Image via Wikipedia
Jared Loughner is a mentally disturbed individual. There seems to be a consensus on that point. But the questions of why Gabby Giffords, and why now, seem to be less important to our national corporate media. To the extent that they’re bending over backwards trying to downplay, dismiss, and even deny that cause and effect might have come into play.
On the Today Show, Monday morning, after showing the clip of Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik voicing his opinion that “The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous”, Matt Lauer took exception to these words and said that he didn’t think there was any cause and effect here. This saddened and angered me, because before even knowing what might have been Jared’s motivation we’re being told that there is no cause and effect. He (Jared) was/is just a paranoid nut-job. End of story. And then, seconds later, the lovely and lanky Ann Curry is fawning all over Matt Lauer, agreeing with him. Meredith and Al also nodding their heads in approval. What was up with that? Is Matt Lauer THAT powerful that he can’t be disagreed with? Or . . . did this directive come down from the head honchos at GE, and were they all just playing their parts? At least Charlie Rose raised his eyebrows and questioned the assertions of Ezra Klein, who also said that there was no cause and effect. And, even Diane Sawyer asking Sheriff Dupnik, in disbelief, “That it is somehow linked???” Why is there so much resistance to to a very plausible possibility? Dupnik didn’t name any names, or cite any specific rhetoric. But boy, was there ever swift condemnation of his words. And where did this come from? From the right-wing pundits, whose very bread and butter is vitriolic rhetoric. Now, the sheriff is forced to respond to the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sara Palin, because they are threatened by his opinion.
The corporate media loves the tawdry, tragic and sensationalistic. That’s what grabs the attention. That’s what sells. Careful contemplation, as to what are the underlying causes, is besides the point to them. With the Jared Loughner case I’ve even heard some reporters say: We may never know. Really? Is the guy dead? Did the police cut his tongue out? Why deny cause and effect? And why set up the premise that ‘we may never know’ what his motivation was? They will milk the story for all that it’s worth, without really telling us anything new or substantive. They need to be ready to jump onto the next shocker of the moment. What seems to matter most to the corporate media is the hype, the sincerity (acting job) of its anchor people, and – bottom line – the ratings.
None of us live in a vacuum. To a large extent, we are all products of our environment. This is true of the sane, and the not so sane. When the Glenn Becks of this country say that “Barack Obama has a deep-seated hatred for white people” and that he’s a “racist”, or the Bill O’Reillys and Sean Hannitys keep saying President Obama is a “socialist”, it resonates with all sorts of people. When Sara Palin puts out her Congressional map with gun-sight cross-hairs on certain districts, and says things like “don’t retreat, reload” most people pick up on the shooting references . . . one way or another. The sane, but gullible, eat it up and regurgitate it. Who knows what kind of catalyst these words of violence and hatred might be to the not so sane! We do know that this very kind of rhetoric has inspired some to kill abortion doctors over the years. So, why be so dismissive, of the effects that words of hate might have, in this instance?
No one is saying there is a straight line, from any specific piece of vitriolic and hateful rhetoric, to the actions in Tucson last Saturday. We don’t know, yet, why Jared Loughner did what he did, and why he targeted Gabby Giffords. Even if his lawyers go with an insanity defense it’s very likely that we will, eventually, know those whys. To completely rule out the possibility of some kind of cause and effect, at such an early stage of the story, by our corporate media, is more than irresponsible, it’s downright . . . reprehensible.
YUR
Unclerave's Wordy Weblog 
The Media’s Denial
Published January 14, 2011 Commentary , Current Events , Language , Media , Politics , Race Leave a CommentTags: Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity
Image via Wikipedia
Jared Loughner is a mentally disturbed individual. There seems to be a consensus on that point. But the questions of why Gabby Giffords, and why now, seem to be less important to our national corporate media. To the extent that they’re bending over backwards trying to downplay, dismiss, and even deny that cause and effect might have come into play.
On the Today Show, Monday morning, after showing the clip of Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik voicing his opinion that “The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous”, Matt Lauer took exception to these words and said that he didn’t think there was any cause and effect here. This saddened and angered me, because before even knowing what might have been Jared’s motivation we’re being told that there is no cause and effect. He (Jared) was/is just a paranoid nut-job. End of story. And then, seconds later, the lovely and lanky Ann Curry is fawning all over Matt Lauer, agreeing with him. Meredith and Al also nodding their heads in approval. What was up with that? Is Matt Lauer THAT powerful that he can’t be disagreed with? Or . . . did this directive come down from the head honchos at GE, and were they all just playing their parts? At least Charlie Rose raised his eyebrows and questioned the assertions of Ezra Klein, who also said that there was no cause and effect. And, even Diane Sawyer asking Sheriff Dupnik, in disbelief, “That it is somehow linked???” Why is there so much resistance to to a very plausible possibility? Dupnik didn’t name any names, or cite any specific rhetoric. But boy, was there ever swift condemnation of his words. And where did this come from? From the right-wing pundits, whose very bread and butter is vitriolic rhetoric. Now, the sheriff is forced to respond to the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sara Palin, because they are threatened by his opinion.
The corporate media loves the tawdry, tragic and sensationalistic. That’s what grabs the attention. That’s what sells. Careful contemplation, as to what are the underlying causes, is besides the point to them. With the Jared Loughner case I’ve even heard some reporters say: We may never know. Really? Is the guy dead? Did the police cut his tongue out? Why deny cause and effect? And why set up the premise that ‘we may never know’ what his motivation was? They will milk the story for all that it’s worth, without really telling us anything new or substantive. They need to be ready to jump onto the next shocker of the moment. What seems to matter most to the corporate media is the hype, the sincerity (acting job) of its anchor people, and – bottom line – the ratings.
None of us live in a vacuum. To a large extent, we are all products of our environment. This is true of the sane, and the not so sane. When the Glenn Becks of this country say that “Barack Obama has a deep-seated hatred for white people” and that he’s a “racist”, or the Bill O’Reillys and Sean Hannitys keep saying President Obama is a “socialist”, it resonates with all sorts of people. When Sara Palin puts out her Congressional map with gun-sight cross-hairs on certain districts, and says things like “don’t retreat, reload” most people pick up on the shooting references . . . one way or another. The sane, but gullible, eat it up and regurgitate it. Who knows what kind of catalyst these words of violence and hatred might be to the not so sane! We do know that this very kind of rhetoric has inspired some to kill abortion doctors over the years. So, why be so dismissive, of the effects that words of hate might have, in this instance?
No one is saying there is a straight line, from any specific piece of vitriolic and hateful rhetoric, to the actions in Tucson last Saturday. We don’t know, yet, why Jared Loughner did what he did, and why he targeted Gabby Giffords. Even if his lawyers go with an insanity defense it’s very likely that we will, eventually, know those whys. To completely rule out the possibility of some kind of cause and effect, at such an early stage of the story, by our corporate media, is more than irresponsible, it’s downright . . . reprehensible.
YUR
Related Articles