The CEO of a large health insurance provider was shot dead on the sidewalk in front of his New York City hotel in a planned killing and 57,000 people posted laughing emojis on the company’s Facebook page.
When did murder become funny?
Days after the Dec. 4 killing, the tone turned even uglier. “Wanted” posters started appearing in New York City, glued to light poles and traffic control boxes at street corners. But these posters were not searching for the murderer; they were threatening more violence against health care executives.
“Health care CEOs should not feel safe,” the posters said. One displayed a photo of the murdered UnitedHealthcare boss, with a red X over his face.
When did it become OK to advocate killing over frustration with insurance?
When did the country become so angry that people justify the use of violence to make their point, get their revenge or simply appoint themselves as judge, jury and executioner?
What worries me is the increasing prevalence — almost acceptance — that threatening to kill people you disagree with is part of life.
Whether it’s insurance company executives or customer service agents, state election workers after the disputed 2020 presidential vote, elected officials, lawyers, health care workers, journalists or even weather forecasters, the online intimidation and death threats are escalating.
Social media plays a big part in this. It makes it too easy for people to anonymously threaten others, hiding behind hashtags or whatever else they use for their online personality. It amplifies anger and rewards outrageousness with more attention. It does little to protect the public and everything to drive likes and hits and especially profits for the companies that run the sites.
It brings attention to people who want attention, like children who throw tantrums to get what they want — only angry and armed adults are much more dangerous than a toddler.
Merriam-Webster’s 2024 Word of the Year is “polarization.” The word is harmless, it never hurt anyone, although it has hurt the country by further dividing people into opposite sides of political battles. Yet the word symbolizes what is wrong and getting worse in the country. It doesn’t explain individual acts of violence but it does describe the fear and anger that can lead to violence.
The public can’t do much about people around the country who think the best answer to their anger is to threaten to kill someone, or to actually do it. But the public can do two things: Pay attention, and if you hear or read a threat, tell the police. And consider not voting for candidates who shout and accuse, mislead and fire up the crowd with pure anger to gain their votes, seemingly not caring whether it makes someone mad enough to grab a gun as the answer.
Reader Comments(0)