Pixel Tracker

Monday, February 18 , 2019, 9:44 pm | Fair 50º

 
 
 
 

David Sirota: Synthetic Novelty Is Not Reality

Our participation in pseudo-events allows pressing crises to fester

A week removed from the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, after all the sound and fury has temporarily subsided, we can look back and know that we have just witnessed the realization of historian Daniel Boorstin’s most renowned prophecy.

David Sirota
David Sirota

In his 1961 classic The Image, Boorstin famously predicted that real news and serious discourse eventually would be replaced by a “new kind of synthetic novelty” called “pseudo-events” — synthetic for their media-manufactured artificiality, pseudo for their lack of authenticity. Though these contrivances attract attention, Boorstin correctly pointed out that they typically represent no deeper ethos than vainglory.

That, of course, perfectly describes the hullaballoo surrounding Florida pastor Terry Jones and his much-hyped plans to burn the Quran. This hateful act, we were told, would have inflamed anti-Americanism in the Islamic world, potentially provoking a terrorist backlash. So grave was this supposed threat that the major media devoted 24/7 coverage to the controversy; President Barack Obama publicly appealed to the pastor to abstain from creating “a recruitment bonanza for al-Qaeda”; and Defense Secretary Robert Gates personally intervened — as if it were a Defcon-1-worthy emergency.

As pseudo-events go, this was a landmark — not for Jones’ abhorrent prejudice (unfortunately, we’ve seen this kind of detestable bigotry before) but for the outsized reaction to one obscure gadfly desperately seeking celebrity. Indeed, the national pandemonium was an emergent symptom of a destructive aneurysm deep within the American cortex — one that has profoundly altered our psychology. Whereas pseudo-events were once seen as cheap attempts to manipulate the public’s perception of significance, the public — in the form of the media, the government and the rapt audience — took part in this pseudo-event, thus manufacturing significance from scratch.

That complicity — both in making this extremist an international star and in subsequently encouraging more such pseudo-events — is this story’s real commentary on the downsides of distorted values, selective outrage and myopic worldviews. A commentary not about Jones, but about us, as just a few comparisons prove.

Consider, for instance, that in the very week the American media, political establishment and electorate fretted over the possibility of Jones enraging the Muslim world, the same media, political establishment and electorate paid no attention to a Guardian of London report finding that “12 American soldiers face charges over a secret ‘kill team’ that allegedly blew up and shot Afghan civilians at random and collected their fingers as trophies.” We ignored this, as if the tasteless theater of a single iconoclast in Gainesville is somehow more troubling to Muslims than allegations that their innocent brethren are being hunted for sport in their homeland.

Similarly, as the president took to national television to worry about Jones posing a clear and present danger to national security, he didn’t mention — nor did nearly anyone else — that America’s continued military occupation of two Islamic countries might endanger national security in a much bigger way.

And, of course, as pundits and their couch-potato sycophants lit up cable TV and talk radio with arguments about Jones potentially inciting a terrorist blow-back against U.S. troops, few bothered noting that the killing of 600,000 to 1 million Iraqi civilians in our war has probably done far more to prompt such a blow-back.

No, we are too mesmerized by the synthetic novelty — too entranced, in this case, by the handlebar mustache and the camera-friendly promise of book burning. We don’t think to ask uncomfortable questions nor do we strive for enlightened perspective. We instead tell ourselves that by joining the cartoonish pseudo-events, we will magically defuse pressing crises — even as our participation in those pseudo-events allows those crises to fester.

David Sirota is the author of the best-selling books Hostile Takeover and The Uprising and blogs at OpenLeft.com. Click here for more information. He can be contacted at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Talk to Us!

Please take Noozhawk's audience survey to help us understand what you expect — and want — from us. It'll take you just a few minutes. Thank you!

Get Started >

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Email
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership
×

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.