Forwarding mail by John Young to: alt.politics.org.fbi () on
10/21/94 9:50:48 PM
-------------------
seg@xxxxxxxxxxx (Naples University Dept of Physics ) wrote:
>
>Dear John, rereading my response, I realize it was a
>bit bureauratic. Let me add that I quite agree with
>your discourse on cults, including the USA, etc. Would
>you agree that the mass media are at the heart of this
>question? Inb any case, thank you again.
>Gordon Poole
Dear Gordon,
I'm no scholar or jounalist but it may be fruitful to consider
the link between [Design & Decon]cults and the media if there
is truth to the perception that cults aim to give identity to
groups of people who feel alienated by media-stories presuming
massive indifferentiation among a diverse population.
Commentators in the studies of groups often mention the need
for special group identification in the face of treatment of
the individual as only a member an anonymous large class, say,
by race, ethnicity, income, gender, political party, and the
like -- the socio-political categorizations now commonly used
in discourse about large populations.
Gypsies, witches, outlaws, the Mafia, cripples, homosexuals,
political radicals, religious sects [D & D] -- and other
stigmatized groups described by Erving Goffman in "Stigma:
Notes on the Manangement of Spoiled Identity" -- seem to gain
strength from their separateness from the mainstream and
acceptance of the dominant group's disdain as a badge of
distinction.
The media fortuitously finds such groups controversial and
newsworthy, and thus money-making. It would make sense for the
media to ascribe "cultish" behavior to a group in order to
dramatize a story for sale. I suspect that is what makes the
CIA, FBI, Jim Jones, David Koresh, Luc Jourdet [D & D]
attractive targets: their very attempt to be separate, and
perhaps, secretive, sets them up for media dramatization
through stigmatization.
This may be also the link among LEAs, TLAs and cults: they
share similar beliefs about themselves and modes of odd (to an
outsider), secretive and prescriptive behavior as conditions of
membership, and perhaps a sense of persecution by outsiders.
You are perhaps aware that the Catholic priesthood is sometimes
perceived this way in some countries.
And, curiously, the media itself then seems to adopt these
characteristics by a kind of admiring osmosis: the
predator-victim emulation circuit. Then, perhaps not so
surprisingly, the more the press depends on reports about
cult-like behavior to lure consumers, the more it is seen to
be cultish, as the public takes the implications of the reports
to heart and mind and percieves itself to be treated as outside
the select circle of those who know the facts first hand.
The New York Times recent wrote on the negative image of the
media as a result of its continual reporting of bad news, and
in turn being blamed for dwelling too luridly on what it
reported.
The Turks and Scientologists [and D & D]are taking a beating in
Germany these days, so the NY Times reports, even as the Times
beats up on the intelligence cults. Who knows who will be the
next target of our avaricious addiction to our own cultish
relish of cult-bashing?
The word "cult" is probably way over used, but the
witch-hunting is certain to thrive one way or the other: it's
just too much fun to be cruel to those different from us.
John
10/21/94 9:50:48 PM
-------------------
seg@xxxxxxxxxxx (Naples University Dept of Physics ) wrote:
>
>Dear John, rereading my response, I realize it was a
>bit bureauratic. Let me add that I quite agree with
>your discourse on cults, including the USA, etc. Would
>you agree that the mass media are at the heart of this
>question? Inb any case, thank you again.
>Gordon Poole
Dear Gordon,
I'm no scholar or jounalist but it may be fruitful to consider
the link between [Design & Decon]cults and the media if there
is truth to the perception that cults aim to give identity to
groups of people who feel alienated by media-stories presuming
massive indifferentiation among a diverse population.
Commentators in the studies of groups often mention the need
for special group identification in the face of treatment of
the individual as only a member an anonymous large class, say,
by race, ethnicity, income, gender, political party, and the
like -- the socio-political categorizations now commonly used
in discourse about large populations.
Gypsies, witches, outlaws, the Mafia, cripples, homosexuals,
political radicals, religious sects [D & D] -- and other
stigmatized groups described by Erving Goffman in "Stigma:
Notes on the Manangement of Spoiled Identity" -- seem to gain
strength from their separateness from the mainstream and
acceptance of the dominant group's disdain as a badge of
distinction.
The media fortuitously finds such groups controversial and
newsworthy, and thus money-making. It would make sense for the
media to ascribe "cultish" behavior to a group in order to
dramatize a story for sale. I suspect that is what makes the
CIA, FBI, Jim Jones, David Koresh, Luc Jourdet [D & D]
attractive targets: their very attempt to be separate, and
perhaps, secretive, sets them up for media dramatization
through stigmatization.
This may be also the link among LEAs, TLAs and cults: they
share similar beliefs about themselves and modes of odd (to an
outsider), secretive and prescriptive behavior as conditions of
membership, and perhaps a sense of persecution by outsiders.
You are perhaps aware that the Catholic priesthood is sometimes
perceived this way in some countries.
And, curiously, the media itself then seems to adopt these
characteristics by a kind of admiring osmosis: the
predator-victim emulation circuit. Then, perhaps not so
surprisingly, the more the press depends on reports about
cult-like behavior to lure consumers, the more it is seen to
be cultish, as the public takes the implications of the reports
to heart and mind and percieves itself to be treated as outside
the select circle of those who know the facts first hand.
The New York Times recent wrote on the negative image of the
media as a result of its continual reporting of bad news, and
in turn being blamed for dwelling too luridly on what it
reported.
The Turks and Scientologists [and D & D]are taking a beating in
Germany these days, so the NY Times reports, even as the Times
beats up on the intelligence cults. Who knows who will be the
next target of our avaricious addiction to our own cultish
relish of cult-bashing?
The word "cult" is probably way over used, but the
witch-hunting is certain to thrive one way or the other: it's
just too much fun to be cruel to those different from us.
John