I was not going to go there, but I changed my mind.[1] The assassination attempt on Saturday happened while I was in a movie (Fly Me to the Moon, not bad, and the costumes were pitch perfect). My husband leaned over and said someone took a shot at Trump during a rally. My first thought was “Holy crap.” I grew up in the 80s and remember well when Reagan was shot. I’ve always held the thought in the back of my mind that being a politician is dangerous, and that running for office means you kind of know you might get shot by some wacko trying to impress Charles Manson or Jodie Foster (who is a lesbian, so read the room buddy). Over the last 8 years, even being a poll worker or married to a politician is also dangerous. We live in a heated moment.
Pretty quickly, the commentary about this event went from Kumbaya to WTF. I was actually somewhat touched by the fact that Biden and Trump spoke on the phone, and that Biden’s remarks in the immediate aftermath were pretty solid, although I still think he sounds like he plans to dodder his way into a lost election which doesn’t thrill me. Trump’s initial remarks were also not bad, and I understand that he toned down his speech for the RNC (apparently Vance didn’t get that memo). Since then, well, things are quickly slinking back into the usual rat-infested partisan corners. I doubt the detente will be long-lived. I’m also not convinced that this event will ultimately swing the electoral vote. Our attention spans aren’t that long, and more crazy stuff is bound to happen on the next episode of the US 2024 Presidential Election.
But I did endure a litany of trash takes about this event, and so that’s what I would love to talk about today, rating each on a scale of 1-10 (1 being eh, not that trashy, and 10 being STFU trashy).
Trump is a Hero. There were quite a few MAGAts on Twitter who said “Trump took a bullet for this country, and if you don’t vote for him you are a traitor.” Mmm ‘kay. Slow your roll there, Marjorie Taylor Greene. First of all, Trump’s ear was grazed which is honestly a terrifying thought. That’s like an inch from the old noggin. And he did quickly realize that he was fine and pivot to maximizing the moment with a raised fist and shouts of “Fight Fight Fight.” Baller move, and damn that photo deserves a Pulitzer. The phrase “he took a bullet for…” usually refers to someone in the military or maybe the police who took a bullet to protect another person. In this case, he was the target, and he wasn’t protecting anyone else. Only a seriously gone MAGA person would think that Trump is somehow protecting other people by being in this race. Trump is Trump’s priority. Getting some of his followers to see that is apparently asking too much. Take-trashiness score: 5 of 10. It’s not going to convince anyone who wasn’t already in the bag probably, but props to Trump for resilience and seizing the moment.
You Missed. This take is honestly disgusting to me and beneath dignifying with further discussion. It’s completely gross to wish violence or death on another human being. Unacceptable. Plus, there were two humans killed in the process (the shooter, who was a mere kid, and a fire fighter) and two others hospitalized. Trashiness: 11 out of 10.
FAFO [2]. This is a take, mostly from the left and the never Trumpers on the right, pointing out that Trump’s own rhetoric is to blame, aka he brought this on himself. While I agree that he’s hugely guilty of employing violent rhetoric (far more than any other conservative prior to his reign and far more than anyone on the left), again, that doesn’t mean anyone has the right to shoot at him, even if he did mock Paul Pelosi for being hit in the head with a hammer. It sounds a lot like victim-blaming, even though he also was a bully to others who bragged he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and who literally took out an ad to have 5 innocent black men put to death. Trashiness: 4 out of 10. I for sure privately thought this when I heard the news, and so yes, I’m admitting to being 40% trashy. I assume we all already knew that.
Glass v. Bullet. This take is that he wasn’t hit by a bullet, just by a shard of glass from the teleprompter that was hit. I don’t know that this is totally known yet (I’m sure it will be eventually), but to me this is a difference without a distinction. The injury is minor in either case, but the peril was equally grave. Trashiness: I’ll be the Aunt Linda on this one and say “Huh??” and “Gaack! If your ear is hit, your ear is hit, and a guy right behind him was killed. The danger was still just as real.[3]
Biden Ordered It. J.D. Vance literally called for Biden to be arrested and charged for Trump being shot at, so for this trash take, I’m going to limit it to the conspiratorial version in which Biden, whom the current conservative SCOTUS just declared would be immune from prosecution for doing it, called in a hit on Trump. Trash level: 10 out of 10, but I’ll move it down to an 8 out of 10 since apparently Biden is immune, so what’s the big deal, amiright, fellas?
