The perils of instant judgment
In an age of instant communication, quick responses take precedence over careful deliberation. Hot takes are valued; “cold takes” are not a thing. But truth can be a casualty when social media hordes leap to vent anger at bits of information that look offensive.
All this became apparent, not for the first time, when a video went viral showing a face-to-face encounter at the Lincoln Memorial between a 64-year-old Native American veteran and a high school boy wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat.
The impression left by the clip was of an arrogant white teenager harassing a person of color for the amusement of his rowdy classmates. The Native American man, Nathan Phillips, told reporters he felt threatened by the crowd of teens and heard chants of “build the wall.”
A storm of outrage followed. The students — from a Catholic boys’ high school in Covington, Ky., — were in the capital for the March for Life. They were denounced on Twitter as racist bullies who had no respect for their elders. Calls went out for the boy and his friends to be expelled and shamed. The archdiocese of Covington condemned the students’ conduct; the mayor disavowed it.
But the reaction turns out to be a cautionary tale about jumping to conclusions. Other videos of the gathering showed the students being subjected to nasty slurs by black protesters known as the Hebrew Israelites; the teens eventually countered with chants. It was Mr. Phillips who strode up close to the boy in the MAGA hat, singing and beating a drum. Robby Soave of Reason watched two hours of footage and didn’t hear a single “build the wall.”
The teenager, Nick Sandmann, who says he has gotten death threats, issued a statement giving his version. His classmates’ chants were a response to the insults directed at them, after they got permission from an adult chaperone. Mr. Sandmann was “startled and confused” when Mr. Phillips approached him and thought that “by remaining motionless and calm, I was helping to (defuse) the situation.”
Was Mr. Sandmann’s expression a smarmy smirk or a nervous smile? Was Mr. Phillips trying to calm the situation or confront some kids he regarded as Donald Trump followers? Were the students provoking antagonism or responding to it?
Even all the footage that has emerged leaves room for disagreement. It’s not hard to believe that Mr. Phillips and Mr. Sandmann each acted in a way he thought was responsible and constructive. It was a messy, confusing situation.
But a couple of lessons can be drawn. One is that it’s dangerous to reach instant judgments based on images that lack context. Sometimes, video footage is invaluable in determining the truth. At other times, it makes something complicated look simple.
Another is that many Americans see their political opponents as not only mistaken but malicious, and are prone to interpret anything the other side does as damning. It’s never been easy for people to see things from the point of view of those who disagree, and it’s even tougher in this hyperpolarized moment.
Some people who were initially furious found themselves backtracking. “If the Covington Catholic incident was a test, it’s one I failed,” confessed Cincinnati writer Julie Irwin Zimmerman in The Atlantic. Conservative commentator S.E. Cupp tweeted, “I wish I’d had the fuller picture before weighing in, and I’m truly sorry.”
Next time an upsetting video or photo goes viral, maybe some observers will wait to learn more before forming strong opinions. Sure, you can rush to judgment and tweet “Gotcha!” to your foes. But doing justice takes time.