A Different Kind of Lynching
In the realm of literature and creative writing, the use of imagery, whether literal or figurative, plays a pivotal role in transporting readers to the world of a narrative. Through symbolism and sensory engagement, writers can shape the reader’s understanding of events and their emotional responses. However, imagery can also be wielded as a tool to underline divisive concepts, such as white supremacy, hierarchical ideologies, and racial prejudices.
A recent article published in Springfield’s local newspaper echoes a recurring theme in journalism and creative writing—a fusion of imagery and narrative manipulation to perpetuate ideas of white supremacy, hierarchy, and racial differences. This approach has historically been employed to justify socio-political violence and the dehumanization of marginalized communities, especially Black individuals.
In this recurring pattern, established politicians enlist a specific writer to execute character assassination. Over the years, this writer has mastered the art of crafting narratives that harken back to a dark chapter in history, echoing derogatory terms like “negro ruffian”, “colored cannibal”, “dissolute Negress”, and “African Annie”. Such portrayals were once used by the white popular press to dehumanize Black people and rationalize violent acts.
The latest piece from this writer employs a specific narrative strategy it opens with the line: “Video footage shows a man associated with Springfield mayoral candidate Justin Hurst handing cash to people outside City Hall last weekend.”
Although the incident allegedly took place at City Hall, the imagery painted suggests a scene of Black men engaged in criminal activities on dimly lit, desolate streets. This portrayal insinuates the distribution of ill-gotten money to desperate, drug-addled, homeless individuals, thereby perpetuating a stereotype of delinquency in a crime-stricken city.
The article supports its credibility by citing City officials who claim in sworn affidavits that the visible distribution of $10 bills in the surveillance footage amounts to voter fraud. Furthermore, City Solicitor John Payne has called for a criminal investigation by the Hampden District Attorney’s Office after being informed that unregistered voters were allegedly paid by members of Hurst’s campaign team.
Interspersed with this information, the writer features a man interviewed by The Republican, alleging that he was paid $10 to vote for Hurst. The writer then underscores Payne’s integrity by mentioning his status as a retired District Court judge, as he labels the incident “a fraud upon the elections process.”
The article then shifts to paint the Black candidate as uncooperative and unwilling to take responsibility for the alleged crime. To reinforce this narrative, it introduces a Springfield police officer’s statement on the suspicious activities and delves into the criminal history of the alleged perpetrator, Gregory, who is described as a convicted felon with a history of violent crimes.
The writer concludes this loaded narrative with the phrase “$10 and a fish dinner”, juxtaposing a police officer’s statement with an observation of a convicted felon, creating a sense of guilt by association.
Throughout the article, readers are subtly led to believe in the guilt of the Black candidate. It progresses to include interviews with Gregory, city hall staff accounts, and responses, all framed by silent video footage without context. City Councilor Tracye Whitfield, a candidate opposed by the current administration, is also brought into the narrative, seemingly creating a double narrative assassination.
The essence of this article is a call for readers to exercise caution and critical thinking when consuming information, emphasizing the significance of controlling one’s narrative. It highlights the presence of a writer with a history of targeting Black influencers and an administration willing to use such writers with pointed narratives to protect their interests. The article underscores the power of narratives in shaping perceptions and influencing public opinion. Imagine, a headline story with no facts and no integrity, just allegations and accusations.
Get the picture???
