Reg
location: back to the wilderness
listening to: static
registered: 1999.11.22
posts: 6470
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
When we have one of these shootings the media does two things, it will
headline the story...which follows the old chestnut "If it bleeds it leads!"
and the second thing that happens is a rush to say "Well, the shooter was
crazy." and the person's entire past is sifted through and every little
event that can be used to say "See this guy was nuts!" is paraded out and
repeated over and over and over again.
This particular shooter lived a good portion of his life on camera so you
can go to youtube or your online video warehouse of choice and see him
living his life before he became the guy that shot people on live
television.
He does not look like, sound like, or act like Charles Manson and is not
sporting a swastika or anything else carved into his forehead. He looks and
sounds like the guy that might be sitting next to you at the bar or standing
behind you in line at the grocery store. He's not wearing a t-shirt that
says "Future Killer" as he goes about his business.
At the moment that these shooters commit to actually picking up the gun or
posting their "manifesto" somewhere...yeah...they have snapped and it is
really convenient after the fact to pick through their lives and say "See,
he yelled at a coworker in 2004, he was angry!"
And this is what the media is good at. Turning it into a story. A nice clean
narrative that makes people believe we could have/should have seen it all
coming. All these little incidents that were building to the day where he
goes out and starts blowing people away.
The problem is it really is not all that neat and tidy and while we like
stories and we like to assemble the clues after the fact...the truth is
these people were/are right there next to us all the time. We smile and chat
with them at the store, in the bar, at work.
Had it really been that easy to see "This guy is nuts and is going to kill
somebody!" and he walked around frothing at the mouth all the time then
perhaps he would have had an issue buying a gun.
Look at the man though and watch the videos of moments from his life and you
don't say "What a wacko!"
This whole media game of assembling a series of moments from a shooter's life
to get the audience to brand them a nut after they have finally snapped and
gone on their shooting rampage...well...it's a fucking joke.
We don't see it coming. The victims don't see it coming. The people that
know the shooters say "Well, I knew he was quiet." or "I knew he was angry."
but they don't expect that will play out in a bloody rampage.
The media takes the easy route to a story because people like stories but
the truth is we can't take the easy route if we really want to deal with
this.
–--
'The only way to avoid getting crushed by absurdity, is to humbly include the absurd in our calculations.'
'The only way to avoid getting crushed by absurdity, is to humbly include the absurd in our calculations.'
Reg
(view)
When we have one of these shootings the media does two things, it will
headline the story...which follows the old chestnut "If it bleeds it leads!"
and the second thing that happens is a rush to say "Well, the shooter was
crazy." and the person's entire past is sifted through and every little
event that can be used to say "See this guy was nuts!" is paraded out and
repeated over and over and over again.
This particular shooter lived a good portion of his life on camera so you
can go to youtube or your online video warehouse of choice and see him
living his life before he became the guy that shot people on live
television.
He does not look like, sound like, or act like Charles Manson and is not
sporting a swastika or anything else carved into his forehead. He looks and
sounds like the guy that might be sitting next to you at the bar or standing
behind you in line at the grocery store. He's not wearing a t-shirt that
says "Future Killer" as he goes about his business.
At the moment that these shooters commit to actually picking up the gun or
posting their "manifesto" somewhere...yeah...they have snapped and it is
really convenient after the fact to pick through their lives and say "See,
he yelled at a coworker in 2004, he was angry!"
And this is what the media is good at. Turning it into a story. A nice clean
narrative that makes people believe we could have/should have seen it all
coming. All these little incidents that were building to the day where he
goes out and starts blowing people away.
The problem is it really is not all that neat and tidy and while we like
stories and we like to assemble the clues after the fact...the truth is
these people were/are right there next to us all the time. We smile and chat
with them at the store, in the bar, at work.
Had it really been that easy to see "This guy is nuts and is going to kill
somebody!" and he walked around frothing at the mouth all the time then
perhaps he would have had an issue buying a gun.
Look at the man though and watch the videos of moments from his life and you
don't say "What a wacko!"
This whole media game of assembling a series of moments from a shooter's life
to get the audience to brand them a nut after they have finally snapped and
gone on their shooting rampage...well...it's a fucking joke.
We don't see it coming. The victims don't see it coming. The people that
know the shooters say "Well, I knew he was quiet." or "I knew he was angry."
but they don't expect that will play out in a bloody rampage.
The media takes the easy route to a story because people like stories but
the truth is we can't take the easy route if we really want to deal with
this.
–--
'The only way to avoid getting crushed by absurdity, is to humbly include the absurd in our calculations.'
'The only way to avoid getting crushed by absurdity, is to humbly include the absurd in our calculations.'
