Revisiting the 'bully pulpit'

The Sentinel-Record/File photo
The Sentinel-Record/File photo

As sadly evidenced by the two early August mass shootings that killed 31 people in 13 hours in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, history does repeat itself.

And tragically, eight other incidents defined as mass shootings occurred this month in cities across the country.

It's not just the all too repetitive use of high-powered weapons in the hands of those who hate that continues to attack American society. It's the ever-increasing use of vile and threatening language that sets individuals apart and makes community residents ever more fearful and wary.

Just last weekend, I perused a book of selected personal columns that had appeared in The Sentinel-Record. I was looking for some of my favorite words and phrases, thinking I might create something of a vocabulary test essay to coincide with the opening of Garland County schools.

But, during this search, I came across a column dated April 1, 2012, and entitled, "Today's new 'bully pulpit'." The column began with my recollection of a television program about a 14-year-old suicide victim who had killed himself after being bullied by several classmates.

I wrote about my difficulty in comprehending the maltreatment of young people by their peers, stating, "Just as I cannot understand how adults can ever abuse children, I cannot fathom how children -- who usually have a great capacity for love -- can also be so coldly cruel to one another."

And I asked, "Where does this venom originate? What possesses teens or pre-teens to engage in unrelenting hate campaigns that can only result in grief and loss? Why are so many of the parents of these bullies surprised when confronted with other sons' or daughters' capacity to hurt other human beings?"

Skipping ahead in the column, I said that as a ninth-grader (I now think it was as an eighth-grader) in the Hot Springs public school system, my friends and I took part in the "opinion book" craze whereby written comments about a range of subjects such as Favorite Teacher, Best Football Players, Top Cheerleader, Most Handsome Guy, Prettiest Girl were solicited from the student body.

I recalled that these penned op-eds were mostly inane and not really intended to demean someone's reputation. However, I also wrote, "At the time, I doubt any of us gave much thought to the possibility that our remarks might cause embarrassment, angst, or worst, for an instructor, a lab partner, a pep squad member. Thankfully, though, this activity was short-lived because junior high administrators pretty quickly discerned its downside."

In this previous commentary, I said, "Today, of course, there's the 24/7 internet blogosphere, which allows for anonymous and extreme sniping that assails people's character and allows 'meanness" to go unchecked. Even Facebook enthusiasts, who generally use the new medium for good, not bad purposes, might not realize how it, too, can become an instrument by which to carry on a steady drumbeat of nasty negativity."

I continued with, "Added to these 'vent-ilation' outlets are the public name-calling by high-profile pundits, celebrities, politicos, and the foul-mouthed condemnations by so-called grown-ups and it is no wonder that youngsters are confused and often feel they have a license to verbally assault anyone who is 'different' or with whom they disagree."

And I offered these assertions so many of us have made: "It seems we are living in an age when it is easier to engage in 'hate-speak' than to have civil conversations that might actually lead to problem-solving. ... Ultimately though, we are all responsible for what we say and how we say it. There is no such thing as totally free speech. And the consequences of excess in the modern-day 'bully pulpit' are all too clear."

Editorial on 08/14/2019

Upcoming Events