God Protected Trump. Where was God during all the mass shooting of schoolkids? Where was He when Trump was assaulting E. Jean Carroll? This is just one of those ridiculous things that religious people are claiming to imply that you must vote for Trump because he’s clearly the savior of mankind. They are claiming that Trump was preserved so that he will lead the nation once again as God’s warrior, and blah blah blah. I particularly appreciated one Tweet clapping back that if Trump were really God’s ordained leader, he would have actually been shot dead and then come back after three days. OK, maybe that reply was a bit extra, but also get real weirdos. Trump is no savior. Trashiness of the take: I’m going with a 9 out of 10 for blasphemy and logical fallacies. These guys are dumb (and unfortunately, this was also something Tweeted by actual Mormons), but they still get one vote, just like me.
Trump Stunt. This take is the conspiracy theory (and I even heard a few actual journalists entertaining this) that everything just didn’t make sense unless it was an inside job done as a stunt to boost Trump’s popularity. Do I agree that there were a lot of open issues that need to be investigated? Yes. Do I think that a narcissist like Trump (and basically 95% of politicians) would ever in a million years agree to have a person shoot at his head and barely miss? No way. What is he? William Tell? Also, if you’re pulling a stunt like this, you do it much much closer to the election, not 4 months ahead. Have these people never watched reality TV? Trashiness: 3 out of 10. It’s not so much trashy on a moral level. It just defies common sense.
Political Rhetoric on the Left. These people can totally get over it, IMO. If you think that pointing out the fascist leanings on the right caused this kid to take a shot at Trump, I guess the best solution is “quit pushing a fascist, authoritarian agenda.” Additionally, we don’t yet know what the kid’s motives were. He was a registered Republican, in a state where you can only vote in the Primaries if you are affiliated with a party. He had a libertarian father and a liberal mother. He had friends who wear MAGA gear. Maybe he just wanted to make a name for himself. Maybe he was mentally ill (although initial reactions didn’t show this to be obviously the case). Trashiness of the take: 7 out of 10 for the absolute gall of these people. Noticing fascism is the best way to combat fascism (even Vance compared Trump to Hitler before his miraculous MAGA conversion). If you don’t want to get indicted, don’t do crimes (or conversely, appoint partisan hack judges up and down the system). And I’m going to go on record with a weird take of my own. I’m not convinced that killing Hitler would have prevented the rise of Nazism. Maybe, maybe not. He was voted in democratically. That’s the real cautionary tale.
The Press. This is similar to the previous take, but basically takes a media twist, pointing out that journalists and networks are ratings whores who will publish the most salacious, out of context, and vitriolic rhetoric that they can possibly put out there in order to boost their viewership, damn the consequences. Trashiness: 5 out of 10. I mean, do they do this? Yes, every media outlet does to some extent. Caveat emptor. We have to be smart enough to recognize the bias of what we consume, and to question things that are contested. A twist on this one, that foreign bad actors are juicing the media narrative and exploiting algorithms with explosive language is something I totally see happening. However, I also think that the same advice applies. You have to take responsibility for your media diet, and nothing you read gives you a pass to (checks notes) commit actual murder.
Secret Service. There’s definitely got to be some reckoning with the Secret Service team. I mean, Trump does a lot of rallies in a lot of venues, and they are all going to have their own vulnerabilities. This one seems kind of ridiculous in terms of security. The kid wasn’t even inside the venue and had a clear shot. It was only sheer chance that he missed. He was taken down almost immediately. People saw him before he started shooting and pointed it out to security folks. To me, this is a totally fair criticism, despite the fact that the Secret Service acted quickly and appropriately when the shots were fired, which is their job and is also heroic. I actually know a guy who used to be in Secret Service (under both Carter & Reagan), and he told me that the asset also creates a lot of risk based on his own instructions. He said Carter was hard to protect, often wanting to wander into crowds, but Reagan made better choices that were safer. Trashiness: 1 out of 10. But if you want to make that take trashy, easy peasy. A whole bunch of right wingers immediately claimed that the real issue was that the Secret Service included DEI hires, by which they meant women. Some stated that these agents were totally unqualified, made disparaging comments about their looks, and claimed that they were too short to protect tall Trump and instead should only be protecting women. Trashiness: At least a 9 out of 10. These women are willing to jump in front of a bullet for their asset, and they are just as trained and brave as men doing the job. As to the height issue, when you are a politician speaking to a crowd, you aren’t surrounded by a phalanx of agents literally blocking your head. That’s not the job.
