Words, of course, are at the core of public relations. They are the building blocks of the all-important “narrative” we’ve discussed in several past posts. Whoever controls the narrative controls the story line or the interpretation of events.
With the horrid Arizona shootings being covered on 24-hour cable, a theme has arisen on whether the crime was “politically motivated.” Many commentators, especially those protecting a certain kind of political ideology, are stressing that the shootings are the result of a single, deranged gunman with no political agenda.
But just on the face of it, there appears to be a clear political dimension to the incident. After all, the gunman wasn’t just killing anyone indiscriminately. Rather, he had singled out a politician as his mark at a political event. Why shoot a politician? Unless it unlikely turns up that there was no motive other than shooting a particular group of people for its own sake and critically wounding a politician merely by chance (or motivation from some bizarre personal connection between shooter and victim), the act indeed was “political.”
0 Responses to ““Political” motivation in Arizona shooting?”