Politicizing The New Zealand Massacre (Or: How A Reporter Reporting Became Controversial)
Americans (especially those on the political right) seem to have two deadly sins— analyzing a tragedy and learning from your mistakes. When last night, an insane white nationalist— who I have no issue with naming but have been unable to get the name of — killed 49 Muslims while they were attending a Mosque.
Edit: The guy was named Brandon Tarrant. I would like to thank long time supporter Sayori Akemi (AKA Ryu) for informing me of this. Considering I was unable to get the name until three days after this article was published and I checked as many news-sites as possible, I do however still believe the main point of this article still stands.
Right-wing media especially (although centrist media is also to blame) has been screaming the real tragedy being that reports dare to report. Don’t believe me? Right-wing commentator Ben Shapiro actually says just this:
The first thing of note — as much as I hate being “that guy,” — is this seems to be a privilege given only if you’re right and white. This idea is one I first heard after the shooting in Texas back in May 2018. I believe the first person I heard call for this was Charlie Kirk, who said the following on 5/19/2018:
The problem is this goes against the fundamental idea of reporting. Was American media wrong for how it handled the attacks on 9/11? (Which, may I remind you, involved constant coverage without even a single commercial break by some networks) Did that “create new terrorists?” Of course not! Should we not be allowing books on the Holocaust as it will “create more Nazis?” No! Should we not allow the terrors of the USSR be told as it will “create another Stalin?” I refer you to my previous two answers.
Yet, Ben Shapiro is proud he treats information about a mass shooter the same way he treats information about the corruption of an Israel Prime Minister. This is because Ben believes his readers are simply not smart enough to understand mass shootings are wrong and believe any information he gives out will lead to them committing a mass shooting. Don’t believe me, he says just as much:
It has become increasingly clear in recent years that the value of public knowledge regarding specific names and photographs of mass shooters is significantly outweighed by the possibility of encouraging more mass shootings.
Ignorance is Strength!
Studies suggest that media coverage of mass shootings can have a significant impact on the psyches of potential mass shooters — that such potential mass shooters have a cognitive craving for attention, which they know they will receive for committing atrocities.
Can I just say, if you think your readers will murder because you inform them of a murder that is way more insulting to your readers than anything your opponents have said.
We will still report the backgrounds of mass shooters, biographical details, the type of weapons used in such shootings, how such weapons were obtained, and other details that could make a difference in the public debate with regard to policymaking.
Without a name, how are you suppose to fact check it? FBI documents include names for a reason. But I guess us proles must just rely on whatever it is The Daily Wire tells us what is true about the shooter. Censoring information is evil, telling you it’s for your own good is manipulative.
While I was unable to get the full manifesto — I guess my IQ just wasn’t high enough to understand murder is wrong — sources from both sides made it clear it was heavily right wing, as well as full of references to online culture.
Before I go over this next part, it should be noted this man is more than likely insane. Here’s an exert from a section about why he became an extremist:
Spyro the Dragon 3 taught me ethno-nationalism. Fortnite trained me to be a killed and to floss on the corpses of my enemies.
Some think this is a false flag against the right, I think that’s idiotic. Charles Manson said he was inspired to do what he did because of the Beatles song “Helter Skelter.” Does that mean he was just a false flag against the Beatles? Of course not.
Therefore, when he also blames right-wing commentator Candace Owens, I take it with a grain of salt. However, in his manifesto he does say the following:
Yet, reading Candace Owen’s response on twitter makes it clear she may not even know this part exists:
FACT: I’ve never created any content espousing my views on the 2nd Amendment or Islam.
Then she declared it racist:
“Black people don’t have to be Democrats” now means…mosque shootings in New Zealand?
This clearly won’t stick but damn if I won’t grow #BLEXIT highlighting your sheer desperation.
Then she had an episode on Twitter:
-Brazilian mining dam collapse
-Chinese air smog
-Tenerife air crash disaster 1973
-Sinking of the RMS Titanic, 1912
In case any of you leftist lunatics want to get a jump on next week.
I recall her also threatening to sue (a habit of hers) but it seems she deleted that tweet.
I end you with this, if those who trade freedom for security get neither, what does one who trades information for security get?