Wednesday, August 8, 2012
#8: Shooting at Oak Creek
Last Sunday, there was a shooting at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin. The news reporting on the event has been fairly limited, and this editorial suggests some reasons why. What is the author's main point? Do you agree with him? Why are people paying less attention to the more recent shooting, and could this lead to problems?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I make out two valid concerns in this authors editorial. One is to draw attention to the fact that its hard to care about or pay attention to things that don't happen in or near your society. If it doesn't affect you, someone you know or are related to, your country, or your everyday life, people don't pay as much attention or care as much. The other concern is that it is also a possibility that in our society racism may have something to do with the lack of comments and outrage on this shooting. I do agree with the author in this sense. It is an ongoing problem that I can see.
ReplyDeleteOne main reason i can see that people are paying less attention to the more recent shooting is that a general member of the public (at least in the US) can't imagine or picture themselves being in a Sikh temple as much as they can imagine or picture being at a theater watching a batman movie and being shot at and killed. It's less terrifying or shocking if you can't picture yourself in the same situation.
It's difficult to call this a problem. calling it a problem is not the right word. It's just sad people are self-absorbed in the way that if something doesn't affect their lives they don't care about it.
The author's main point is that Americans are overlooking something that changes and destroys societies. People aren't as sympathetic towards the Sikh shooting because they don't understand what is going on. The author is worried why people are more worried about the random shooting instead of the racial shooting. The racial shooting emulates the racial dilemmas that have had a destructive effect on society in the past. The random shooting, while horrible, has never become a true threat to our country and society.
ReplyDeleteI fully understand why people are thinking like this, however, I don't agree with it. While it is easier to fear something that can easily happen to you (like a random shooting), the racial shooting represents a hate that we have fought against for a long time. People have demonstrated an intolerance towards racial violence, and this is no different. If people begin to stop giving attention to violence like this, then it may lead to racial violence like this to being explained away as the "norm" and nothing else.
The Author is pointing out that America is focusing on the wrong issues with regards to danger. As a society we tend to latch onto random acts of violence, rather than continuing and escalating violence between different groups. While random violence is more terrifying on a psychological level (Someone I’ve never seen before might be about to shoot me for no apparent reason) it is generally less of a threat. As the author said, continuing violence between groups tends to escalate. As this continues, it will draw more people into the conflict and cause more damage to people and society.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the author on why it has received less media attention, but I also believe there is more to it than he brings up .I believe we tend to sympathize with similar people, and many more people can imagine themselves watching Batman than can picture themselves in a Sikh Temple. I also think it has to do with the tactics many news organizations use to gain readers. People are far more likely to read an article about why the shooting at a movie happened (a movie which they and many friends/family members may have seen) than they are to read about a shooting at a temple of a small religion which they probably have little to no contact with. I think this may lead to problems of continuing violence which people will not notice until it is a huge issue.
The author suggests that we are overlooking the Oak Creek shootings and the dangerous fallout that could come along with it. He gives us many reasons as to why we haven’t paid so much attention, and I agree with all that he says. I think that, as Wright said, that we haven’t seen as much Oak Creek coverage because most people cannot identify with those victims as easily as they can with the Aurora shootings; and thus the media has kept coverage down. Although the Aurora shootings were tragic, the Oak Creek murders have a bigger chance of lighting a racial spark that could grow into a dangerous fire. As people, we tend to zone in on the things that hit closer to home, which is not necessarily a good thing.
ReplyDeleteThe media’s job, in addition to providing the people with news, is to draw viewers. If they got the feeling people didn’t concern themselves with one issue and were focusing on another instead, then of course they’ll cover the latter more frequently. We cannot fault the media for not writing stories that will go unread, but we can fault ourselves for missing the importance of the Oak Creek shootings. I'd consider that another reason why we've seen much less coverage than the issue deserves.
