Two weeks ago, the News + Record interviewed New York Times feature writer Elizabeth Williamson about her book, “Sandy Hook: An American Tragedy and the Battle for Truth.” The book is a compelling account about the aftermath of the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School and how conspiracy theorists portrayed it as a “false flag” event, using actors and designed to promote gun control measures.
After the May 24 shooting at another elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, the CN+R reached out to Williamson again with follow-up questions. Here’s that conversation:
Within hours, people were online saying the shooting was a Biden administration “false flag” operation, a pretext for gun control. Tony Mead, a house mover in Florida who since Sandy Hook has reinvented himself as an “investigative journalist” who picks apart media coverage for “anomalies” that he says “proves” most major mass shootings never happened, was on Facebook the day of the Uvalde shooting, calling it a hoax. I profiled Mead in my book.
After Sandy Hook, Mead ran a private Facebook group called “Sandy Hook Hoax,” where hundreds of people would gather every night, building each other up by sharing false theories about the shooting. Lenny Pozner, the father of Noah, the youngest Sandy Hook victim, spent time with Mead’s group, showing them proof that Noah was murdered, including Noah’s birth certificate and his post-mortem report. They rejected all that, and kicked him out of the group. Today, Lenny’s non-profit, HONR Network, works to defend the victims of online abuse in part by getting hoax material taken down from social media. He got the Sandy Hook Hoax group removed from Facebook, but it took nearly five years. Now here was Mead again, denying Uvalde on Facebook, and it took the company nearly a day to take down his posts.
The conspiracy theories spring up almost immediately, as they did after Sandy Hook. But this phenomenon is no longer confined to the fringe, to Alex Jones and the audience for his Infowars radio and online broadcast. These false theories are being spread by some members of Congress opposed to new gun legislation.
And it’s not just denial of the shooting or false theories about the shooter, it’s unconstructive arguments that muddy the public discourse and prevent Americans from having a useful debate about what to do. The more time people spend online challenging Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-Texas) argument that every school should have one door, or the NRA’s argument that every one of our more than 110,000 schools should have an armed guard of some kind, the less time they have for logical, quiet debate that is crucial for finding solutions.
And as we know the nation’s attention soon wanes, so by occupying those first days after a shooting with unworkable arguments, people opposed to any change are running out the clock. By the way, that armed guards in schools argument, and the “good guy with a gun” slogan, was first advanced by the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre several days after Sandy Hook. At the time it was derided by law enforcement officers, educators and politicians across the political spectrum as unworkable, even “delusional.” Now it’s embraced by some prominent Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, who, following his base, has moved further to the right on the gun issue.
I think it should be a victim’s family members’ individual choice.
The Sandy Hook family members I spoke with and whose comments and media interviews I read after Uvalde were very much opposed to the idea of releasing these photos. They are being asked to do so, or being asked to convince the Uvalde families to do so, and they find this traumatizing, even cruel. It places a burden on the shoulders of people who are already struggling, and who have paid the highest price for our lack of solutions.
In my book I describe how Lenny Pozner and Veronique De La Rosa, parents of Noah Pozner, led then-Connecticut Governor Dan Malloy to Noah’s open casket. The grievous wounds to his face were covered, but as Veronique said, the governor was still seeing a dead child, lost to gun violence. Today Lenny Pozner told me he thinks releasing the photos wouldn’t work — he predicted that mass shooting deniers would dispute the veracity of the photos or weaponize them, using them to further torment the victims’ families.
My advice is to not get bogged down in fighting online with people who deny that these events happened, or reject the evidence. As I document in my book, people who gather in groups to deny major mass shootings are not likely to be convinced. They derive entirely new identities, a sense of community and immense psychic income from doing this. Likewise, ignore unhelpful or outlandish statements masquerading as proposals.
Whatever your views on new gun legislation, you should be making your elected representatives aware of them and of your intention to hold them accountable for representing you on this issue. If you are in favor of additional legislation, there are national groups working at the local level and lobbying in Washington for that. Using our democratic system to express your views is a more effective and productive way of responding to these mass shootings than arguing on social media about them.
Yes. Neil Heslin, whose son Jesse Lewis died at Sandy Hook, referred to Uvalde as an “instant replay” of the shooting that killed his son. Scarlett Lewis, Jesse’s mom, who advocates for teaching empathy and social learning in schools, noted that the gunman was bullied, and is angry about the lack of attention to those issues, which she feels could prevent a child from turning to violence. Robbie Parker, whose daughter Emilie died at Sandy Hook, described a feeling of despair, and a desire to reach out to the Uvalde families, and physically be with them. These are families who for 10 years have walked the terrible road the Uvalde families are just embarking upon, and they want to help them when the time is right.
Read as much as you can, and not just from commentators that tend to reflect your point of view. Lawmakers from both parties are engaged in talks over the issue right now, and it’s important to understand what is being proposed, and to weigh in with your elected representative. This is a highly emotional issue, but it would help the discussion if we collectively can keep an open mind and listen to the ideas of all.
If you’re inclined to research the issue, seek data from reliable sources. The Gun Violence Archive, for example, is an nonpartisan organization that collects data on shootings from more than 7,500 sources, including local and state police, media and government, and then independently verifies it. Many universities conduct studies on gun violence and policy, and convene researchers to discuss their findings. Our quest for solutions — not to mention our democracy — relies on a calm, fact-based exchange of ideas among honest, well-meaning people.