The rhetoric of fear is a
dominating factor in American society. Rhetoric is the art of using language (OED) in order to inform, persuade and
even motivate. In this case, it is fear that is channeled in different kinds of
discourse. In the US, inducing this emotion is a widely spread tool that is
detected in the media as well as in politics. For example, President Franklin
D. Roosevelt, in his first inaugural address in 1933, is famously renowned for
stating “the only thing we need to fear is fear itself” (whitehouse.gov). More recently, the rhetoric of fear was
undoubtedly a prominent instrument in Bush’s speeches to get the public to
support the ‘War on Terror’ after the 9/11 attacks (Marquit slates.com). On another note, the daily
media coverage of different issues such as public order offenders, heath
problems and the economy has also the power to trigger fear amongst Americans.
In The Culture of Fear: Why America is
Afraid of the Wrong Things?, author Barry Glassner affirms that three out
of four people in the US feel more afraid today than they did twenty years ago.
In this regard, this kind of rhetoric appears to
be a ubiquitous phenomenon in America. Though many will argue that the rhetoric
of fear is exaggerated and can lead people to adopt a paranoid behavior, it
still remains a powerful and effective tool that has positive outcomes. In the
light of the following arguments, it will be argued why the rhetoric
of fear does not have a debilitating effect on America.
The rhetoric of fear is widely used
in numerous media coverage. However, this type of discourse does not have a
debilitating effect on America because many scares are unquestionably serious
issues that deserve public attention. A case of robbery or a drug problem in a
neighborhood is not a latent matter. Hence, it explains why the media turn to
this rhetoric in order to inform and influence the behavior and actions of
their audience. These are pressing problems that require careful consideration.
American people must know what happens in their surroundings and in the rest of
the country – which, of course, includes very serious fear-mongering stories
such as assaults, rape, war, heath concerns, and so on and so forth.
Accordingly, “it has a potential impact on their lives or the well-being of
friends and family” (http://crimeinamerica.net). As an example, the media
coverage of crime is conspicuous in the US. PhD Matthew Robinson notes that “from
the very founding of the press in America, crime and criminal justice have held
a prominent place in the media. […] Thus, crime and punishment are often on the
forefront of Americans’ minds”. But this rhetoric of fear surely does not have
debilitating impact on American citizens because it will force people to take
charge, especially if one lives in a city where the crime rate is quite high
like in Detroit, Michigan or St. Louis, Missouri (Flippin AARP). Consequently, Americans will rather choose to be on the
safer side and therefore, take precaution: they become more sensitive about
their environment and will secure their homes better. Thus, the rhetoric of
fear in the media does not have a debilitating effect on America.
A second example that reveals why the rhetoric of fear does not have a
pernicious impact in media was the case of the severe acute respiratory
syndrome (SARS) epidemic in 2003. Even though the number of victims in the US
was not striking (Sternberg USA Today),
the media coverage on SARS was abundant and made people avoid Chinatowns all
over North America (Watts). But, in an article written by Duncan Watts, it is
explained that fear is a good thing in the case of epidemics: “it is almost
certain that without […] the resulting avalanche of news stories about the
disease, the situation could have been far worse than it is” (slates.com). In this regard, the
rhetoric of fear does not have a harmful effect in America media because many
scares are serious issues and also helps for prevention.
Another reason why the rhetoric of
fear does not have a harmful effect on American society is that it can bring
people or a community together to cooperate towards finding immediate and
long-term solutions in response to a threat. For instance, pedophilia and gang
feuds are important problems in the US. Instead of evading the troublesome
situation, it is likely that people have created or joined communities that
attempt to solve these menacing matters. On this note, a healthy dose of fear
has brought people together to address and contribute into resolving serious
affairs. In Nashville, Tennessee, “parents, teachers and neighbors have begun
efforts that range from programs in schools to neighborhood watch groups”
(Schrade and Echegaray The Tennessean)
in order to help children and young adults to stay out of gangs. Concerning
anti-pedophilia movements, online communities and organizations were founded to
fight this abominable crime. One of the missions of the “Crimes Against
Children” program is to decrease “the vulnerability of children to sexual
exploitation.” (FBI.com) In this respect, they offer “The
National Sex Offender Public Website” (NSOPW), coordinated by the U.S.