The author of this editorial points out the reasoning behind why we as Americans tend to focus on the wrong topic or issue when it comes to our danger and safety. He describes that we are overlooking the Oak Creek shootings because we cannot relate to it as much as we can with the Aurora shooting thus keeping the media coverage to a minimum. Even though the Oak Creek shooting was a racial act, we tend to draw our attention more towards the Aurora shooting because we can actually picture ourselves being in a movie theatre watching batman rather than in a Sikh Temple.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what the author is saying in terms of less media attention but we also have to think about why that is. I think the reasoning behind it is because of us; the people of our country. The media covers stories based on the popularity of the topic because they’re all about drawing viewers in. Since we tend to relate and sympathize with the people of Aurora of course we’re going to be drawn in more to that story and media coverage rather than the Sikh Temple.
The author of this editorial is pointing out that America isn't taking the Oak Creek shootings as seriously as one needs to, and that this ignorance could lead into something worse. And after reading the editorial, i must say that i agree with about everything the author has said. He states that America is more concerned with the shooting in the theater in Colorado because of the "randomness" of it and that more people can relate to the deaths at the theater as many go to the movies. This contrasts to the Oak Creek shooting as it was targeted to a specific group, the Sikh, who were at the temple. And since more people can relate themselves watching Batman than being in a Sikh temple, the media will tend to offer more coverage of the Colorado shooting than the Oak Creek shooting.
ReplyDeleteIt is the job of the media, as Moriah said, to draw viewers and i don't blame them for the amount of coverage they have put on regarding the Colorado shooting as compared to the Oak Creek shooting, but it should not slip from one's mind that the Oak Creek shooting isn't as important, if not more important than the one in Colorado. I do agree that the Oak Creek shooting can lead to more problems in the long run as it was a racial killing, as opposed to random people dying. And as the author said, this is the type of issue (racial) that can truly destroy a society, as hate can build up until something worse erupts, as history can prove. Yes, both shootings were tragic and they should both be covered a lot, but one, the Oak Creek shooting in this case, can lead into something worse in the future, and I only wish more people could see that.
The author tries to illustrate the potential violence each action has. The Aurora shooting while very violent cannot lead to an escalation. He says random acts of violence cannot accelerate because “there's no group to retaliate against in the first place.” He goes on to illustrate the potential cycle that hate acts, such as the shooting in Oak Creek, against a certain ethnicity can have. That cycle leads to increased terrorism and more hate acts.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately the author is correct. The aurora shooting represents a completely random act that in and of itself is terrifying, however the Oak Creek shooting represents a bigger overall threat. The lack of media attention given to Oak Creek could have several explanations. As the author explains many people can see themselves in the theater watching batman but many aren’t Sikhs so they don’t relate as well. Another explanation is that hearing news about a man who is practically insane is one thing but hearing about a person who is so prejudiced that he murders people is another. We all experience prejudice and most would just rather not be reminded of that aspect of humanity.
The author’s main point is that Oak Creek shootings aren’t getting nearly as much coverage as the Aurora shootings, and that this lack of coverage shows a frightening trend of ignoring the growing threats of homegrown terrorism. I agree with almost all of the reasons the author offers as to why we lack coverage on Oak Creek. As he points out, it’s much easier for the vast majority of the population to identify with the Aurora shootings; we can all see ourselves being in a theater for a movie premier, yet most of us can’t relate to a Sikh temple. Although being able to relate is definitely on reason why the Aurora shootings are getting more coverage, another, possibly greater explanation, is the sensationalism of the media. In a society centered around 30 second sound bites and hooking viewers in, shock value is incredibly important. The Aurora shootings command a larger shock value for a few reasons. Firstly, it was essentially random, and there wasn’t much that could have been done to prevent it. Second, the Aurora shootings happened first, and thus were had the undivided attention of the media, whereas the Oak Creek shootings fell under Aurora’s shadow. Finally, James Holmes was a much more shocking killer. As bad as it may sound, Wade Page is exactly the type of person we expect when we hear that there was racial violence.
ReplyDeleteObviously it’s unrealistic to ask the general public to try to empathize with a religious group most of them probably know nothing about, but that doesn’t mean it should be ignored. There is a very fine line between ignorance and apathy, and treading that line is what leads to more of this type of violence. The biggest issue here is the public becoming desensitized to racial attacks like the one in Oak Creek. If that should ever happen, we could easily see a return to the racial tensions of the 50s and 60s.