Gun Control. Given that the right has been on a quest to roll back gun control, including for automatic weapons like the ones used in this attack and in the majority of mass shootings, this is a fair critique. The only thing I will note, though, is that the gun was legally purchased by the boy’s father, and the kid was trained in gun safety, so it wasn’t a totally reckless gun issue. Trashiness: 2 out of 10. Given the recent Trump-appointed SCOTUS decision, though, the irony gets a 6 out of 10.
Nut jobs. Honestly, this one doesn’t necessarily stand out on its own. It often goes hand in hand with the rhetoric, which we have no idea whether it contributed or not to the action. But the gist of this one is that we have an unaddressed mental health crisis in this country, and just as Jesus said to Judas “The poor ye will have always with you,” same goes with people on the fringes who are mentally unstable and might do something like this. I just don’t think you really solve it without addressing automatic weapons which are now off the table thanks to the radical SCOTUS. Trashiness of this final take: 5 out of 10. IMO, it’s not really something you can solve for directly.
This one’s my take, so therefore not trashy, but you are free to disagree. I find it completely tragic that this young person took this action. We don’t yet know why he did it, and it will be hard to figure out until the FBI releases their conclusions (they took his phone to analyze it). Young people who are under 25 have brains that are still not fully developed, and yet this one made a horrible decision that ended his own life, another person’s life, nearly ended Trump’s life, and also injured two others; we are lucky more people weren’t killed or gravely injured. It’s such a waste of human potential.
An assassination is a way to undermine democracy; so are things like gerrymandering and fascism. Instead of getting one vote (in a swing state, no less, which is even more valuable than in California or Texas), an assassin wants to have undue influence by taking a life, even if they consider that life to be a danger to the country. It’s a democracy, and we only get one vote. I don’t like the choices, but I condemn the very thought that taking a life Minority Report style is ever OK. It’s the same (unconvincing to me) justification employed by Nephi when he gives his account of killing Laban. I’m not buying it. You get one vote. So do I.
Here are some questions for you to discuss:
- Are there other trash takes you’ve heard that I missed?
- Would you rate these differently?
- Have you heard opinions shared by church members, either online or in your local ward? What are people saying?
- What’s your take on this tragic event?
Discuss.
[1] The post title is taken from the M*A*S*H episode of the same title.
[2] Gen Z for “Eff around, find out.”
[3] It honestly (don’t throw fruit) reminded me of the fact that a guy standing next to Hitler in the Beer Hall Putsch died by gunshot, but Hitler fearlessly kept marching at the front of his followers. This was when he staged his own coup, before he was jailed, and before he won the office of Chancellor by popular vote, when his movement was still in its early days and his agenda was both unknown and possibly still unformed. Totally different scenarios, but both were unflinching in the face of mortal peril. Hey, I was just in Munich. Sue me.
Wheat & Tares 
Sometimes you watch too much TV news. Life goes
Assassination attempts in the USA are more common than readily acknowledged. We usually get a story about them but if lives were not in jeopardy and no injuries occurred then we quickly move on to other headlines.
What almost all assassination attempts have in common is a lone wolf, mentally unstable person. This is the main reason why the attempts fail. The Hollywood story of a well organized terrorist outfit killing / kidnapping the American president is fortunately just a story. Go back to President Ford. In September 1975, in two incidences, two separate radicalized unstable woman tried to shoot him dead. Fortunately, they failed.
