned by the American interests and in full extent confirms the Chomsky-Herman typology, while Herman and Peterson find in their research that the number of such cases has been increased considerably in the meantime. Therefore, in the case of the crime that was performed in Kongo, it was required more than 317 thousand of dead Kongos to appear in the American mainstream media that the 'genocide' is in question, while at the same time it was required 12 killed Albanians from Kosovo to appear the qualification of 'genocide'. Their finding on racism in qualifications is based on this and other facts put in proportion: it never has happened that ''guardians' of the international justice' managed to find evidences for a single crime made by 'great white northern powers, which exceeds the threshold of tolerance'. In other words, in such a situation it never has happened that bloodshed was judged as genocide. A conclusion is made on connection of high American officials with media from the behavior of media, which in that way create propaganda and creation of such public opinion that support the course of the official American politics uncritically, without any doubts regarding the authenticity of given qualification of certain event.