I’m not a psycho killer. In fact, I’m not any kind of killer. I work routine jobs, hang out with my friends, and go on the internet. But if you had access to my internet history, and analysed posts I have made on messageboards/twitter/fanfiction websites, you could probably paint a picture of me as some deranged psycho who is mentally unstable and liable to snap any minute.
At least that’s the impression I’m getting from the Wall Street Journal. In the aftermath of the shooting of congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, along with an number of other people, in Arizona this week, the WSJ published the article ‘Postings of a Troubled Mind: Accused shooter wrote on gaming site of his job woes, rejection by women.’ The article then goes on to dissect the content of messageboard posts by the ‘accused’ shooter, Jared Lee Loughner. I bet any of you who have ever written on the internet about problems getting a job, or how you have no luck with women are wondering why the FBI haven’t hunted you down before now, aren’t you. What heinous material to be posting! And on the interwebs no less!
Now, before anyone starts to get angry about how I’m making light far too soon after this horrible tragedy, I will say that it is horrible. I know that. I mean no disrespect. I’m just trying to give some semblance of sanity to a world that has the media running rampant over every small scrap of material they can find around anything that the public considers ‘news’. And let me tell you, what counts as news is a very scary thing.
The article starts by summarising notes found scribbled around his house, saying things like ‘die bitch’ and ‘die cops’ on a letter from the congresswoman’s office, which I’m sure is somewhat relevant to the whole shooting thing. But then it moves into the messageboards. At first, a couple of lines the WSJ focuses on let you think that there is something of concern here. Apparently he was fixated on grammar, and yet he posted “I bet your hungry....Because i know how to cut a body open and eat you for more then a week. ;-)”. Unless he was fixated on bad grammar, that’s decisive evidence that he’s disturbed. Other lines published include him asking if anyone is angry all the time, or whether users would hit a “Handy Cap”, or some weird ranting ‘justification’ for rape. Okay, so it’s useful in painting the picture of him as a disturbed man who was not of sound mind when he committed the crime he is accused of.
But then they start using whatever posts they can find as evidence of his ‘insanity’. But these posts don’t add to the crazy. They’re just ordinary messageboard posts. Somehow, the WSJ is trying to use these as evidence that he is an insane motherfucker and somebody should have noticed earlier. I mean, of course, why wouldn’t you start to get worried when a guy is posting things such as these on the internet?
“How many stars are in the universe?”
“What do Chocolate cookies taste like?”
“This forum made me feel better J”
Under a topic he started called ‘Weight Lifting’ (Shock! Horror!) he “asked whether anyone else lifted. He described himself as 5 feet 10 inches tall and 155 pounds, and said he could do 65 push-ups, bench press 165 pounds, and do 25 pull-ups and 100 sit-ups, (thanks to the ab machine).”
Have you mused about the number of stars in the universe? Have you wondered about the taste of chocolate cookies? (Not me, I know what they taste like, but if I didn’t I’d definitely want to know) Have you ever posted information and advice about your current fitness obsession on a messageboard? Then the WSJ clearly thinks you are mentally disturbed, and you should probably go take a pill for that, or something.
I’d like it if the moral of this tale was as simple as ‘the media are morons and will print anything, even if it makes no sense’. But, sadly, there aren’t enough people in the world to temper the massive wave of idiocy that flows out from printing presses the world over. So the moral really is, be careful what you write on the internet. And I’ve broken that already.
* All material quoted in double marks (“”) is from the WSJ. Almost all the words in single are me being a dick. I do realise I use them a lot.
This post is my favourite
ReplyDelete