On Tuesday on CNN, Parkland survivor David Hogg was asked by Anderson Cooper about the plethora of right-wing Web sites and social media accounts spreading conspiracy theories about him.
“I’m not a crisis actor. I’m someone who had to witness this and live through this and I continue to be having to do that,” Hogg said in response.
Those with little experience of the febrile world of conspiracy theory might not fully understand what Hogg is being accused of, but the idea that mass shooting victims and witnesses are hired performers serving a dark purpose has over the past decade migrated from the farthest margins of conspiracy media.
Thanks to a range of right-wing media actors, it is now much closer to the mainstream: On Tuesday, a Florida Republican’s aide was fired after he suggested the survivors were actors.
The first thing to understand is that the “crisis actor” conspiracy theory has a slender tie to reality. Crisis actors do exist, although there is nothing underhanded about them: They are simply performers hired to play disaster victims in emergency drills or wounded combatants in military exercises. They provide a degree of realism for people practicing for real emergencies further down the line.
However, in the past few years, the term has been appropriated by conspiracy theorists claiming that mass shootings are staged. Social media users, broadcasters and even political staffers now routinely allege that events like the Parkland shooting are orchestrated by shadowy actors to effect some political goal.
Lately, they are likely to nominate the “deep state” as a culprit — by which they mean segments of the intelligence community and unelected officials who are held to be working against US President Donald Trump and working toward the confiscation or regulation of firearms.
Google trend searches show that searches for the term in the past decade have spiked around high-profile mass shootings. There was a small flurry at about the time of the Tacoma Mall shooting near Seattle in 2005, but by far the biggest spike came at the time of the Newtown shooting, where 26 elementary school students and adults were shot dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
By this time, conspiracy culture had already bedded down the concept of “false flag” attacks. This is the idea that powerful forces routinely arrange massacres or terrorist atrocities, and make it appear as if some other individual or group did them to achieve their sinister political goals.
Conspiracy theories surrounding Sept. 11, 2001, had long asserted that while it appeared that the al-Qaeda extremist network was responsible for the attacks in New York, they had really been orchestrated by then-US president George W. Bush’s administration, Mossad, or some other actor to provide a basis for war in the Middle East.
The “crisis actor” concept augments the “false flag” idea. It offers an alternative narrative for incidents of mass violence: Government agencies or other powerful actors stage shootings and then employ actors to play victims, witnesses and bystanders.
If this is true, conspiracy theorists think, it means that the US’ gun violence crisis is not real and has been manufactured to disarm the populace. Some conspiracy theorists would then argue that this is part of a larger plot to subjugate those in the US to tyranny.
The “evidence” presented is often the resemblance between people featured in media reporting of mass shootings and people who have been present at other events. Here, YouTube and other video services provide the raw materials for conspiracy theorizing, in the form of shareable, reusable video, and a venue for the propagation of the resultant “investigations.”
It is no coincidence that the cottage industry of false flag allegations has grown in tandem with the mass uptake of social media — theories are absorbed and spread rapidly online by a range of groups.
Conspiracy broadcasters have large, international audiences, and some polling suggests that up to half of those in the US believe in at least some signature conspiracy theories.
Some outlets spreading “crisis actor” theories, like Alex Jones and True Pundit, have been lent credibility by Trump or members of his family. There has also been some suggestion that conspiracy theory has been automated, with tall tales about the Parkville massacre being spread by a network of bots.
As with conspiracy thinking about Sept. 11, 2001, Alex Jones acted as a major popularizer of crisis actor memes.
Jones said back in 2012 and 2013 that Sandy Hook was a “false flag” and that “no one died.”
He claimed that the children killed were acting for the cameras and that the parents had faked their own children’s deaths.
Under pressure, Jones has sometimes tried to back away from his role in propagating the theory. However, in other incidents since — from Orlando to Las Vegas, Jones’s first resort in his broadcasts and on his Web site has been to assume that the official accounts are elaborate lies and that many on the scene are in on the deception.
Jones and others often take advantage of the inevitable confusion that attends complex events such as mass shootings to freely speculate on the events and lodge their explanation in the minds of their audience.
These theories would be laughable and unworthy of our attention, were it not for their real-world impacts and that so many people accept them.
When Jones was interviewed by Megan Kelly last year, parents of Sandy Hook victims took to the airwaves and the Internet to protest. They said that on top of their grief, they had been harassed for years since the massacre by people who, thanks in part to Jones, believed that they and their dead children were lying.
The teens who are bravely speaking out after the Parkland attack will not only have to contend with conservative media bottom-feeders questioning their competence to speak about the massacre. They will also have to deal with people who think that they are knowingly participating in an elaborate hoax.
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
Taiwan is facing multiple economic challenges due to internal and external pressures. Internal challenges include energy transition, upgrading industries, a declining birthrate and an aging population. External challenges are technology competition between the US and China, international supply chain restructuring and global economic uncertainty. All of these issues complicate Taiwan’s economic situation. Taiwan’s reliance on fossil fuel imports not only threatens the stability of energy supply, but also goes against the global trend of carbon reduction. The government should continue to promote renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as energy storage technology, to diversify energy supply. It
Former Japanese minister of defense Shigeru Ishiba has been elected as president of the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and would be approved as prime minister in parliament today. Ishiba is a familiar face for Taiwanese, as he has visited the nation several times. His popularity among Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) lawmakers has grown as a result of his multiple meetings and encounters with legislators and prominent figures in the government. The DPP and the LDP have close ties and have long maintained warm relations. Ishiba in August 2020 praised Taiwan’s
On Thursday last week, the International Crisis Group (ICG) issued a well-researched report titled “The Widening Schism across the Taiwan Strait,” which focused on rising tensions between Taiwan and China, making a number of recommendations on how to avoid conflict. While it is of course laudable that a respected international organization such as the ICG is willing to think through possible avenues toward a peaceful resolution, the report contains a couple of fundamental flaws in the way it approaches the issue. First, it attempts to present a “balanced approach” by pushing back equally against Taiwan’s perceived transgressions as against Beijing’s military threats
RSS