“Many in legacy media love mass shootings. Now, I’m not saying that you love the tragedy. But I am saying that you love the ratings. Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you, and many in the legacy media in the back [of the room]. And notice I said, ‘Crying white mothers,’ because there are thousands of grieving black mothers in Chicago every weekend, and you don’t see town halls for them, do you?”
These words were said by NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch last week at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
The Parkland, Florida, school shooting has revived the nationwide debate on gun control in the U.S. In a country in which the right to bear arms is constitutionally protected and gun deaths are more prevalent than other developed nations, it’s no wonder the discourse is visceral. And there’s no doubt whether the NRA and its members have been villainized in the process.
RELATED: Editorial: After yet another school shooting, Congress must act against gun violence
However, Loesch’s despicable assertion that “journalists love mass shootings” only deepens the nation’s divide, and her mention of black mothers in Chicago feels cheap considering her organization’s racist public history. Loesch’s bio on CPAC’s website champions her “brand of young, punk-rock, conservative irreverence.” Irreverence indeed.
This column will be my third time writing in response to a mass shooting in the past four months. This is work I believe in and know to be important. But I think I echo the sentiment of my professional peers when I say I hate that it’s necessary.
Huffington Post reporter Matt Ferner tweeted in response to Loesch, “I vomited while covering the San Bernardino attack I was so overwhelmed.”
The media comprise people who have the duty of speaking truth to power and informing the public. And they are also people with families who must navigate the same uncertain world as those who claim they celebrate the spectacle of tragedy.
RELATED: Helton: Two bad arguments against gun reform, a better one, and why they’re all wrong
I agree with Loesch’s sentiment that America’s gun-violence problem should be newsworthy even when there has not been a major mass shooting. And lawmakers should work every day to produce solutions for the issue when 96 Americans are killed with guns every day, according to Everytown for Gun Safety.
But while Loesch may sympathize with black mothers, she and her organization did not come to the defense of Philando Castile, a black man shot to death during a traffic stop after telling the police officer he was carrying his legal firearm.
“He was also in possession of a controlled substance and a firearm simultaneously, which is illegal. Stop lying,” Loesch tweeted a year after the incident.
RELATED: Gun regulation, or lack of, in spotlight
And despite touting the diversity of their members, the NRA has a problem with rampant racism on its public platforms. NRATV news host Grant Stinchfield tweeted in 2015, “Blame minorities killing each other, not law abiding conservatives.” Longtime board member Ted Nugent said in a 2013 opinion piece that black communities have a “mindless tendency to violence” and an incapacity to “read or speak clearly,” a comment the NRA has not publicly condemned.
Does the NRA really care about minorities? Well, I have no interest in making such a personal judgment of 5 million Americans. But I hope spokeswoman Loesch and others will eventually realize the vitriol being spread about her organization becomes more regressive when she puts it back out into the world. Whatever you believe the solution is to America’s gun problem, whether it be stricter background checks, banning certain weapons, or mental-health reform, acting like any group is reveling in this tragedy will only set us back further.