Did you know that Tucson is to blame for the shooting that took place there on January 8. I thought that Jared Loughner was allegedly responsible for the crime that killed six people and critically wounded Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords.
Well, at least to some in the media, Tucson is stained by the tragedy. Somehow the overwhelming number of people who live in that Arizona city and had nothing to do with the incident must still bear some responsibility, according our modern day media.
I have never understood the media's preoccupation with blaming a geographic location with a violent tragedy that occurs within its boundaries, but it has happened throughout most of my life. The first occurrence that I remember was in 1963 when the media declared that Dallas should be forever be shamed by the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on November 22 of that year. It didn't matter that you could see practically all the people lining the parade route that day crying when they learned of the shooting. Many in the media stained everyone living in the area simply because the tragedy took place there.
Of course, just because the media makes such declarations doesn't mean that rational people accept it. I grew up on the southeast side of Chicago, just 10 blocks from where Richard Speck killed eight nurses in July 1965. While everyone in the community was stunned by crime and we rallied around the neighbors affected by the tragedy, I don't recall anyone who believed they shared responsibility for the crime.
The media doesn't always try to stain a geographic area for a crime, especially if it is an area where many of the media elites live or find appealing. Robert Kennedy was assassinated in Los Angeles in June 1968, but somehow the media didn't believe in tarring that city with the crime. The same is true of New York where John Lennon was killed in the early 1980s.
To stain any geographic area for a violent tragedy that occurs there is a false premise that is totally bereft of logic, and yet the media continues to do that. To contend that the residents of that geographic area who had nothing to do with the incident still bear some responsibility is equally foolish if not more so.
I would be interested in debating anyone from the media who has fostered this false premise. I doubt that I will get any volunteers, however, because it is very difficult to defend the irrational.