Rise of extremist media harks back to dark days of nation’s past

As a nation, we must return to the professional, evidence-based media standards of the mid-20th century, which are a fundamental civilizing force and will prevent the abuses we’ve seen before.

When companies like Google, Apple and Amazon cut their business ties with the Henderson-based social media site Parler by removing its app from their platforms, many Americans undoubtedly saw it as a positive step toward curbing the violent right-wing extremism that is plaguing the nation.

And indeed it was, said UNLV sociology professor Robert Futrell, who has extensively studied right-wing and white supremacy groups. However, Futrell said, much more action will be needed to effectively contend with the threat of groups like the Proud Boys, Boogaloo Bois, neo-nazis, militias, the Ku Klux Klan, etc.

“Deplatforming websites and social media that host far-right networks and suspending individual accounts can have some important effects, such as reducing the volume of extremist messaging,” Futrell wrote in an email response to questions from the Sun. “But deplatformed sites often find other hosts (as Parler seems to have done with Epik) and individuals create new accounts.”

Futrell is correct about Parler getting back online, with news reports confirming that it has returned to the internet with help from a Russian-owned web security service and that its domain is now registered with Epik, which hosts other far-right sites such as Gab and the neo-nazi message board the Daily Stormer.

As Parler has shown, these online cesspools will find ways to reconnect the hate groups, anti-government organizations and violent insurrectionists to whom they cater. And of course, Russia is eager to help them because it will harm America. That’s deeply disturbing, considering the type of dialogue these sites allow. Amazon, in response to a lawsuit filed against it by Parler, offered 67 pages of violent comments and memes posted on the site, including calls for Black and Jewish people to be murdered, a reference to law enforcement officers as “modern day redcoats” and calls for them to be shot, a meme of former President Barack Obama with a noose around his neck, and the killing of specific politicians such as Stacey Abrams and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-cortez, D-N.Y.

One sample comment, referring to Obama: “We need to burn and rape that stupid (expletive) for all he did for our country!!! Donald Trump 2020!!! Heil Hitler!!!”

Clearly, there needs to be a reckoning with social media’s power to validate, sustain and encourage violence. It’s become the most corrosive technology in our society, creating an artificial insanity fed by the ability of these sites to take sane but vulnerable people and turn them into monsters through a diet of lies and validation of our worst impulses.

Another avenue toward battling extremism can be found in the history of the nation’s traditional media, which in the 19th century became characterized by an overtly partisan and lying press. That led to Americans existing in separate worlds of “facts,” and there were no significant ethical standards in journalism to present truth rather than fiction. It was a time not unlike today, with the right-wing press violating ethical standards and presenting extreme lies.

That situation reached its climax with the yellow journalism of the 1910s and 1920s, fueling divisions between Americans through partisan attacks masquerading as legitimate journalism.

Finally there was a backlash, and professional standards slowly began to emerge in journalism. The pace of those reforms picked up during World War II, and continued for decades despite a momentary backstep during the Red Scare of the 1950s. By the late ’50s and into the 1960s, evidence-based journalism held sway.

Although there were exceptions, the country from the early 1920s onward gathered around a shared agreement of facts. Americans might have disagreed on how to act based on these facts, but the adherence to an evidence-based society resulted in America making the greatest advancements — on every front — in a single century the world had ever seen.

But now, because of far-right organizations like Fox News, Sinclair broadcasting, the Examiner newspapers and many more, we are seeing our shared set of facts eroded by egregious lies. Those lies are in turn amplified and weaponized on social media. The abandonment of shared facts puts us squarely in danger of reverting to the divisions of the 19th century.

As a nation, we must return to the professional, evidence-based media standards of the mid-20th century, which are a fundamental civilizing force and will prevent the abuses we’ve seen before.

To get there, our society must reject media that trades in lies, and a few powerful media owners must stop sacrificing civilization to profit off of those lies.

In the meantime, with the genie out of the bottle in terms of the ability of Parler and sites like it to operate, how can our society address this extremism at its roots? Futrell’s suggestions include:

n Expanded monitoring and surveillance of right-wing activities. Although Futrell says this can push up against civil liberties, it can also be effective for “evaluating farright claims-making, identifying escalating claims, strategizing, and any illegal actions.” The private sector has already shown that such operations can be conducted effectively without violating individual rights: The Anti-defamation League’s Center on Extremism tracks websites and collaborates with law enforcement to identify imminent threats. Its work has aided numerous investigations and disrupted or prevented multiple terror attacks.

Placing additional emphasis on hatecrime prosecutions.

n Expanding anti-racism education and training in classrooms, workplaces and for parents. “To quote a parent whose child was convicted of a hate crime: ‘We didn’t teach our child to hate but we also didn’t teach him not to hate,’ ” Futrell wrote.

On a much broader scale, Futrell said, countering extremism is a matter of championing equality and justice in public policy.

“They (hate groups) assume their extreme ideas and violence will terrorize and intimidate their opponents and create a stalemate of sorts where social justice efforts are slowed or abandoned,” he wrote. “Too often, their bet on the cowardice or timidity among policymakers and institutional leaders and white citizens has been correct, such as with the much-needed recent changes in the criminal justice system. We have to find ways to seize upon these moments to create a different, more equitable and just future.”

As shown by the Capitol attack and the online chatter surrounding it, white supremacy and far-right extremism pose a clear and present danger to America. As a society, we can’t ignore it as it bubbles up — in places like Parler or anywhere else.