A more recent aspect of assassination attempts is the incompetency of the Secret Service. Take for example one of the attempts on Obama’s life. In November 2011, a mentally disturbed man, drove to the White House and fired shots at the building. No one knew it happened! Only after four days were bullets discovered and the investigation launched. How bizarre is that? Who knew that a person could do a drive by shooting of the White House and not initiate an immediate, emergency response?
The failures of the Secret Service are real. The security failures at the Butler PA Trump rally are inexplicable and catastrophic. I actually don’t think most Americans comprehend the magnitude of the failure. What I read is many people are clinging to conspiracy theories in order to avoid recognition that Donald Trump is only alive today due to good fortune – the opportune turn of his head just as the bullet was fired.
What happened is seemingly incomprehensible. A young man, with currently no identified motive, climbed up on a roof that provided a direct line of sight to Trump and was able to fire several shots, injuring Trump and two others and killing one rally attendee. Not only was access to the roof allowed, but a tree obscured the shooter’s position on the roof from view by snipers who were present to protect Trump. In other words, this young man was able to easily pick the perfect spot to attempt an assassination. This is not supposed to happen!
We also understand that the young man was observed minutes prior to the shooting and his unusual behavior sparked concern and reports to law enforcement. And to top it all off, we have reports that Secret Service personnel also observed the young man behaving suspiciously. And the cherry on the top is apparently Secret Service personnel occupied the building the roof of which the young man climbed.
This is all so crazy that I can understand why people turn to conspiracy. But maybe there is a simple answer. Sometimes an organization is so dysfunctional that it is simply bad at its job. We don’t want to believe that about the Secret Service – the most elite police force in America! But evidence shows the Secret Service has far to many “Keystone Kops” moments. And a sure sign of dysfunction is the leadership rushing to defend itself and absolve itself of responsibility. If no one is held responsible for failure then the persons and processes that cause failure only become more deeply engrained.
You would think this episode would make the dangers of putting assault rifles into the hands of almost anyone who wants one perfectly clear and create legislative unanimity to put a ban into place. I doubt most conservatives will see it that way.
You would think this episode would awaken Trump and his cronies somewhat more aware of the dangers of political rhetoric that encourages political violence. I doubt that is going to happen — just the opposite is likely to occur.
The biggest loser here ought to be JD Vance. The knee-jerk reaction to blame Biden shows he is totally unfit for the job of President. And Trump ought to lose points as well for choosing an unqualified sycophant for his VP, who would be the President of the Senate if Trump wins. There won’t be a Pence to save the country the next time around.
Fully agree with this statement: “Our attention spans aren’t that long, and more crazy stuff is bound to happen on the next episode of the US 2024 Presidential Election.” How about Biden resigns and Harris spends four months showing she can handle the job. That would be a game changer.
How about this take? “If Trump had been in jail where he ought to have been, this wouldn’t have happened and two people would still be alive.” I can’t remember where I heard that but I think I’d rate it 3/10 on the trashiness scale. Yes Trump should be in jail but unjailed people still shouldn’t be shot at.
Here’s my take: Whatever the circumstances that allowed this to happen, and whatever you think of Trump (I loathe him), that photo is pure gold. He looks Captain-America-level tough, fist in the air, rising above a cowering huddle of secret service, blood streaming down his face. It’s more hardcore than most action movie posters. When I saw it, I was instantly dismayed because it’s honestly so amazing and he just doesn’t deserve it.
Trump has one undeniable skill: he manipulates the media and national attention to his benefit better than anyone. This is not a good qualification to be president and yet it made him president. He had the instinct to pose in the middle of that life and death situation because he knew what it could do for him and it just might have won him the presidency again.
The trash take I keep hearing is that Biden motivated the shooter by saying in a private donor call, “I’m absolutely certain I’m the best person to be able to do that. So, we’re done talking about the debate. It’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.” It is really rich that right-wingers are seizing on this comment as evidence that Democrats promote violence in their rhetoric when they’ve ignored or laughed off the myriad instances when Trump has promoted violence, and with further-reaching ramifications, particularly on Jan. 6, 2021. Biden apologized for using the metaphor, something Trump has never done in his repeated invocations of violence. Furthermore the metaphor was clearly a metaphor not intended in any sense as a call for violence. Interpretations of this as a call for violence are hysterical overreactions that grasp at straws.
