An Alarming Observation of Mass Shootings

In 1774, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe published his first successful novel, “The Sorrows of Young Werther.” In the novel, Werther shares letters to his colleague about his unrequited love, his agonizing embarrassments, and the tortures of his very existence. Sadly, feeling no other way out, young Werther dramatically takes his own life.

The book was a sensation, but it also carried a dark consequence that ultimately ended up causing it to become banned in several places throughout Europe. Rashes of suicides began where victims were found dressed in the same fashion as young Werther, using the same mechanism (pistol), following an eerily consistent end of life as Werther had in the novel, or even with the book opened at the scene. This copycat effect of well-publicized suicides has become known as the Werther Effect or Werther Syndrome.

While some scholars argue that this is fiction and rumor, both Daniel Goleman and Robert Cialdini explore the concept in their research and writing. Goleman, in a 1987 New York Times article, explores the impact of a nationally publicized suicide. His research showed an increased rate of suicide amongst the population following a well-known suicide, with a larger increase when the suicide is a person of influence such as a celebrity. Cialdini equates the Werther effect to the social-psychological influence mechanism of social proof, or essentially the normalization of behavior to people who identify and relate with the person exhibiting the original behavior.

While this research has been conducted around self-harm, I was curious if the same held true in acts that harmed others. In the last week, there have been 3 mass shootings in the United States. These are highly publicized and generate significant press. It is within our human capacity of curiosity to desire an understanding of what most of us would classify as senseless violence. It inevitably sparks debate on mental health, gun restrictions, and race.

With everything happening recently, I decided to review the data surrounding mass shootings. Right away, I noticed a correlation with the dates. They often occur very close to each other in groupings. You can review the data I looked at here: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

Before continuing, I wish to state in no uncertain terms that I condemn this violence unequivocally. There is no excuse for this type of violence. Having a “bad day” is not an explanation nor a justification. We all have bad days, we all do not commit mass murder. The perpetrator of these horrific acts is solely responsible for their own actions. I am not taking a position of suggesting that the media, mental health, guns, or anything other than the perpetrator and their decisions are to blame. However, I do believe we should look at possible explanations of what may inspire someone to make such a horrible decision or action.

Werther Syndrome as a Potential Explanation

In the scope of gun deaths, mass shootings are actually a very small number as compared to accidents or suicides, let alone single or double homicides. Here is the data: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/16/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/. Additionally, in terms of gun deaths, using accidents or poisoning as comparative examples, gun deaths are not the largest contributor to mortality. Here is the data: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm. However, they often receive the most amount of press and media attention.

This is not placing blame on the press or media. Press and media are businesses. They publicize the stories that the public wants to consume. It is cyclical and symbiotic - the public consumes, the media provides, the public consumes more, and so on.

It is in this cycle that normalization occurs. The more we read about something happening, the more we begin to believe that it happens all the time. We see from data that there is a correlation to many of these mass shootings occurring within the surrounding weeks or months of each other. Is our immediacy and reach of communication propagating the continuation of this behavior? I argue, yes.

So what can be done? Without getting into gun control and freedom of the press debates, I offer the following as a thought experiment.

What if the media agreed to not provide any coverage of the perpetrator of gun violence or the mechanism by which they victimized the public? Zero, zilch, nada. No mention of the name, the rationale, the backstory, or the actual situation. Instead, they focused exclusively on the victims. Would this limit the focus on the perpetrator and potentially reduce the likelihood of the Werther effect?

The above thought experiment is intended to provoke questions on the symbiotic relationship of the press and consumption of information and how that affects the behavior of their audience. I recognize that the probability of press and media conglomerates taking such an approach will never happen. However, it does beg a provocative question:

If it could have an impact on reducing mass shootings (or violence in general), what responsibility does the press have in continuing their existing practices?

That is a question for another day.