I use that graphic as my own reaction to the diaries and comments that have been posted concerning the Austin bombings and now the explosion at a FedEx facility near San Antonio and reports of a suspicious package at a FedEx facility in Austin.
There has been a great deal of speculation as to the motives of the bomber and the connection of the FedEx incidents to the four Austin bombings. There has also been some examples of quick reactions that simply got the facts wrong. Some of this reaction and speculation has been stated as authoritative facts, and people have grown quite upset when challenged on them.
For example, after the first three bombings, it was stated, not only here but all over Twitter, that all of the victims were African-American. This was simply untrue, as the victim of the third attack was a Hispanic woman. Desperate to hold on to their narrative, one DKos commenter suggested that the Latina was a domestic servant and not the intended target (also untrue).
When the fourth bombing occurred, there were immediate responses to erroneous first reports of two simultaneous explosions, with one diary’s headline stating that they were “timed explosions.” This was followed by comments that the tripwire IED involved in that attack was somehow targeted towards individuals and/or that the victims were also POC. When it turned out that they were white, some speculated that they were injured while manufacturing the bomb, which also proved false.
When a bomb threat was emailed to a nightclub during SXSW, people automatically assumed it was the work of the bomber or bombers. It was not.
Today, with the incidents at the FedEx facilities, everyone is assuming that they are connected to the four bombings. We don’t yet know that they are, and law enforcement is wisely stating that they are investigating that as a possibility. A New York Times story irresponsibly quotes an anonymous “law enforcement official” as stating a definite connection—see #2 in the graphic above.
There has also been a huge amount of speculation and assumptions regarding the motivation of the bomber or bombers. We don’t know what’s going on in their head(s), and unless and until they issue some written statement or are arrested we can’t know. Are they targeting certain individuals? The fourth bombing would seem to disprove that, but what if it was set as a distraction? Are these acts of terrorism, or do the bomber(s) just want to kill random people? Are there more than one bomber? Is it ISIS? Is it some rando here for SXSW just trying to screw with people? These have all been suggested as possibilities or. worse, stated as fact.
If we are to consume news intelligently, we need to remember what we actually know and what is someone’s wild-ass guess. And if we are to engage in responsible discussion, we need to state clearly when we are speculating and accept the possibility that our speculations could be wrong.
To those wishing to report news on DKos, please keep in mind that it is far better to be accurate than it is to be first.
The guidelines in the graphic above are, I believe, indispensable aids to dealing with breaking stories. In this case, I think we need to keep in mind that the story is still breaking, with developments days apart that shatter people’s assumptions. Until the bomber(s) are caught or issues some sort of manifesto, we don’t know for sure what is going to happen next or why it is happening at all.
For those living in Austin, the best course of action is to listen to law enforcement statements and take the authorities’ advice. It is terrifying that we don’t know enough to say who is a potential target, but it won’t make the situation any better to operate under assumptions that may well prove false.