Ben Shapiro
So, Jussie Smollett was lying.
The “Empire” actor claimed
that when he was walking home at 2 a.m. in Chicago, in the midst of the polar
vortex, he was accosted by two assailants, both of whom shouted anti-gay and
anti-black slurs at him.
They then attempted to throw a
noose around his neck and pour what he thought was bleach on him while
shouting, “This is MAGA country!” he says.
None of this is true. Police
now think that Smollett paid two of his friends to stage the entire attack.
Why, exactly, would Smollett
do it? He is a successful actor on a hit television show. He’s been
continuously working in Hollywood for years, with roles in the 2017 films
“Marshall” and “Alien: Covenant.”
He’s not exactly a textbook
victim.
The answer to this question
makes for some uncomfortable lessons.
First, alleged victims
sometimes have an incentive to lie. For several years, each time an alleged victim
tells an unverified and unverifiable story, we are told that we must believe
that victim’s story. Why? Because, why would the victim lie? But this is often
untrue.
Smollett had an incentive to
lie: unending media attention, fawning sycophancy from politicians, and the
potential for even greater Hollywood stardom. If Smollett had gotten away with
his hoax, he’d be the face of gay, black suffering in the United States. Few
had heard of Smollett before this story. Suddenly, he found himself on “Good Morning
America,” telling the world about his own bravery. That’s a lucrative career
path.
Second, hoaxers can read the
tea leaves. There’s a reason that the most prominent racial and sexual hoaxes
have generally flattered the political sensibilities of the political left.
Right-wing hoaxes might catch the attention of right-wing sources, but
left-wing sources are far more powerful and plentiful.
Imagine if a MAGA-hatted young
Republican had accused two young black men of assaulting him while shouting,
“F— Trump!” That story might get play on talk radio and Fox News, but it
wouldn’t earn one iota of attention from celebrity culture or the mainstream
media.
Third, social media make
hoaxes infinitely easier. There are large-scale incentives for jumping on every
story before the facts are clear, which is why Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and
Kamala Harris, D-Calif., both running for president, tweeted their support for
Smollett … and then had to backtrack radically, suggesting as the hoax emerged
that they had to wait for more facts.
Being the first to rip America
bears political fruit; waiting for the whole story often earns public
castigation for insufficient sensitivity.
All of this means that the
hoaxes won’t stop anytime soon. The incentives simply aren’t aligned for hoaxes
to end. Media members are too eager to buy into stories that support their
preferred narratives; social media are too eager to engage in pile-ons of epic
proportions; hoaxers are obviously eager to make a buck or win some fame.
That means that we should all
wait next time we hear a story too good to be true.
But we won’t. Nobody knows who
the next Jussie Smollett will be. But within a few weeks, we’ll surely know.
Ben Shapiro, The
Daily Wire, 20-2-2019
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
Não publicamos comentários de anônimos/desconhecidos.
Por favor, se optar por "Anônimo", escreva o seu nome no final do comentário.
Não use CAIXA ALTA, (Não grite!), isto é, não escreva tudo em maiúsculas, escreva normalmente. Obrigado pela sua participação!
Volte sempre!
Abraços./-