Ryan claims that he likes Rage’s sound, but not the lyrics. Well, I don’t care for Paul Ryan’s soundorhis lyrics. He can like whatever bands he wants, but his guiding vision of shifting revenue more radically to the one percent is antithetical to the message of Rage.
I wonder what Ryan’s favorite Rage song is? Is it the one where we condemn the genocide of Native Americans? The one lambasting American imperialism? Our cover of “Fuck the Police”? Or is it the one where we call on the people to seize the means of production? So many excellent choices to jam out to at Young Republican meetings!
Don’t mistake me, I clearly see that Ryan has a whole lotta “rage” in him: A rage against women, a rage against immigrants, a rage against workers, a rage against gays, a rage against the poor, a rage against the environment. Basically the only thing he’snotraging against is the privileged elite he’s groveling in front of for campaign contributions.
The definitive clip on how the media should handle mass murderers.
At least it is in my opinion. Watch til the end for the payoff. (It’s only 2:48)
It’s true that these crimes have to be reported; we don’t want to be left in the dark. But it’s not true that they have to be pumped up into a big story or given wall-to-wall coverage on CNN. In Denver, it’s a huge story. But in the UK?
What bothers me most about the coverage of these things is the atmosphere of excitement that creeps in. The tone should be business-like, informational, the voice of someone resigned to the fact that crimes like this happen but determined to deny the killer any hint of glamour. An excess of sobriety to frustrate his craving for notoriety.
This is also true for print and digital media. My Twitter feed turned into an tragedy industrial complex, offering tidbits that are seemingly mundane, yet captivating. Red hair! Application for guns obtained legally! And I wonder if post-Columbine, post-Oklahoma City, post-9/11, media enthusiasts and Internet denizens and TV news watchers are both disgusted and enthralled by these types of tragedies, as they are news outside of the norm, a hot flash in the media pan. And one of the ways of dealing with a dialectic tension such as disgust and enthrall is to post, or air, endlessly about it. Then again, if we’re living in, as McLuhan says, a global village, then it does matter, doesn’t it? A village takes care of one another, especially in times of tragedy. Shouldn’t we want all the information that’s given to us by the media?
Yes, this, all of this. The media shouldn’t be fueling more crime.
The media gives us what we demand. If there was no payoff for them, coverage would change. If our media wasn’t all corporate-owned, it would look very different.
Coverage of these tragedies should focus on the victims, not the murderer. Also prevention. Nobody knows the “why” of these rampages, because they are not rational acts. Focus should be on preventing future violence.
Focusing on the murderer and turning them into a sort of folk anti-hero is not only the most despicable kind of voyeurism, but it lets other unbalanced people know that if they do something like this then they will get attention. They know that they will be remembered, perhaps long beyond the individual victims (Who recognizes the name Alex Teves? Now who recognizes the name James Holmes?).
What we saw in Aurora was the direct exploitation of our fascination with violence and spectacle: the killer chose a highly-anticipated cultural event and aligned himself with an iconic character from that franchise to try and maximize his impact. If we really want to understand how this happens, we must look at ourselves. The public deserves to know about acts mass violence, and I hope public awareness will turn into action against violent crime. However, we need to focus on the victims and the system that brought us here, not the person who committed the crimes.
Slavery in America was clearly harmful and wrong to the people who lived under it, but it proved to be the unintended transmission belt that brought Africans into the orbit of Western freedom,” he wrote.
if an Army medic serving in Afghanistan is raped and becomes pregnant, she can’t use her military health plan to pay for an abortion. If she does decide to get an abortion, she will have to pay for it with her own money. And if she can’t prove she was raped—which is difficult before an investigation is completed—she may have to look for services off base, which can be dangerous or impossible in many parts of the world.