The author’s main point is that the Sikh temple shooting is as scary as the shooting in Aurora. I agree with him because any shooting would be frightening in my opinion, but people are more intimidated by the Aurora shooting since they can relate to it. Almost everyone goes to the cinemas and a shooting could happen at any theater in the world. As the author pointed out, not many people in the United States are Sikhs or know of anyone who practices Sikhism, which makes it harder for people to relate.
ReplyDeletePeople are not paying attention to the more recent shooting for a few reasons. One possible reason is the Olympic coverage. When the Olympics come on, it seems as if everyone focuses on the athletic events for the two weeks. Another possible reason is the Aurora shooting. The other shooting had more casualties and the ongoing trial take more of the media time. This could lead to problems because some people could assume that they could attack an ethnic group without media attention.
When James Holmes walked into the theater that day, he did not point his gun at just a certain race or religion. When Wade Page walked in to that temple he only killed people of one religion. We are sympathetic to the random act of violence but for those of us, who aren’t Sikh, we can’t relate. As Billy pointed out, it is easy to point fingers at an insane man and judge him but we are all guilty of being prejudiced at some point. I have never been a Muslim walking through an airport, knowing everyone is profiling me so I can’t sympathize with him. It is the same with the Oak Creek story. But is a Sikh decides to retaliate against a white person, it will be all over the news because as the others mentioned above, the news picks stories that people will read and many people would read that because they sympathize with it.
ReplyDeleteThe main point is while the Aurora shooting was tragic, it wasn't directed at a particular race, religion, or culture like the Oak Creek shooting was. Because of that, a bigger issue can result from it - "destroying social fabric", and I agree with him.
ReplyDeleteBecause Wade Page narrowed down his target to a culture that most Americans are clueless about, it's hard to sympathize with them over the Aurora shooting. As the author said, "They can imagine their friends and relatives--and themselves--being at a theater watching a batman movie; they can't imagine being in a Sikh temple." It's understandable, especially since the media is realizing this and covering more on Aurora, but I do believe this is a problem. People do not simply forget discrimination against them.
The author is annoyed that the Sikh temple shooting received little interest from Americans, while the “Batman” shooting received much. I agree that people seem to be ignoring the shooting that crossed ethnic lines and which could cause more turmoil.
ReplyDeleteI can see the author’s perspective; I understand his main reason for the lack of attention to the temple shooting. Most weekends, people are sitting in a movie theater, but rarely people are sitting in a Sikh Temple. There is not the personal connection with the Sikh Temple shooting that there is with the movie theater shooting. I do not think people should ignore a shooting to begin with, but it is understandable that Americans will focus less on a shooting that they believe will not endanger them. They forget that hate crimes like this cause tension that results in wars which will affect everyone, like Thomas M. said.
I believe the ignorance of people when it came to the Sikh Temple shooting will cause future disturbances. The fact that this shooting occurred and that there was not massive attention leads me to think that people will perform other hate crimes based on elements like race or religion.
The author is trying to explain how little attention the Oak Creek shooting recieved while the shooting at Oak Creek could have more of an effect later than the Aurora shooting. Although the "Batman shooting" was very tragic, the Oak Creek shooting could lead to a much worse aftermath. I agree with what the writer says about how people could relate better to the Aurora shooting than the Oak Creek shooting. Anybody can be shot in a theater but only Sikhs can be killed at a Sikh temple. It is very sad that the Oak Creek shooting recived less attention than what the event could amount to. I agree with the writer's irritation at the fact that sometihng as equally, if not worse, terrifying as the Aurora shooting was not reported on as much. The Oak Creek Shooting could lead to conflict between two groups down the road and it could be a serious concern. Many reasons contributed to why people paid less attneiton to the shooting. Bigger news and stories out weighed the shooting, people are still recovering from the Aurora shooting, and not many people can relate to it. Future conflict needs to be prevented or a serious problem could errupt.
ReplyDeleteThe author of this editorial is trying to show how the lack of coverage and attention the Oak Creek shooting received is potentially a major problem in our society. The Oak Creek shooting, by numbers, was not as severe as the Batman shootings, but it may have been more severe by the process behind it. James Holmes was one man with extreme psychological issues, but Wade Page was a man from a group of many more who are harboring hatred against minorities. I agree with the author that more attention should have been given to this shooting in order to expose something that could be growing within these neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups. Holmes' one, random act of violence was not targeted and can't bring about a retaliation by a specific group of people. But Wade Page's actions could do that, even though it is unlikely, as the author pointed out.