The shooter was likely psychologically troubled. But no one as of yet has remarked that they noticed any psychological trouble from him. He likely acted alone, and no evidence has emerged that the assassination attempt was part of a coordinated plot. The shooter loved gun culture and wore merchandise from gun and shooting YouTube channel Demolition Ranch. He had tried out for his high schools’ Rifle Club, but was rejected because he was a poor marksman. He was armed to the teeth and had explosive devices in his car, expecting not only to survive the assassination attempt, but to wreak more violent havoc afterwards. The Secret Service failed to prevent him from lightly wounding Trump and two others, and killing a man. But they did prevent him from inflicting more damage.
We may never know the shooter’s motive or what he listened to that may have inspired him to do this. He was probably living out some sort of twisted fantasy. As of yet, we cannot find any trail of writing that would reveal his political thoughts. The little we can glean from interviews with classmates and neighbors reveal that he was more conservative-minded. In classroom debates, he would routinely take conservative positions and hold strongly to them. He is said to have been a loner, but occasionally to have hung around people who were MAGA. His father was a registered Libertarian and his mother a registered Democrat, but neighbors recall seeing Trump signs displayed in their yard. RNC data showed that the Crooks was identified to be reliably conservative and pro-gun. He was said to be a smart guy, and at one point having been fascinated with the JFK assassination. He registered Republic a week after turning 18, and voted in the 2022 elections. He donated to ActBlue, a Democratic-supporting PAC, the day of Biden’s inauguration, in response to an email campaign, but what email and why is unclear.
If we are to impute a political motive to the shooter’s killing, left-wing or liberal ideology simply doesn’t fit the picture. Consider that 5 months ago, Alex Jones discussed with a guest how the ideal would be to assassinate Trump and then that way they could justify assassinating Biden and a long list of “deep-state” figures and also justify a larger right-wing takeover. Also consider that many in the far right do not believe Trump to be right-wing enough. Consider how the Boogaloo Boys in 2020 wanted to accelerate a race war and took to vandalism amid the BLM protests even though they were right-wing libertarians and had no affinities for BLM or its ideology. I think it is worth exploring the possibility that far right political conspiracy theories and rhetoric could have been part of what motivated Thomas Matthew Crooks to attempt to assassinate Trump. If that can be ascertained, then it would appear quite ironic that the very ideology that Trump has spent the better part of a decade fomenting almost got him killed.
I’ll just note that the weapon used in this incident is one that was once banned, by a law that was in part motivated by the Reagan assassination attempt, which seems quite ironic. My own leanings are toward better gun safety laws, but I also have heard the critiques of the so-called “assault weapons ban” (that the differences between categories of semiautomatic rifles are largely cosmetic) and I think there’s some validity to them. Also I don’t think a repeat of that ban would stand under the present court system, so this weapon isn’t getting banned any time soon. It’s here and we have to deal with that.
In that light I just want to express my utter hatred for this weapon. It was not designed for hunting or self defense or any of the other legitimate purposes for civilians to own guns. It’s a slightly watered down version of a weapon engineered for war, for killing other humans. In that light, it’s amazing to me how this weapon has become so symbolic to some gun enthusiasts. It seems that as a symbol it means a lot of different things to different people. For some it’s just their belief in gun rights, which is fine, even though I wonder why it has to be this one in particular. For some it seems to be a desirable symbol because some other people find it scary. Whatever. It it makes you feel better to have that sticker on your truck, you do you. But, for a certain set of troubled nihilistic young males of a certain age, it seems to symbolize an easily accessible sense of power and notoriety for those feeling powerless about whatever is frustrating them. It’s no accident that this same weapon is getting used over and over in mass shooting events.
For that reason this assassination attempt feels to me to belong in that category, with mass shootings, even though the death toll in this case was much smaller. Mass shootings seem to be a competition between troubled young men for notoriety, which was typically measured by the death toll, but now someone has hit upon the idea of going after someone with a high profile. I fear that this will inspire copycat violence, just as some of the most high profile mass shootings appear to have motivated copycat incidents. I hope I’m wrong.
