The Narrative Took Precedent
A quick analysis of the media's coverage of the 2022 Club Q shooting.
The twisted human being that took five innocent souls in November of 2022 will never see the light of day again after he was sentenced to a prison sentence of over 2,000 years. Nothing is more precious than life, and as such, nothing is more disturbing than it’s premature ending.
I have waited awhile to publish this piece. Primarily due to being busy, but also because it never feels like the right time to speak about a tragedy such as this. Unfortunately, as has become customary with events like this in the United States, it is an issue that was quickly politicized. It became simply another rhetoric cudgel to wield against political opponents.
The excitement from the left was overwhelming when they unearthed enough consequential evidence that pointed the finger towards those on the right. Conclusions were drawn within hours that the shooter was indeed acting upon the antagonistic rhetoric from politicians such as Lauren Boebert and conservative commentators such as Ben Shapiro. Indeed, the shooter was the grandson of a Republican politician from California (who I met a handful of times while I worked out there), but beyond that, we knew little about the shooter’s potential political leanings in the days immediately after the tragedy.
Michael Littwin, a liberal Colorado Sun opinion columnist, published a piece following the shooting that stated “the motive remains unclear” in the subheading, yet mentions Lauren Boebert five times. I expect these connections to be drawn in opinion pieces such as this, but it expanded into news coverage as well, which is where I felt it was necessary to do a retrospective.
A Colorado Sun news article was published three days before Littwin’s piece titled “Clear spike in anti-trans rhetoric sets stage for violence like Colorado Springs shooting, experts say,” which has a large section titled “Boebert and other conservative Colorado lawmakers have amplified anti-trans rhetoric.” The Congresswoman is mentioned five times in the article as well. Mental health is mentioned once, paraphrasing somebody who was interviewed.
A Denver Post news piece struck a similar tone, titled “Anti-LGBTQ rhetoric leads to violence, advocates say in wake of Club Q shooting.” Boebert is only mentioned once, Republicans are mentioned twice, mental health is mentioned zero times.
A Colorado Public Radio piece, titled “Lauren Boebert defends her past anti-LGBTQ and anti-trans tweets during KOA radio interview in wake of Club Q shooting,” again seems to point the finger at Lauren Boebert. Mental health is mentioned zero times in the article. An essential piece of information is buried in the tenth paragraph. “The police have not yet released a motive for the shooting on Saturday.”
Regardless of how you feel about Congresswoman Boebert’s rhetoric, there has been zero evidence that Lauren Boebert’s rhetoric played any role in this shooting. There is not a shred of evidence that indicates the shooter was even aware of Lauren Boebert’s existence or her rhetoric towards LGBTQ individuals, supported policies, or cultural impact. No evidence was presented that the shooter had a Twitter, Facebook, or any other social media accounts where he followed, retweeted, or shared any rhetoric from Lauren Boebert.
Reporters wrote entire stories connecting Boebert’s rhetoric with this shooting with zero evidence that they are related. An egregious case of journalistic malpractice that has apparently made it past editors in Colorado’s most significant newsrooms.
Why? Because the narrative took precedent.
It didn’t stop in Colorado. A Los Angeles Times Article from November of last year was titled “Who is Randy Voepel, the East County politician whose grandson is accused of LGBTQ club killings?” An entire story written about somebody other than the shooter, simply because they are related.
Admittedly, if some strong connection had been evident between Assemblyman Voepel and his grandson, I could see reason to write about it, but in the sixth paragraph of the story, it states that “There is no known link between the alleged shooter and his relatives’ beliefs, nor is it clear how well he knows his grandfather. A legislative aide said Voepel hadn’t talked to his grandson in years.”
Read the story. Seriously.
They talk about how Voepel voted against increasing restrictions on cigarette smoking in public places as Mayor of Santee. Did his grandson murder individuals at a nightclub, in a different state, years later, because of their smoking policies? I think you know the answer to this one.
Almost no local stories focused on the potential mental health angle of this shooting, at least not in the immediate aftermath. The shooter is a 22-year old that was raised by divorced parents, one a former porn star who has struggled with addiction issues, the other with a then-outstanding warrant in another state (not sure if that got cleared up). His father, who gave a much-publicized interview following the shooting, stated that the mother had led him to believe that his son had committed suicide years ago, and it was only recently that he discovered he was still alive. His mother was arrested just hours after the shooting for disorderly conduct.
While it does seem that the shooter specifically targeted an LGBTQ nightclub, it is also abundantly clear that this isn’t some average conservative who was upset about drag queen story hour. This is somebody who came from a broken home, was the victim of an online bullying campaign when he was younger, has been described by those who knew him as a former drug user, and recently had a run-in with the law when he threatened to use a bomb in his mother’s house, a case that has revealed potential systemic failures that permitted the shooter to walk free and continue possessing firearms despite evidence that he posed a threat to others.
By all means, let us have a civil, fact-based discussion surrounding mental health and the Second Amendment, but blaming the likes of Lauren Boebert and her tweets for the broken mind of a lost individual is absolutely ridiculous. Furthermore, dragging his grandfather, a politician that lives a thousand miles away, into it is asinine.
Much of the framing utilized by local media in the days following the shooting are exactly why conservatives feel that the media is “out to get them.” There is nothing factually incorrect with the reporting, but the stories are clearly formulated in a fashion to point blame in a certain direction and make connections that don’t exist. It is clear that reporters went in asking the question, “how does Lauren Boebert’s rhetoric lead to incidents like this” rather than the open-ended “how did this happen?”
The Denver Post story revealing the plea deal did not mention Lauren Boebert, nor the shooter’s grandfather, Randy Voepel. Neither did the Colorado Sun story. Neither did the Colorado Public Radio piece.
I wonder why.
(As I’ve been tinkering with this for about six months now, it’s entirely possible something here is a tad outdated, so I apologize if that is so. If I made a factual error, or more information was revealed I didn’t see, please let me know.)
Normally posts like these are reserved for my paid subscribers. Thankfully for you (if you’re not a paid subscriber already), my September deal is still on. Just $2.50 a month gets you premium content. Heck, I think you paid $3 to withdraw some cash from a 3rd party ATM recently, didn’t you? Thanks for considering.