This is rather rambling, but I can't figure out how to organize it, as it is just the jumble of my thoughts over the shootings in Arizona.
What is your opinion of the situation? I'm hearing people say "Don't make it political," or "Don't blame the media," or "Consider it a random act of violence."
Random act of violence: But it wasn't, apparently, random.
Blaming the media: I think the media makes a lot of situations worse by the rhetoric they spout on a regular basis. This morning I heard someone say the media didn't do anything to convince him to do what he did, but I kinda think they do.There are certain media groups or individuals that don't say "Go shoot someone," but they do say things that are negatively inciting about groups or individuals they don't like or who have different opinions. I hear things from both extremes that are antagonistic toward other opinions or views. Let's face it, when anyone, including you and me, "talk down" a person or group, we tend to use language, intonation, etc. that is inflammatory. I think it is pretty much human nature to do so. And why do we do that? Because we want to convince people to see things our way, agree with us, and thereby validate our opinions. What many in the media don't get is that their words are taken seriously by some people. I'm not talking about seriously inspiring thought for debate, but seriously taken as "gospel." IMO, that is downright scary.
Is it political: I don't know. I haven't heard anything that says this shooter had a political motive. Keep in mind I avoid most "news" from the media, however, so I may not have heard all the "news" about this incident. I have concern, however, about the probability that politics fit in here some way. There are soo many things that are politically influenced. Hells-bells, friendships are impacted with the political trash that is e.v.e.r.y.w.h.e.r.e these days!! I really wish we could turn the clock back and have political discussions without hubris and acrimony.
And then I found this video on FB. It says a lot. BTW, if Jon Stewart turns you off, please watch/listen, anyway. It is really neutral, thoughtful, and worth the listen.
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c|
|Arizona Shootings Reaction|
And I found this article at http://hotword.dictionary.com/:
After the tragic Arizona shooting, the word “vitriol” was everywhere in the news. What is its literally dangerous meaning?
After Saturday’s shocking attack on Arizona lawmaker Gabrielle Giffords and a crowd of bystanders, an unusual word proliferated through all forms of media. Shortly after the shooting tragedy, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik cited “vitriolic rhetoric” as a potential source for the violence.
This article is not about politics or the relationship of media and violence in American culture. The topic at hand, of course, is “vitriol.” What is it?
Vitriol is an old-fashioned name for one of the most dangerous chemicals you can find: sulfuric acid. This substance is incredibly corrosive, meaning it eats away other substances due to chemical reactions. When sulfuric acid meets water, it produces an exothermic reaction, meaning that the chemical reaction with water produces heat. Reactions between the two are responsible for many horrific burns.
The acid is so corrosive that, even in diluted form, a drop of it will burn through a piece of paper. Medieval chemists named this substance vitriol after the Latin vitrium, “of glass.” In solid forms, sulfur compounds can have a glass-like appearance (like the image of crystallized copper sulfate above.)
Vitriol has been used poetically to refer to harsh speech since the 1700s. Sheriff Dupnik’s remarks are not the first time that the caustic word has been used to describe recent political discourse. In April, 2010, President Obama referred to some politically-themed talk shows as vitriol.Oh, and here's one more interesting read about it: NPR
What'd ya think?