I am avoiding most commentary on the shooting, and am not reading social media on the shooting. I have checked some news sources I consider reputable for the facts.
My take on the shooter is that he may have wanted to commit suicide by cop, or go out in a blaze of glory in a way that meant everyone knew his name. Based on what I’ve heard, he’s very similar to other mass shooters. He just picked a really high profile target.
I don’t believe this was staged or done to make one side or the other look bad.
Political violence is awful and should be avoided at all costs. I strongly condemn anyone wishing the shooter hadn’t missed. Absolutely do NOT go there. To be entirely honest, if Trump dropped dead of a heart attack, I wouldn’t grieve much. But I do not want him to be assassinated. Not at all.
I find no value in this post. While I recognize that it won’t change a thing, I don’t think a post like this belongs here. “Carry On, Garth”…..
I recently read a psychology book profiling school shooters. This guy fits that profile. So, I am 100% agreeing with Quentin above, that he wanted to do just a bit more damage than just shoot up a bunch of kids. And what is more attention getting than assassinating a candidate for President? I mean, look how famous the assassins of JFK, Martin Luther king, Robert Kennedy all are.
My first take on or reaction to this shooting was flashback to childhood and when a lady came screaming into the school lunchroom that someone shot the president. So, horror. That was when JFK was killed and such things were truly shocking and the whole nation grieved for weeks.
Many shooters have no motive other than they have been bullied and are angry at the whole world and want to hurt everybody as much as possible while getting themselves killed. School shootings become contagious, like the suicides that follow a news making suicide. The more violence is talked about and glorified, as Trump and many on the right do, and the more guns are loved just add to this environment where more violence presents itself to the as the solution to the shooter’s anger, helplessness, and self hate.
And, Trumps take on his assassination attempt is—He already has merchandise out to make money off of it. I give this take a 9 out of ten for trashiness.
Trump now selling $299 assassination attempt sneakers: 1 billion/10 on the trashiness scale.
grizzerbear: do you also go up to the sample ladies at Costco handing out free juice and say “What?! No soda??”
Hawkgrrl:
Pounding the same keys on the piano….over, and over and over again….do not make you a musician. We all now know what your hot buttons are and could write your columns for you.
Grizzerbear, definition: troll; hypocrite; someone who write comments that hit the same keys over and over again that take no effort whatsoever; wishes every blog to conform to their ideals; does not contribute to discussions; has little room for differing opinions; intolerant; arrogant; attempts to coat their aggression with humor; triggered easily by others; a fool; a time-waster; unoriginal; unable to voice differring opinions with respect; possibly a bot; a vulnerable personality masquerading as confident; emotional underdeveloped; unsophisticated; crass; grizzerbear.
I saw this on the AUSTRALIAN BC nightly news. It was the first item and took nearly 15 minutes. I thought it was staged by trump to get sympathy. Why? Shots are heard and trump ducks behind the podium. When he emerges he has a bloody ear and a streak of blood down his face. If a bullet comes from the front and hits his ear; will it splash on his face, will it look like a splatter or like it does? The secret service then rush him away but he manages to get his head and arm out to do his fist pumps, while there is still an active shooter. Would a person in shock want to do fist pumps? Would the protection squad allow him to? Then he does it again. His bandage at the convention looks more like a badge than a bandage. In a month it should not need a bandage and we will see. My thoughts alone.
The next item on the news that night was given a minute. It told us that Israel had directed a rain of American supplied missiles onto palistinian people killing 90 in the hope of killing a hamas leader.
Putting the second story in the context of the first. If Netanyau was in Bidens office and sent say 10 missiles into the crowd at the rally in the hope of hitting Trump, and killed 90 people wonding as many again, how would we all feel. Should the numbers be adjusted because there are only 2 million palistinians? Or because 40,000 have already been killed?
Biden please stop supplying weapons to Israel.
