News, terror, and amusement parks

What do amusement parks and news outlets have in common? They are both purveyors of fear. And what is the difference between them? The amusement park looks you dead in the eye and says, “Get on the rollercoaster. You are going to pay us to frighten you and you are going to love it!” I respect that. Sure, it is rapacious and unapologetic capitalism but, the terms are clear and overt. I am not so certain I could say the same about many of our news outlets.

Like many Americans, I recently watched the drama caused by the so-called Austin bomber. I was saddened by the casualties but having lived through the era of the “uni-bomber”, I was relieved that the whole episode was mercifully brief. Kudos to the brave and dedicated law enforcement officers on this front. However, what struck me was how quickly our attention turned to what we now consider to be the most important question. Were these bombings an act of terrorism? Was the perpetrator a terrorist? When the perpetrator was discovered to be a caucasian and an American, our mutual abhorrence with regard to his actions quickly faded. In its place, we found a way to be divided. Lines were drawn based on who was willing to call him a terrorist and who was not? Our news outlets told us we were at war with each other over a labeling issue. It wasn't even a hard sell. We were primed.

Did you ever stop to wonder why there are national discussions on who should be labeled a terrorist? We ask ourselves if we are labeling too many foreigners as terrorists and not enough homegrown Americans. What about the color divide, we collectively muse? Sure, there are lots of brown terrorists (most of us are pretty quick to agree on this) but are caucasian terrorists being undercounted? If it were not so deadly serious, it would be laughable.

Meanwhile, how many are questioning the gruel we are offered? Why are we now more obsessed with tactics (terrorism) than criminal acts (murder and destruction)? If we have a national consciousness, any thoughtful discussions in that realm are now surrendered to fearful fretting, anger, and thoughts of vengeance.

If you suspect the coverage of “terrorists” and “terrorism” is somehow not in line with day-to-day reality, you are not alone. We are all victims of terrorism now. But, perhaps, not by the agents we imagine. The simple fact is, terrorism specifically and fear-mongering generally are big business with many purveyors. A number of our news outlets would certainly qualify. However, like any multi-level marketing scam, there are many other sellers in the chain as well. And who is buying? We are.

A worthwhile link on the topic by actual experts:

Terrorism and the media: A guide for journalists

Open letter to David Gregory (of NBC's Meet the Press)

Mr. Gregory,

Regarding your recent Meet the Press entitled Faith in America.

To broadcast a program with a journalistic ethos that was so blatantly lacked an opposing or balancing voice was disappointing. Running so closely on the heals of the recent Congressional debacle in Washington in which important and deeply personal issues for women were discussed without a single woman on the panel was especially egregious. As an American citizen, U.S. military veteran, and proud Atheist/Rationalist/Humanist I am personally offended.

How is it that you can feel justified to speak about us with none of us in the room to speak for ourselves?

John Forest

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

To which, I add the following.

I understand that Meet the press is touted as a broadcast journalistic benchmark. I suggest that, if the recent edition on Faith in America is any indicator, they've fallen short of the mark and, perhaps, missed the bench. There is a place in the world for a set of backslapping religious apologists making unsubstantiated assertions. I submit that this place is not in the newsroom.

Allow me to be clear, if these same folks were saying the same things on, let's say, the Christian Broadcast Network, I would be among the first to stand for their right to engage in such activity. But, I draw the line at selectively infecting the slender thread of our national conversation still available to us through journalism.

Is it not sufficient that religious people are the vast majority? Is it not sufficient that believers own most everything, control most everything? Is it not sufficient that, despite these obvious facts, they subject us all to unending paranoid whining. None of us is allowed to pass a day without hearing how the clear and obvious majority of the population are treated as though they were a powerless minority. If we are to assume their view, they and/or their "values" are always under nefarious attack or in retreat. Apparently it is not sufficient that believers daily lay claim to a moral high ground where they "own" basic human values of decency and compassion.

I could scarcely do better than offer the words of the Pastor and Congressman from Missouri Emmanuel Cleaver, who stated on the show:

"Religion at it's very essence requires theological arrogance. Because we have to declare 'This is what I believe in. I believe this is the way'."

Pastor Cleaver went on to opine that religious arrogance could and should meet with diversity and tolerance. To which I respond, if this worked as well in real world practice as it does in high-minded oratory, the Pastor and I would be seeing much more eye-to-eye.