Re: Why do people want to believe bad news and terrible stories?

ronniecat wrote:

> In discussing these stories, no matter how someone points out that the
> person telling the story, even if a first-hand witness in one of the
> centers, is always talking second-hand ("I heard stories about..."),
> or that remembered quotes from tv shows don't confirm these details,
> many - most? - people seem outright resistant to having these rumors
> debunked.
>
> Why is that?
>
> <SNIP> Why do people
> want so badly to believe bad, bad things when they cannot be confirmed
> - and in fact the evidence that is posted repeatedly fails to confirm
> it? Why do they *resist* - and not just in this forum, but many I've
> read - having these terrible stories turn out to be false?
<SNIP>
> Are there academic theories as to why people cling to urban legends
> and even become hostile or angry when they're debunked?

When I was in college, I was lucky enough to have a freshman sociology
professor who devoted one week of class to urban legends, rumor panics
and other related phenomena. The following ideas are based upon his
lectures as well as the work of numerous scholarly and popular authors
I've read on this subject (Brunvand, Victor, etc.).

Before tackling this issue, you may want to read two very famous
children's fables: Chicken Little and The Emperor's New Clothes.
These "silly" stories actually outline the two uniquely human
propensities at work here:
1) our willingness to accept "bad news" solely on word of mouth
2) our instinctive inclination to disregard our own senses (and
sensibility) in favor of a shared consensus of reality no matter how
absurd, unsubstantiated and delusional it may be

Whenever I encounter a sensational claim in the media, I keep these two
fables in mind. In fact, I often label what I see in the media as
resulting from The Chicken Little Effect or the ENC Principle. For
example, as soon as I heard reports of the inhuman atrocities occurring
in the New Orleans Superdome, I immediately heard that voice in the
back of my mind singing, "the sky is falling in."

I'm not going to be so presumptuous as to attempt to explain human
nature here. However, I do think many experts before me have proposed
similar theories on why we want to believe "bad news."

Bad news grips us. We will read and relive countless accounts of a
victim's harrowing story in newspapers, magazines, true crime
paperbacks and Lifetime movies. Yet, typically, we only read a story
about someone's good fortune - e.g. winning the lottery - once.
Obviously, then, "bad news" satisfies something inside us that
"good news" does not. Whereas we rarely question the veracity and
factuality of bad news, we almost always question the truthfulness of
good news.

Why?

I remember my college sociology professor explaining it this way.
"We live under the impression that bad news can teach us something.
We think bad news imparts upon us knowledge that we can somehow use to
protect ourselves." He tied this to superstition and myth, which is
the impetus of all legend, be it urban or not.

With your typical scary urban legend - Man With the Hook-Hand,
Choking Doberman, etc. - the lesson or moral of the tale instructs us
to be careful, to always be vigilant. We are taught that evil people
surround us and that something bad can happen to us at any moment. If
we believe the legend and keep it in our minds, then we are arming
ourselves against something similar happening to us.

This desire to be forewarned and forearmed is also the fuel that stokes
so-called "satanic panics," "witch hunts," and conspiracy
theories. What begins with unsubstantiated rumor can often grow into a
spectacle as big as the Salem Witch Trials, McCarthyism or the McMartin
Preschool debacle.

Believing that we are surrounded by EVIL, then, actually comforts us.
Unlike the teeming, unwashed and blithely naive masses, BELIEVERS know
the truth and thus can protect themselves. This is why all the animals
follow Chicken Little without ever once questioning her contention that
"the sky is falling in."

The animals immediately believe the bad news because this knowledge,
erroneous as it may be, still conveys upon them the illusion of power
- power over their circumstances, their environment, and their own
ignorance. This sense of power, in turn, allows them to take action in
order to protect themselves. Questioning Chicken Little skeptically
and investigating the matter would have only lead to more uncertainty,
doubt, and a growing sense of helplessness.

So what does this have to do with the stories of rape, murder and
euthanasia that arose unchallenged from the media coverage of Hurricane
Katrina? Well, if you look at these stories in light of the Chicken
Little Effect - Belief becomes Power becomes Protection - a
reasonable explanation does present itself.

None could look at the horrific aftermath in New Orleans without
vicariously putting themselves in the shoes of the storm's victims.
"What if that had been me?" we asked ourselves. "What would I do
in these circumstances? Would I go to the Superdome? Would I loot?
Who would I trust?" The hopelessness, powerlessness and desperation
of the evacuees' situation is utterly overwhelming and
incomprehensible.

Amid our national wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth, the stories
of the New Orleans atrocities suddenly appeared. The media
disseminated them because sensationalism sells, i.e. "If it bleeds,
it leads." The public embraced these tales of lawlessness because
believing in the EVIL without question immediately gave us a warped
sense of power over the situation.

In other words, when we heard about the horrors in New Orleans, we
suddenly learned a great human "truth": we are all animals; the
separation between order and chaos is just an illusion; given the right
circumstances our high-and-mighty civilization can crumble into total
anarchy in mere hours.

"Knowing" this becomes a queer comfort because we feel this
knowledge can somehow protect us. If we ever find ourselves caught in
a disastrous situation like Katrina, we feel this knowledge of EVIL can
arm us against being victimized like the pitiful souls in New Orleans.
"Knowing" the true nature of man and civilization, we will never
allow ourselves to be put in the same situation as the evacuees. It is
therefore in our best interests to believe that the sky is falling
because this belief gives us the power to act and the wherewithal to
protect ourselves in the future.

Once the rumors of the New Orleans atrocities started circulating among
the various news agencies and resources, the Chicken Little Effect
became full-blown. No one questioned the reports before passing them
on. No one stepped out from the madding crowd, pointed to the dearth
of evidence, and asked for proof or corroboration. The media and the
public went along with stories in direct accordance with the ENC
Principle. No one questioned the stories because no one wanted to look
insensitive or ignorant. The nation was reveling in the knowledge that
we are surrounded by EVIL and that anarchy is just a Molotov
cocktail's throw away.

Even in the thunderous wake of contrary evidence, many are still
enamored with this belief that the sky did indeed fall in New Orleans.
Their belief gives them a sense of power and protection against the
EVIL that lurks among us, waiting to pounce. When the next disaster
strikes, and it will, they will be the first to wag their fingers, wave
their bloody shirts, and remind us all how thousands suffered in the
aftermath of Katrina; not by the fury of Mother Nature but by the
inhumanity of Man. To paraphrase Thomas Pynchon, these Believers
aren't paranoid, they are simply well informed.

.