Maniac or Not? Binghamton’s Media Sensation
by elaine chenDoes the media give us a good enough picture of Jiverly Wong?
Given that Google News lists about three thousand and growing articles on this subject, you’d think that I would be satisfied with the information out there on the web about the Binghamton, New York shootings by Vietnamese American Jiverly Wong (or Voong). But ironically, I am desperate for more, seeking coverage on gun control or mental health treatment or even some sort of response to the way the media is portraying this tragic event. Instead, I am met with article after article attempting to psycho-analyze, with morbid fascination, the mind of “the killer” or “the immigrant who wanted to destroy lives before he destroyed his own.”
Although it’s hard to read past the lines of embellishment in this rampage, what are the singular facts of what happened?
On April 3rd, with two guns and a hunting knife, Wong barricaded the backdoor of the America Civic Association, an immigration community center described as a place that “helps immigrants settle in this country.”[1] After closing off the back exit of the building, he entered and shot thirteen people before shooting himself.
But a scenario like this cannot be stated without sufficient context. I honestly felt nervous before diving into all the information available on this topic. How will the media portray Asian, immigrant men? With the Virginia Tech shootings fresh in people’s minds, how will the media spin this? I had a sickening fear that stereotypes were now shifting from Asian men being dorky, asexual beings to quiet, psycho killers with the potential to explode at any moment.
I was definitely not disappointed by the number of articles out there sensationalizing the news surrounding Wong. A cryptic letter and photos of Wong that were sent to a media station in New York further encouraged all this. Wong was depicted as a crazy, America-hating, ticking time bomb based on interviews with co-workers, many of whom had only had one-time encounters with him. News sources highlighted Wong’s statement, “I don’t like America. America sucks,” which was said in response to “Do you like the Yanks?” Other articles noted how he wanted to kill the president.
Eager to dig up a motive behind the act, numerous articles started with similarly phrased lines: “The maniac who shot 13 people dead in a Binghamton immigration center before killing himself was described Friday as an angry loner who loved guns, hated America and talked about assassinating the President.”
And after haphazardly framing a picture of Wong through these interviews with coworkers, the blame game begins! What is really the problem? The economy, the difficulties of learning English, adapting to America, job insecurity, family… the web of explanations for Jiverly Wong’s actions expand and grow. Of course, Wong’s not exempt from the blame game. He is eagerly labeled as a maniac, a psycho, and a coward.
What’s even more fun than hastily made judgments and labeling? Random scientists with no involvement at all giving opinions based on poor coverage! One example: “
Park Dietz [is] a criminologist and forensic psychiatrist at UCLA who analyzed the Columbine High School shootings in Colorado in 1999.
"What will be revealed if the investigation goes deep enough is that many people in a shooter's world knew that he was angry, mad, unreasonable, scary at times, and recently some of them came to learn that he was threatening and armed," said Dietz, who is not involved in the Binghamton investigation. "They've known that for a long time, but none of them did what they should have done with that information."
What’s my beef here? So what? The media has been sensationalizing everything from mass killings to the president’s dog (Did you hear?? His name is BO!). My problem with the media right now is the lack of conversations being started on understanding immigrant communities and socialization, analyzing problems with mental health access, or even questioning gun control laws. Yeah, learning English is hard, but what about everything else an immigrant faces in America? Why don’t we talk about the financial and social instability of settling into a new country which might forever contextualize you as a foreigner? What about noticing the lack of available resources for him to turn to in order to deal with the so quickly condemned mental illness he struggled with? How about the social stigmas of even trying to access mental health care? And can someone please tell me why the heck people are still able to so easily buy a gun, especially after the number of shootings that we’ve witnessed growing up? Why are we still clamoring for second amendment rights when the irresponsible exertion of these rights results in the harm of others?
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not justifying Wong’s actions by trying to expand the picture of the problem. I condemn his actions and his choices. No matter how deeply we investigate into this, the situation remains the same. What I do want to say is that I think what we must first do is really grieve over the violent actions of this man and extend sympathy to the victims who were deeply affected by this incident. We also must recognize how dangerously the media construes the events, and feel indignant at the attempts to play to our emotions in order to sell stories.
It is important to not expand this incident any further by trying to zero in on Wong’s motives, problems, and life. Let us not so easily condemn Wong as a special case, a freak of nature, an abnormality, but see him as someone who could’ve very well been us. What is more, we need to make constructive efforts to understand the greater elements that played key roles in this incident and start a dialogue on key problems which contributed. That is the only way we can build knowledge and awareness in order to move for greater change to prevent these things from happening in the future.