Read on Twitter
The key here, as I’ve argued elsewhere, is that violent (& dehumanizing) rhetoric doesn’t cause *just anybody* to act violently. It causes people who are already inclined towards violence to do so. And it causes those inclined to resist it to do the same. https://bit.ly/3hW9UjY https://twitter.com/jayvanbavel/status/1347152146031063041
There’s been a lot of great, recent work on this. My favorites include (1) Adena et al.’s study of the role played by propaganda in Nazi Germany: https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/130/4/1885/1916582?redirectedFrom=fulltext
(2) Yanagizawa-Drott’s study of propaganda and violence in the Rwandan genocide: https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/129/4/1947/1853091
As well as (3) Straus’ research on the same topic:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=straus+rwanda+radio&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DKxjpFDhWUH0J
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=straus+rwanda+radio&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DKxjpFDhWUH0J
(4) This excellent analysis by Selb & Munzert of the impact of Hitler’s speeches on the rise of the Nazi party: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/examining-a-most-likely-case-for-strong-campaign-effects-hitlers-speeches-and-the-rise-of-the-nazi-party-19271933/1E88D3B79217653D77735294CF2C8DED
&, perhaps paradoxically (will explain more in a sec), (5) @betsylevy’s work on promoting tolerance in Rwanda (she does too much great work on this to suggest just one piece, but I’m going with this one)— https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-02415-005
The thing is, as I’ve argued in my research on behavioral variation in genocide, people participate in violence for myriad & complex reasons. Yet very rarely do those of us who study these things find ppl act violently & even kill bc media motivated them: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0735275115587721?casa_token=9ZdQDsGSxLkAAAAA:jh6H-48EL6x6oUhkEESDIajkeZ1cCRmSMxLGz3IrlWdf4UR4N0sTSaTmFsyeq26tBEmx0GHJ1ugN
Rather, media often serves as a coordination mechanism for ppl who want to act violently to feel like there are others like them & to help them find allies, it serves as a cultural script for those horrified by their own actions to justify to themselves why they are doing...
what they’re doing & why it is just, and, building on @betsylevyp’s work, it sends signals to people about what they think others believe such that even if they disagree, they feel pressured to keep their feelings to themselves, thus limiting dissent & making violence more likely
There’s much more I can add, of course, and I’ve explained elsewhere how timing is key for understanding changing dynamics between media/propaganda, violent mobilization, and ideology (linking to a short letter I wrote below), https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/11/letters-from-the-december-11-2017-issue
...but suffice it to say (I hope!), this is something I work on and think about obsessively and I am happy to talk about it off-line with anyone who is interested. /fin