Department of Justice, which enables any citizen to track sex offenders in
fifty states. A second example in the US that has volunteers moved to fight
pedophilia is the Perverted-Justice
Foundation; which has helped convict 550 sexual predators since 2004. Thus, the
rhetoric of fear does not have a debilitating effect on American society. On
the contrary, it is perhaps because of fear mongering that citizens also take
matters in their own hand and help solving a significant problem by joining a
community or organization.
As argued in the previous
arguments, the rhetoric of fear does not cripple American society because it is
an effective tool to apprise people of serious issues that require their
awareness and even cooperation. Another reason that shows why the rhetoric of
fear does not have a debilitating effect on America is that it is a potent tool
in preparation of a crisis situation.
Frank Furedi claims in his article “Epidemic of Fear” that safety has
become “one of Western society’s fundamental values” (spikedonline.com). After 9/11, the safety of American people has
become a core issue and mission. Government officials have taken different
measures and have for instance incited people to report unusual behavior. This
was the case in the Times Square bombing attempt in May 2010. Two street
vendors noticed a suspicious vehicle and immediately alerted the NYPD. As
journalist Mark Thomson claims, “one of the most unheralded victories in 9/11’s
wake my be that the US […] succeeded in atomizing the terrorism threat.”
Furthermore, concerning the full body X-Rays at the airports, a 2012 poll
illustrates that Americans are prone to give up their liberty in exchange for
better safety (Thommy, mcclatchydc.com).
Once again, these measures are effective because safety is one of the nation’s
major concerns. The threats of terrorist attacks is not an issue that should be
taken lightly and it is better to be prepared in case of an emergency or crisis
situation. Because of this, the rhetoric of fear does not have a harmful impact
on America.
To conclude, one can assess in the
light of these arguments that the rhetoric of fear does not necessarily have a
debilitating effect on America. Its ubiquitous use has forced the American
citizen to be very cautious and prepares him/her against serious threats.
SOURCES
Echegaray, Chris and Brad Schrade. “Fighting
Gangs Takes Community Effort.” The
Tenessean. 2 March 2010. Accessed 3 June 2012. <http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100302/NEWS03/3020337/Fighting-gangs-takes-community-effort>
Flippin, Alexis. “The Five Most Dangerous
Cities in the US.” AARP. 10 Feburary
2012. Accessed 4 June 2012. < http://www.aarp.org/travel/destinations/info-02-2012/five-most-dangerous-cities.html>
Furedy, Frank.
“Epidemic of fear.” Spiked Online. 15
March 2002. Accessed 3 June 2012.
Glassner, Barry. The Culture of Fear, Why America is Afraid of the Wrong Things. New
York: Basic Books, 1999.
Hardy, Victoria. “Fear in America.” American Chronicle. 25 February 2007.
Accessed 4 June 2012. <http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/21245>
Marquit, Jean. “Rhetorical Use of Fear by the
Bush Administration.” Yahoo. 8
October 2005. Accessed 4 June 2012. < http://voices.yahoo.com/rhetorical-fear-bush-administration-8370.html?cat=37>
Robinson, Matthew. “The Media: Crime and
Criminal Justice in the News and Entertainment.” January 11 2011. Accessed 2
June 2012. <http://www.pscj.appstate.edu/media/media_preface.pdf>
Sterberg, Steve. “Estimate of likely SARS cases
in USA down to 35.” USA Today. 17
March 2012. Accessed 2 June 2012. < http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2003-04-17-sars-usat_x.htm>
Thomma, Steven. “Poll: Most Americans would
trim liberty to be safer.” McClatchy
Newspapers. 12 January 2012. Accessed June 4 2012. <http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/01/12/82156/poll-most-americans-would-trim.html>
Thomson, Mark. “Attempted Bombing was Poorly
Plotted, Experts Say.” Time. 4 May
2010. Accessed 4 June 2012. < http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/vc_majorthefts/cac>
Watts, Duncan. “ Outrbreak: In Epidemics, is
Fear a Good Thing?” slate.com 30
April 2003. Accessed 3 June 2012. <http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2003/04/outbreak.html>
Crime
in America. “Does Local
Television News Mislead The Public About Crime?” 17 March 2012. Accessed June 4
2012. < http://crimeinamerica.net/2010/03/17/does-local-television-news-mislead-the-public-about-crime/>
Federal
Bureau of Investigation.
“Crimes Against Children.” Accessed June 4 2012. <<http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/vc_majorthefts/cac>
The
White House. “Franklin D.
Roosevelt.” Accessed June 4 2012. <http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/franklindroosevelt>
Oxford English Dictionary. “Rhetoric.” Accessed June 4 2012. <OED.com>
