We now know, according to CNN, “an Army veteran who neighbors say played in a far-right punk band was the lone shooter in the rampage at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin that killed six people and wounded four, according to information Monday from law enforcement authorities.”
And pictures of 40 year old Wade Michael Page are now circulating on the internet, showing him posing in front of a swastika and stories have surfaced of his involvement in white supremacist groups while hoping for a “racial holy war”.
The media has asked: Did he mean to kill Sikhs? Did he confuse them with another religious group?
I ask: Does this really matter? Is this actually the question we need to be asking?
No. Of course not.
It is another horrific tragedy, impossible to comprehend from afar. As such, we rely on the media to help us understand. To make sense of that which makes little. To explain. Such understanding then helps us move on., hopefully a bit better for it.
So, why has the media lost interest in this story so quickly?
After all, we had round the clock coverage of the shooting in Aurora Colorado for nearly two weeks.
Three days following the Wisconsin shooting, The Washington Times website’s main page has six Romney stories, coverage of the London Olympics and NOT ONE SINGLE HEADLINE regarding the shooting in Wisconsin.
Some other examples:
The New York Times has one story, buried far down the page, with the angle that the shooter was fueled by hate driven music.
The Washington Post leads with Romney’s fundraising prowess. They do mention the shooting a little further down with the claim that “anti-hate groups had been tracking the shooter for years.”
At least USA Today leads with it, calling the shooter a Neo Nazi musician.
For their part, CNN still features the story prominently on their website, but also is focusing on the hate-group angle now.
I sense a theme here.
A lone wolf, bent on psychotic racial supremacy. End of story. Move on folks, nothing more to see here.
But then, CNN also goes as far as to say that these latest two shootings have “reignited the gun debate in the US.”
Not according the coverage noted above. Reading that, you’d think the NRA had written for each media outlet, under the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” mantra.
Nice try CNN. Lip service to the real issue. The issue non-existent in the current coverage.
Both recent shooters were mentally unstable. So again I ask, why the different angle now? Is the media bored covering large scale issues?
Let’s hope not with an election looming.
I have already written at length about the sorry lack of leadership shown by both President Obama and Mitt Romney on this issue following the Aurora shootings. Following this post and after considerable pressure from the media, President Obama did venture slightly toward leadership as I noted here. Mitt Romney has offered little of substance, which is no surprise.
No debate. No bold thoughts. No leadership on guns. Still.
I see a theme here as well, and I don’t like it much either.
Neither should you.
- Walt Wawra Goes to Canada Without His Gun And Lives
- Wait! Maybe It Is Mitt Romney Who is Reading The…
- Is President Obama Reading The Wary Lemming?
- Buyers flock to gun stores in Colorado after rampage
- Ebert: Seen This Movie Before
- Gunman Kills And Injures Many More In Denver
- Sandy Hook Elementary School, December 14, 2012