Episode 212: Gaza and the Political Utility of Selective Empathy
Nov 20, 2024
auto_awesome
Muhannad Ayyash, a sociology professor and policy analyst, delves into the concept of selective empathy in media narratives, particularly regarding marginalized groups. They discuss how certain communities, like Palestinians, face dehumanization compared to others deemed 'deserving' of empathy, such as Ukrainians. The conversation critiques disparities in media coverage of conflicts and examines the racial dynamics involved. Ayyash emphasizes the urgent need for a nuanced understanding of violence and compassion in shaping public perceptions and responses.
Media narratives often reduce complex racialized communities to 'culture of violence', stripping away their historical and socioeconomic contexts.
Selective empathy highlights a disparity in media portrayal, valuing the suffering of certain groups while devaluing others based on perceived deservingness.
Dehumanization in conflict discourse permits justification of violence against specific populations, framing them as less deserving of compassion and life.
Deep dives
Pathologizing Violence in Media Narratives
Media narratives often portray certain racialized communities, such as Black, Latino, and Arab populations, as inherently violent. This representation encourages the perception that any violence these groups experience or perpetrate is somehow ingrained in their culture, stripping away the socioeconomic and historical contexts that contribute to their circumstances. For instance, during the coverage of conflicts or uprisings, narratives can suggest that the violence observed is simply a natural part of these communities, leading to generalizations that obscure individual motivations and societal pressures. By framing these populations as 'savages' incapable of reasoned action, media narratives reinforce harmful stereotypes and justify policies of oppression and violence against them.
Selective Empathy and Conditional Compassion
Selective empathy is evidenced in how media coverage prioritizes the suffering of certain groups over others, often based on perceived deservingness. For example, victims of Russia's invasion of Ukraine have received extensive media sympathy, whereas similar coverage for Palestinians under siege in Gaza has been notably lacking. This discrepancy reflects a conditional compassion that treats some lives as precious while viewing others as expendable, rooted in long-standing narratives of racial superiority and geopolitics. As a result, public perceptions of suffering become shaped by these disparities, influencing not only media coverage but also policy decisions and humanitarian responses.
Historical Context and the Culture of Violence
The concept of a 'culture of violence' serves to mask the historical realities that shape conflict in various regions, often attributing violence to the fabric of communities rather than external factors. Articles characterizing the violence in the Middle East or urban spaces in America tend to ignore underlying causes, such as colonialism, poverty, and systemic inequality, focusing instead on perceived inherent traits of the populations involved. For instance, during times of civil unrest, narratives tend to portray communities as inherently violent, neglecting the impact of systemic injustice and deprivation that prompts such reactions. This perspective further entrenches stereotypes, preventing a nuanced understanding of the dynamics at play in these situations.
Dehumanization and Justifications for Violence
Dehumanization is a critical mechanism that allows for the justification of violence against certain populations, portraying them as non-human or less deserving of life. Historical examples reveal that during conflicts, such as the U.S. imperial actions in the Philippines or the violence against Palestinians, media narratives dehumanized the adversaries, framing them as 'savages' that must be subdued. This narrative not only justifies acts of aggression but also normalizes the perception that certain lives are expendable. Thus, the discourse surrounding these groups becomes intertwined with language that justifies violence, ensuring continued oppression under the guise of necessary action.
The Role of Language in Shaping Public Perception
Language plays a pivotal role in shaping public perception about violence, empathy, and humanity within conflict narratives. The framing of communities as understanding only the 'language of force' diminishes their complexity and dismisses their humanity, reducing them to mere targets. Pervasive phrases like ‘culture of violence’ create a distorted view that legitimizes violence enacted upon these groups while ignoring their histories and struggles. This manipulation of language ultimately perpetuates cycles of violence and further divides people, masking the truth behind the machinations of power and imperial interests.
"Salvadoran Ties Bloodshed To a 'Culture of Violence'", reported The New York Times in 1981. "The violence in Lebanon is casual, random, and probably addicting," stated the Honolulu Star-Advertiser in 1985. "Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims," wrote long-time New Republic publisher and editor-in-chief Marty Peretz in 2010.
There’s a recurring theme within media coverage of subjugated people in the US and around the world: they’re mindlessly, inherently savage. Whether the subject is immigrants from Central and South America, Black populations in major American cities, or people in Lebanon or Palestine, we’re repeatedly told that any violence they may be subjected to or carry out themselves is inevitable, purposeless, and baked into their "culture."
The pathologizing of violence in certain racialized communities is one side of the coin. The other side of the coin, which reinforces this notion, is the equally sinister concept of selective empathy. It’s a conditional sense of compassion, reserved for victims who media deem deserving—say, Ukrainian victims of Russia’s invasion—and not for those who media deem undeserving, like Palestinians under siege by Israel in Gaza. What motivates this asymmetry, and how does it shape public understandings of suffering throughout the world? How is empathy as a form of media currency central to getting the public to care about victims of certain violence, while a lack of empathy––and even worse, pathologizing violence in certain communities––conditions the public to not care about those whose deaths those in power would rather not talk about, much less humanize.
In this episode, we look at the concept of selective empathy in media coverage, examining how it continues centuries-old campaigns of dehumanization – particularly against Arab, Black, and Latino people – bifurcates victims of global violence into the deserving and the undeserving, and influences contemporary opinion on everything from pain tolerance to criminal-legal policy.
Our guest is Dr. Muhannad Ayyash.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
