Ask the Reader: Reacting to Terrorism
Marc Lynch tweeted a key question:
"So far much less collective freakout over Times Square failed bombing better than over X-Mas failed bombing -- learning?"
The question would then be who is learning what?
- Are media outlets learning that over-playing a terrorist incident is a bad idea? That it does not help in ratings? Or are they merely distracted by the oil spill?
- Are politicians learning not to play politics with these things? Perhaps. Did anyone really win or lose after the Christmas incident? Obama certainly spoke out faster, perhaps pre-empting any criticism.
- Is the public learning? Are we getting inured to these events?
I really have no clue. I do think it is too early to tell about a great many things--not just who is responsible but the political dynamics within the US. Again, attention is now focused on the Gulf, which is probably appropriate because visible government efforts are needed here. In NYC, we need and will get a serious investigation. The next big moment will be when the government leaks or releases its identification of suspects--foreign or domestic? AQ inspired or extreme right wing?
So, readers, why are we not freaking out about this event, given how many of us have wandered through Times Square?
1 comment:
Perhaps it's because we don't know for sure who did it. There's a well-known racial/religious bias (the two being conflated, of course) in reporting on acts of terrorism. For an example, compare Andrew Joseph Stack III with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. If the media had a face that wasn't white and a name that sounded Muslim, we'd probably have much more intense coverage of that issue compared with the oil spill, both from the media and from opportunistic politicians. Indeed, so far the "person of interest" on the video taken from the scene is white, which doesn't fit the narrative that, to be a terrorist, one must be a foreign, non-white Muslim.
Post a Comment