ReplyDeletePeople are probably paying less attention to this shooting because it was not the only major news event going on at the time (the Olympics were in full swing) and it was not as threatening in the hearts of each American family. Most people can envision themselves in a situation similar to the Batman shootings, and very few can imagine why they would be in Sikh temple, just as the author pointed out. This lack of relation between the victims instantly makes it more difficult to have a connection that draws out a want to know more about the issue at hand.
The main point of this article is to explain why people responded more to the Aurora shooting rather than the Oak Creek shootings. He explained that people respond more to situations they can see themselves in. For most people, they can see themselves in a movie theater rather than a Sikh temple. So a shooting in a movie theater would naturally cause more fear than a shooting in a Sikh temple. The problem of this is a shooting dealing with ideology is more likely to cause retaliation than a random shooting. So in the long run a shooting like the one in Oak Creek could cause more violence but ironically less fear.
ReplyDeleteBoth of these incidents are extremely tragic, but the Oak Creek shootings could cause even more violence than the Aurora shootings. Usually the goal of a hate crime is to create fear in the targeted group. So when people pay attention to it, it is important that they do not create widespread fear. Yet at the same time there does need to be attention on these issues because it does need to be prevented and the people in the tragedy need to be supported.
The author of this article tries to show us that the Oak Creek shooting is in fact important as or even more important than the Aurora shooting. The shooting at Aurora was an act of random violence that scared many people in this country because it happened in a movie theater. Most people in America go to the movies, so they have something to relate to in this situation. They don’t normally go to a Sikh temple. The Aurora shooting can’t escalate because it was random. What happened at Oak Creek was directed at a group of people by a hate group. That’s why the Oak Creek shooting shouldn’t be overlooked. It could lead to more acts of violence. I think the author is trying to show us the seriousness of the Oak Creek shooting. I agree with this, if we don’t start paying attention to it and start trying to put a stop to the racism in America more acts like the one at Oak Creek could happen.
ReplyDeleteThe author of this article rightly points out that the movie massacre in Aurora, Colorado attracted much more attention than did the shooting at the Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. I think that one reason people paid less attention to the shooting in Wisconsin was that it didn’t feel different from other violence around the world. I think that people hear that it was a shooting brought on by religion and think to themselves, “It’s just another religious feud.” Many, many wars have been fought over religion, so it seems to people that this isn’t anything new. In Aurora, the shooting was arbitrary and more of a mystery. I don’t think that this kind of thinking could lead to immediate problems, but I believe that it might eventually cause unrest from different religious sects.
ReplyDeleteThe author is pointing out that the Oak Creek shooting is just as serious as the Aurora shooting, maybe even more serious due to the chances of an even worse aftermath. The author suggests that people are overlooking the Oak Creek shootings because people can't relate to it as easily as the Aurora shooting. Like the author says, people can more easily see themselves or their loved ones at a movie theater than at a Sikh temple. People go to see movies in theaters all the time, and this could have happened to anyone. This is probably why the Aurora shooting has been drawing more attention. Both shootings very tragic, but the Oak Creek shooting could lead to an even bigger problem on a larger scale. Wade Page was targeting a specific religious group while James Holmes wasn't. This type of hate crime against Sikhs could spark a very dangerous battle. This could lead to more hate crimes against Sikhs, or Sikhs could retaliate. Either way, this could lead to a very serious issue. I can see why the Aurora shooting has received so much attention, but the Oak Creek shooting is something that should not be overlooked.
ReplyDeleteThe shooting in Aurora was more heavily advertised than the attack at Oak Creek because it is more relatable by people. Almost everyone in America has gone to the movies so they can relate how this random act of violence came as a shock to the viewers at the movie theater. The attack at Oak Creek also was directed at a specific religious group. Since not everyone has been or even heard of a Sikh temple it is harder for others to relate to that act of violence. The shooting at the movie theater was not targeting one specific group of people, and also killed more than people (12) than the the attack in Oak Creek (6). The author is saying that the Aurora shooting was more advertised because it is more relatable to the general public which I agree with.