Jon Stewart made a salient observation about this event. He said rather than watching it on TV news, everyone just scrolled Twitter and social media, part of why we get these trashy takes, although social media includes snippets from news sources as well. Honestly that was also true for the insurrection on January 6, so basically this is just how we roll now. All news is personal opinion, curated to each of us.
Hawkgrrrl,
The news business has been evolving since humans learned to communicate. Your mention of Jon Stewart and TV /mainstream news makes me thing of the “Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect”. Gell-Mann was a Nobel Physicists who observed the dissonance people have in processing information. He remarked, perhaps even criticizing himself, that a person can read a newspaper and notice a story that is 100% wrong. The person knows the article is wrong because the person is expert on the topic. The person will then turn the page and read another story and accept that story’s claims as completely valid.
In short, “Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect” describes the phenomenon of a person believing the news on topics outside of their field of knowledge even after recognizing that articles and reports published by the same operation that are within the expert’s field of expertise are error-ridden. In the case of Jon Stewart, he famously shredded the mainstream news narrative that Covid did not originate from a Wuhan lab. So he believes the media is wrong about that, but he will still treat the mainstream news as credible?
Mainstream journalism does serve a useful purpose. It shows us the preferred narrative and bias of the corporate media. It gives the public a common reference point on a story. This narrative may be completely wrong. Or it may be mostly correct but with gaps and holes. But at least the public knows what this common, corporate, narrative is.
Social media certainly allows trashy takes. It grants every person a soapbox to give an opinion and many times those opinions are baseless. But is social media worse than the mainstream media? It can be. Social media can propagate error in ways traditional media cannot. On the other hand, intelligent consumption of social media is empowering as it can circumvent the biases and errors inherent in traditional media. And let us not blind ourselves to the reality that we have constant examples of the mainstream media reporting news that proved completely wrong if not intentionally biased.
One of the best critical assessments of the “news business” is the 1981 movie “Absence of Malice”. A fantastic commentary on the film is on YouTube – search for “absence of malice retrospective video”. One of the tag lines from the movie is “everything reported was accurate, none of it was true.” Did we not see exactly this from the reporting on the Trump rally? Various news outlets immediately reported, “Shots fired at Trump rally, Trump falls down.” 100% accurate. None of it true to the reality of what really happened!
Sometimes social media isn’t trashy, but can be a unique resource that brings understanding untouched by a middleman like corporate news.
One of my favorite Instagram accounts that I follow is Pete Souza, who was the official photographer to the Obama White House. During those terms of office, he was careful about his photojournalism, and took the dignity of the office seriously in the way he documented a visual record of a historic presidency. He rose above the political fray as much as he possibly could. At the same time, he was very open with the public, and curated a timeline with his Instagram account. When Trump was inaugurated, he stopped posting to the IG and retitled it as an archive, but it remains public online. His current IG account is more personal, and sometimes he’ll repost an image from the archive. So yeah, I find that fascinating and not a bit trashy.
I continue to follow because I’m a photo nerd, and I enjoy learning how he manages his vast digital content, and also observing his take on photojournalism in American government.
Earlier this week Souza posted about the four photogs in the buffer zone (up close to the dais) at Trump’s Butler PA rally. The post was a single image from Anna Moneymaker of Getty Images, with his analysis why her photo better represented what happened, instead of the photo of the defiant fist in the air that went global. Which also was a very good photo. He mentioned each of the four by name, with due respect for their work, but only @anna.money was tagged. So I did a deep dive to find their IGs to see what they had, and was well rewarded.
Each of them have posted the best multiple images (IG limits multiples to 10) on their personal instagram pages, and it was better to look at the raw images than to hear/read a dozen news reports. My initial impression right after the incident, like some, was a cynical suspicion that the bloody ear was staged. But Doug Mills (NYTimes) (whose fist pump photo went viral,) also got an image showing the bullet as a long line whizzing past Trump’s head. Mills also has a thoughtful video I found, where he talks about the incident. I ended up making a story about it, tagging the photogs for my friends convenience. One of the 4 thanked me for it.
So I’ll try to post some images in a different comment. Because a picture is worth a thousand words. And the ones you’ve seen don’t show everything.
Also, I’m agreed with Janey. I want Trump to go away, but not like that, not ever.