By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Recent mass shootings in Michigan and North Carolina, both linked to MAGA and anti-LGBTQ+ sentiments, highlight a disturbing pattern of selective outrage. The article contrasts the media and right-wing response to these events with the reaction to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, where a trans roommate was falsely implicated and subjected to intense scrutiny. The author argues that the far right’s silence and lack of investigation into the shooters’ backgrounds, due to their alignment with MAGA ideology, reveals hypocrisy and fuels the demonization of the LGBTQ+ community. This selective outrage, the author claims, normalizes hate, puts queer people at risk, and contributes to the likelihood of future violence, particularly given the rhetoric and actions of figures like Donald Trump.
Read the original article here
When shooters are MAGA and anti-LGBTQ+, the right suddenly loses its appetite for conspiracy theories, and, as John Casey writes, this phenomenon becomes painfully obvious. The immediate aftermath of a shooting perpetrated by someone with right-wing affiliations reveals a stark contrast in how the news is handled versus when the perpetrator is, or can be portrayed as, outside of their ideological sphere. The media’s coverage often shifts from relentless investigation to a hushed silence, particularly when the shooter’s motives and affiliations align with the MAGA movement. This sudden reticence is a direct consequence of the narrative that is supported and the narratives that are undermined based on the alignment with the right-wing agenda.
The silence that often descends when a shooter is identified as MAGA stands in stark contrast to the media firestorms that erupt when the shooter’s background can be used to discredit liberal politics, and the coverage of their beliefs. When the perpetrator can be linked to the left, conspiracy theories flourish, details are scrutinized and amplified, and the incident is immediately characterized as part of a larger pattern. But, as it is noted here, when the shooter is right-wing, the narrative often focuses on the individual as a “lone gunman” with no connection to any broader movement. This narrative serves to isolate the event, preventing it from being connected to the pervasive nature of right-wing extremism or to any systemic problem that the current political climate may be the cause of. The use of the “lone wolf” label in these instances is a deliberate tactic. It avoids addressing the shooter’s ideological influences and the ways in which the right-wing media ecosystem often fosters the type of extremism that can lead to violence.
This selective silence and the focus on individual actors rather than systemic issues reflect a deeper strategy of preserving the reputation of the right-wing ideology. The media is frequently complicit in this approach, as the mainstream press avoids portraying right-wing extremism as a significant threat. This reticence is often justified by claims of journalistic objectivity, but it ultimately allows right-wing violence to fester and continue. The denial of any right-wing connection and downplaying the significance of events are strategies for keeping the narrative in line with the right’s ideology.
The fact that a trans roommate, who is also right-leaning in this case, can become a major news story serves as a telling example of this hypocrisy. The coverage of the trans roommate highlights a perceived “liberal lean” of a person, even though it has been noted that the trans roommate has an alignment that leans toward right-wing ideologies. The story is promoted and sensationalized. This tactic distracts from the shooter’s actions, diverting attention from the core issue of right-wing violence. This tactic also demonstrates the right-wing’s goal of controlling all of the aspects of a person’s life and pushing them towards being in line with conservative views.
The lack of interest in pursuing the case also reveals an unsettling pattern. The silence surrounding the shooter’s affiliations and the quick dismissal of the incident demonstrate the right-wing’s hypocrisy. The right-wing is focused on maintaining its grip on the narrative. This often means minimizing the relevance of the shooter’s beliefs or right-wing connections. This allows them to maintain their image and avoid scrutiny.
The focus on political violence in the media often changes depending on the shooter’s political affiliation. Any event can be sensationalized to fulfill the goals of those in charge of the media outlets, and those with a bias may be the most likely to succeed. The omission of negative information about a political party can be a sign of the media’s complicity. The media focuses more on the individual’s actions and their relationship to the victim or the victim’s background rather than the shooter’s political affiliations. The media will focus on the perceived political association of the victim, which may not be the case. This behavior allows the news outlets to support their agenda and protect the politicians they may be in favor of.
The fact that the story of the shooter’s crime will often be completely removed from the news or the news will focus on irrelevant aspects of the story shows the media’s intention. The goal is to protect the right-wing narrative and downplay the significance of right-wing violence. The omission of relevant information about the shooter is the media’s complicity in spreading lies. The actions of the right-wing and the media outlets are destructive because they allow violence to be normalized and encourage more violence from right-wing extremists. This makes it much more difficult to identify and address the root causes of the problem and to protect the public from these threats.