The Culture of Fear_ Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things - Barry Glassner [172]
There has never been a time in modern American history when so many people have feared so much. Glassner demonstrates, chapter after chapter, that it is our manipulated perception of danger that has increased, not actual dangers themselves. This vast market in trepidation can and should be replaced by programs and measures focused on correcting the true, if unpopular and unpleasant, causes of our problems. “We need to learn how to identify exaggerated or false fears from legitimate ones,” Glassner has insisted. “We need to be able to distinguish between isolated events and rumors, on the one hand, and real problems and dangers on the other hand.” The Culture of Fear goes a long way in helping us to make the correct distinctions and to identify the true dangers.
For Discussion
1. Glassner begins his book with the double question, “Why are so many fears in the air, and so many of them unfounded?” (xix) How does he answer those questions? What specific fears does he cite as unfounded or exaggerated, and what explanations does he put forward? What fears strike you as particularly pervasive and without factual basis? How would you explain them?
2. Why do specific fears, and fear in general, seem to play such a critical role in contemporary life? What purposes—social, political, psychological, and other—might be served by the promulgation of and belief in specific fears and threats, however unfounded, misreported, or overstated they may be?
3. What potential dangers, hardships, and costs does Glassner associate with the inflated, exaggerated, unfounded, false, and overdrawn fears that he identifies? What can be done to allay or prevent those dangers, hardships, and costs? Which of Glassner’s pseudodangers and scare campaigns do you consider the most important or the most threatening to the well-being, stability, and improvement of individuals, communities, and American society overall, including your own well-being? Why?
4. In Glassner’s view, what organizations, groups, and individuals “promote and profit from scares” (xxxi), and in what ways do they profit? What are some of the ways by which these fear profiteers create and spread unfounded and exaggerated fears? How might they be dissuaded from doing so?
5. In what ways does what Glassner calls “psychoblather” (7) contribute to the continuation of unreasonable and unfounded public fears, and to an inaccurate view of the actions of individuals and groups and of the consequences of those actions? What might replace psychoblather in relation to the analysis of public scares?
6. In what ways do reports of contrived or questionable dangers divert us from what actually puts us at risk, enable us to avoid dealing directly with the actual dangers and social and economic ills that they mask, and—at the same time—enable us to think and talk about the results of those dangers and ills? What actual danger or disorder does each false scare cover up? Why don’t journalists, politicians, advocacy groups, and others pay more attention to these dangers and threats? What can we do to increase attention to and concern for actual dangers?
7. In what ways do intentionally propagated false scares give their advocates the offensive advantage and defensive weapons for use in other disputes? (17)
8. What does the account of Erik Larson’s Wall StreetJournal exposé reveal about journalists’ reporting concerning workplace violence, specifically, and their approach to the reporting of crime in general? Why is Larson’s style of journalism so important, and why are there not more journalists—print and electronic—like him?
9. In what ways might Glassner’s treatment of such