They Also Serve, Who Shill

In what's now post-massacre routine, the Noise Machine went into high gear, reassuring the audience that mass murder should be blamed on anything other than guns. And as it suggests enemies to blame, this encouragement for paranoids to stock up an ammo is less than subtle.

With the lunatic segment so well served, why shouldn't the industry try some seemingly gentler PR—say, on the NPR fans? Ergo: Malcolm Gladwell, on today's Morning Edition.

Here, Gladwell's spuriously "scientific" talking point was that—

The first person who throws the rock is a lot more radical than a hundredth person. By the time the riot has attracted a hundred people, you don't have to be nearly as much of a daredevil or a hothead or committed or any of those things to want to engage in a riot.

...

The first half-dozen or so cases [of school shooters, beginning in the 1990s] are kids who are profoundly psychotic, deeply traumatized or, in the case of someone like Eric Harris at Columbine, are kind of textbook psychopaths. Now 20 years into the epidemic, the kinds of boys - it's all boys - who are attracted to this are no longer as profoundly troubled or - you know, as the early ones were. We're replicating Granovetter's theory of riots. The hundredth person is not nearly as much of a committed radical as the first person in. And that's a terrifying conclusion if that's what we're seeing.

I found the segment incoherent, but Gladwell was touting his latest piece in the New Yorker, where he no doubt aimed to overwhelm objection by expounding on the theme at more stupefying length.

Gladwell is so entrenched, by Establishment embrace and by his book sales, that it's hard to find much public critique. There's this, which notes that social scientists have objected to Gladwell's use of their work, complaining of "the writer's penchant for reporting correlations as causations."

Certainly, it could be at most correlative for the psychology of people joining a riot in progress to have any relation to the mental workings of an emotionally isolated person who decides to enter a school and start firing. But, it serves as a change of subject: from guns, to something abstract and purportedly Scientific.

If, for that matter, social science was anything to Gladwell other than material to mine for great profit, he could examine what social context might tend to produce these enraged loners. And, perhaps even look at Family; now that would seem a good topic of inquiry, considering some of the parents who have encouraged their sons' "interests." In the case of this most recent massacre—

According to multiple reports, the shooter's mother boasted online about her arsenal and feared that gun ownership would soon be restricted.

"When the mood strikes," Harper reportedly wrote on Facebook, "I sling an AR, Tek-9 or AK over my shoulder, or holster a Glock 21 (not 22), or one of my other handguns, like the Sig Sauer P226, and walk out the door." "Shotguns," she said, "are a little too cumbersome to open carry."

According to officials, the Harper family moved from Torrance, California to Winchester, Oregon, in 2013. "I moved from So. Calif. to Oregon, from Southern Crime-a-mania to open carry," Harper noted in that same Facebook post advocating for open carry laws.

Harper, a registered nurse who shared an apartment with her son, spoke "openly about her love of guns," according to one of her patients.

But to examine this sort of thing is certainly not what Gladwell is about. The most thorough critique of his career has been Yasha Levine's. Unsurprisingly, Gladwell got his start in a right-wing pundit mill, from whence he was thrust into prominence. Along the way up, says Levine—

... Gladwell has shilled for Big Tobacco, Pharma and defended Enron-style financial fraud, all while earning hundreds of thousands of dollars as a corporate speaker, sometimes from the same companies and industries that he covers as a journalist.

Malcolm Gladwell is a one-man branding and distribution pipeline for valuable corporate messages, constructed on the public's gullibility in trusting his probity and intellectual honesty in the pages of America's most important weekly magazine, The New Yorker, and other highly prominent media outlets.

Presumably, the New Yorker, NPR, and Gladwell's many other forums will be a source of new PR work, on behalf of yet another industry with no regard for human life.