The Amplification of the Disharmony

There was recently a story that made the news. I assume it's true, and if it's not factual, it certainly sounds true, and fits in, with my understanding of human nature, so, let's go with it.

A girl suffered a disfiguring injury. She underwent surgery and her face was still...disfigured. She or her mother, seeking support and something to lift her spirits reached out to the world via social media, and the results were what you'd expect.

Thousands of people answered the call, praising her courage, assuring her that it would heal and she'd have a happy life, that she was still beautiful, etc. Had I heard her story at this point, I probably wouldn't have joined them, sending something nice.

But of course, along with the thousands of supportive voices, there were a handful of the other kind. Making fun of the way she looked, likening her to a movie villain, etc. 

And which do you suppose had the greater impact? The thousands of supportive emails and cards, the plush toys, or the handful of hateful ones sent by anonymous, and therefore emboldened, detractors?

I don't know that she specified it in her suicide note, but a poor, tortured soul gave up her life because the voice of a few outweighed the voice of many. 

The population of the U.S. is nearing 400 million. A television show host, in the 1960's, said something about blacks, which at the time was considered acceptable, certainly more acceptable than "Blazing Saddles,". It gets dug up, and the media,  a reporter, publishes a story about it. 83  people say that it's unacceptable. Other media pick up the story because, if they're reporting it, we should too. So now, a dozen editors, 200, maybe 1,000 commenters are offended.

The television station is asked about it. The host must now tweet an apology, but afraid of the adverse publicity, the host is fired.

20 media people maybe, maybe 10,000 comments, and it seems like the world has revolted against this one person, whose innocuous statement, read in a different era and interpreted according to a reader's understanding, not necessarily the speaker's intent.

400,000,000 people and 10,000 set the agenda. 

I did a story a long time ago about the West Bend Citizens for Decency League (WBCDL). (Nice bit of marketing: you were either for them or indecent)

They objected to Playboys, Penthouses, and other similar magazines being sold in stores. Didn't matter if the cover photo was obscured. It was wrong. It was indecent. And the WBCDL wasn't having it. 

Any store that carried those publications would be boycotted, and they would publish a list of stores that didn't accede to their demands.

I asked Charles Weir, the leader of the league,  to attend a meeting. There weren't meetings, as such, so I interviewed him in his house, a little one-story affair. He was in his late 80s, lived alone. Didn't drive. 

Although I never met them, I was led to believe that the other handful of people in the league, (about 8 if I recall) were of a same mind. They would boycott any store or gas station that carried the publications. 

I wouldn't think a boycott of 8 people, at least some of whom, didn't drive, would affect any business, especially the gas stations. I asked him about it. But he assured me, they spoke for the multitude, perhaps the same silent majority Nixon led.

The local gas station was owned by someone I had known for years. And I asked him about it. He said he had seen a petition with 50 or so dames on it. And so he had taken the magazines out of store.

The threat of being seen as indecent, along with a boycott of people who may or may not be customers, was too much of a threat.

In a city of 30,000, a hundred or so voices got their way and affected someone's livelihood.

Why?

Because those who didn't agree, weren't organized. They didn't express an interest. In the case of the little girl, no numbers could make up for the handful of hate. For the television host, (who is a composite of incidents, by the way), many people didn't care, bleeped right over it, until the news came that she was fired, and then, I, and I assume many others, thought it wasn't right, but what can you do? A lot of the people who don't believe in censorship, aren't necessarily going to buy Playboys and aren't willing to sign a petition. 

Why are we inundated with Kardashian news? "Which Kardashian has the better Bikini photo?" Is it because they are really that interesting? 

Or is it because they are low hanging fruit, editors don't want to be left out, most people don't object enough to do anything about it, so a handful of Kardashian followers set the agenda? 

The minority voices are what is heard. The majority is too disinterested, too disjointed to care. A handful of editors determine our news cycle. A handful of politicians define our issues. And a single voice, out of tune, is the one that is heard loudest.