News sources play on tensions, emotions to increase hype surrounding attack
Trayvon Martin is the name on the tip of America’s tongue. Our own president expressed his sentiments on the situation, and the Black Panthers put out a $10,000 reward for the capture of George Zimmerman, the man whom many have accused of killing Martin in cold blood. It seems as though the entire nation has mobilized itself against a specific image of Zimmerman, one in which the facts of the incident are presented as a racially induced hate crime perpetuated against an innocent young man at the hands of a racist. But polarizing events such as these further emphasize the necessity of skepticism.
The unfortunate fact about humans is that we are gullible. People are suckered into Ponzi schemes, too-good-to-be true medical hoaxes and dangerous self-destructive cults. It is a bad idea to trust yourself totally to believe you have it “all figured out.” When emotions are involved, it is critical not to allow your prejudice and fears cloud your judgment.
America is capitalistic, which means news corporations must necessarily gain readers to stay in business. Get people talking about something like a race-induced hate crime and you’ve got a great recipe for a month’s worth of revenue with hundreds of thousands of readers or viewers hanging on any new detail or opinion column that comes out. The newspapers have absolutely sensationalized this event and in a majority of cases have presented a one-sided story.
For example, Zimmerman is not entirely white; he is the son of a Peruvian mother and a non-Latino father. Yet in a majority of newspaper publications Zimmerman’s “whiteness” is the focal point of his race. Zimmerman speaks Spanish, has African-American family members and even mentored African-American children. Zimmerman’s father stated, “The media portrayal of George as a racist could not be further from the truth.” Details such as these are rarely present in front-page articles.
Multiple witnesses have also corroborated Zimmerman’s recounting of events with Martin as the aggressor. The anonymous witness, identified as “John,” reported seeing Zimmerman on the ground in a red sweater, being pummeled in the head by Martin. Yet no one seems to want to say these things or talk about them.
Do I, or does anyone else, know what really happened? No. And that is where we should comfortably stop ourselves, relying on skepticism until the truth comes out. Is it right to be outraged at a race-fueled hate crime? Absolutely. Is that what happened, or is the media sensationalizing the facts it wants to focus on? Have news sources left proper rational judgment by the wayside for the benefit of a few extra bucks? In the spirit of that same skepticism, I’ll let you decide.
More Like This
In Brief: 10/20/15
By Patrick Ingraham | Oct. 19, 2015#blacklivesmatter cofounder Alicia Garza discusses pain, progress
By Eleanor Mooney | Sep. 15, 2015