ReplyDeleteOverlooking such a despairing topic as that of the massacre in Oak Creek is clearly not something the author supports. The shooting in Aurora was an act of malicious and random violence, it should be held to the same publicity standards as that of the Oak Creek shooting. I believe and truly support the thoughts of the author because, through his annoyance at the lack of sorrow that the Oak Creek shooting received, it should have just as much impact as any other shooting that may have occurred in history. I understand that in the eyes of many movie goers in the United States, that the thought of "that could've been me" is a scary thought. The violence committed at the Oak Creek shooting was an act directed towards one specific group of people and it is wrong to have overlooked this remarkably racist act. It is important to place emphasis on the death of any said person, regardless of how many may have died, they are all important.
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with the author of this article. He's saying that the Aurora shooting got more attention because more people could relate to it, but he also warns that while most people aren't Sikh and probably don't know many he's Sikh's, he's more wary of violence that isn't as random as Aurora, despite how awful it was. What scares people is the randomness because we have no where to look to an pin the blame. This gets coverage, this is what the media can sell. What worries me, like the other key points the author makes, is that Americans can relate to non-random violence. Violence that deals with hate against certain groups. That goes for everybody whether you're black or white, Christian or Jewish. We aren't used to random acts of violence like Aurora, and that makes me question if that's part of the reason Oak Creek got such little coverage. Have we embedded ourselves into being casually frightened by such events? If we saw this in the newspaper, would it have gotten as much attention as Aurora or would it have just gotten a shake of the head and a few sympathetic words because we've seen, read, and heard about it times before? That's what worries me.
ReplyDeleteThe author's main point in this editorial is that the reason there was so much less media attention on the Oak Creek shooting is because Sikhs are a minority in the United States, and most people probably do not personally know any Sikhs. I agree with the author on this point, people are more interested in topics that they can relate to which is why the shooting at the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado had more publicity. However, when there are hate crimes aimed at a certain group of people there is always potential for bigger issues resulting from that and could definitely end up being bigger news stories than shootings at movie theaters.
ReplyDeleteRobert Wright is saying that the shooting in Aurora Colorado is not as strong or important a story as the one about the shooting in the Sikh temple. His main point is that because of the discriminatory issues in the Sikh temple, that shooting is more consequential compared to the randomness of the murders in a movie theater. He says it is more consequential because people who come out of groups that feel discriminated against have turned to violence. This cause and effect leads to a whole group of people being hated because of the stereotypes that begin to surround them. He is right that the story deserved better coverage than it received because it is a more newsworthy story and it is a more controversial issue. Because it was not nearly as dramatic it did not receive the same attention. This is wrong, but it is how news works in America in alignment with the dominance of social media.
ReplyDeleteThe authors main point of view is that the people don't pay attention to news that are more dangerous and keep dismissing it. The authors point is that people are likely to dismiss something because you feel you wont be affected, when comparing the two violent acts you realize were talking about an identifiable group that could potentially initiate more violent acts. In the other hand there is no identifiable group. I agree with the author in that yes the people do dismiss something because there just not them, in this case a Sikh. People are not paying attention because they cant relate. Its human nature to ignore something that is not directly involved in you any way. Were hardwired to think like this and frankly that is our problem. For our future this could lead to a more bigger and fundamental problem as we move forward as a society. People don't realize that when thinking of there place you feel different. The act of not understanding one another is problematic going forward in taking action on heinous acts.
ReplyDeleteI think the media should have equal coverage of a shooting, no matter the randomness of it. I agree that more people imagine themselves watching a movie, but religious shootings are more common. To cover one more than another, I believe, is unfair to the victims of the Sikh shooting. My main point about news coverage is I just do not want the people who died or were injured in the Sikh temple to be forgotten. Their lives matter too. The author is trying to get across that the shooting at Oak Creek is just as important or frightening as the one in Aurora. The author has not heard of any societies falling due to a random violent act, but he has heard of countries fighting due to racial and ethnic problems. He is just trying to warn Americans that the shootings that are not random are scary as well.
ReplyDelete