Every time we look at the newspaper headlines, visit our favourite news site, watch TV or listen to the radio, we are reminded what an increasingly violent and scary place our world is becoming. Gang shootings, mysterious plane crashes and disappearances, vandalism, murder suicides, bombings, state or “rebel” military actions, beheadings, home invasions, car crashes, the list goes on and on. It’s obvious isn’t it? The world is just a mean, scary place.
As part of our unit, Critical Thinking and the Media, our class examines this issue by studying the Mean World Syndrome, a Media Education Foundation documentary, narrated by Michael Morgan, that outlines some of the work of George Gerbner a professor of communication particularly prominent in the 1990’s but deceased as of 2005. Gerbner’s work dispelled the simple and widely accepted notion that media violence led viewers to commit increased acts of violence. Instead, his research showed that the relationship was more complicated. He found that the increasing reporting of violence in newscasts, the advent of more and more sources of news and the increasing amount of graphic violence in entertainment, was causing viewers or consumers of the media to view the world as an increasingly violent or mean place. As viewers perceive the world to be more and more terrifying, they have greater concerns for their security and are more willing to take steps that lead them to feel safer and more secure in their own environment. Examples like support for greater toughness on crime, the need for owning a gun, less questioning of the rights and responsibilities of security forces that protect us and many others come to mind. Interestingly, Gerbner and more recent sources like Michael Shermer argue that in fact our world is becoming significantly less violent. That century over century and decade over decade we lead a much safer existence than we did in the past.
A Clip From The Mean World Syndrome
When this is combined with what we learned from Dan Gilbert in his 2005 TED Talk, Why We Make Bad Decisions, we start to understand the enormity and complexity of the problems with mass media. If humans are bad at estimating risk and at the same time the media is bombarding us with all the things that we have to fear, you can see how this would easily lead to some even worse decision-making. It is easy to understand that many would be far more concerned about the threat of a home invasion or a terrorist attack than simply buckling up their seat belt when they rush off to grab some milk, or watching their toddler a little more carefully around the inflatable pool.
Dan Gilbert: Why We Make Bad Decisions
In Michael Shermer’s new book, The Moral Arc: How Science and Reason Lead Humanity toward Truth, Justice, and Freedom, in addition to emphasizing the importance of science and reason in making sense of our increasingly complex world, he has a section on terrorism which he excerpted in the most recent edition of Skeptic magazine titled Myths of Terrorism. This article which I shared with our class, argues that terrorism induces far more fear that it should, because it is less effective than we think and far less prevalent than the media would have us believe. In fact, he documents the superiority of non-violent strategies in the past and currently, in effecting political change and reforms. A similar article was written by Shermer for Scientific American in 2013.
The Five Myths of Terrorism – Including That It Works
After the students had read the article, I asked each of them to come up with one or two study/discussion questions that we could use in a subsequent class. Here are a few:
1. What are the political benefits of propagating terrorism myths?
2. Do terrorists really recognize the consequences of their actions or are they manipulated to believe they are doing “good?”
3. Do governments who promote the fear of terrorism and their citizens’ need for protection, promote the apparent success of terrorists?
4. If it can be shown that violent strategies for political change seldom work, why do some groups continue to resort to violence?
5. Now that Canada’s Bill C-51 has passed, do you think that more non-violent and widespread action should be taken against it?
These are some of the great questions we will be discussing in our next class. What do you think?
Enjoy the links.