I do not follow politics very closely. In fact, I did not follow the Brett Kavanaugh controversy at all until I decided to write this post. Therefore, what follows is not an opinion on Mr. Kavanaugh himself, his guilt or innocence, his suitability for the office of Supreme Court, or about his accusers. As far as I have read about his politics I tend to agree more with him than I did with his future predecessor, Ruth Bader-Ginsburg. At the same time I believe that if he is guilty of sexual assault he is not qualified for that office, no matter how good his politics are.
You may ask, then, if I am so indifferent to the outcome of this contest, why am I writing it at all? The answer is that it has dominated my internet welcome screen for weeks. Whenever I open a new tab in Microsoft edge I see a page of headlines, usually something about “Trump does new incredibly stupid thing that will destroy the world” juxtaposed with “You won’t believe how cute this animal is.”
I almost never click on any of them, so the algorithm has nothing to go off of in selecting what headlines to show me, so I get a pretty good sampling of what you might call the “natural bias” of Microsoft edge, i.e. of its programmers. I do, however, look pretty critically at the wording of the headlines and the picture that heads it. Here are some examples of what I mean.
Looks rather a dolt in that one, almost as if he is disappointed he got his hand caught in the cookie jar.
Judge Kavanaugh is a fairly prominent public official, I venture to guess he has had his picture taken more than a few times. I am sure he knows how to look his best in front of a camera, and I am sure the photographers taking these photos, (to say nothing of the writers and editors choosing these photos) also know how to make their subject look their best. Instead, for some reason they chose to head their stories with pictures that seem calculated to make their subject appear in a less than favorable light. Contrast that with this picture of Kavanaugh’s latest accuser.
This picture makes her look friendly, confident, brilliant, trustworthy… the opposite of the pictures of Kavanaugh above.
But it gets even better. Check out this gem of a cover picture:
This picture looks like his wife is looking askance at him, as if to say, “Really? You were a choir boy in high school and college? If you were a choir boy then I am a nun.”
It also looks like someone went through the video frame by frame and found the split second his wife turned her head to look at him and was caught in this exact expression, similar to how people look ridiculous when you take a picture of them with a fork halfway in their mouth, or in the middle of speaking.
As it turns out, the headline was even a bit misleading, as it suggests that he claimed to be something of a holy roller. However the article simply explained that two of his former classmates did not believe his claim that he had never blacked out from drinking. One could not remember any instance in which he had suffered memory loss, but was sure he had. The other remembered drunken antics and was certain that he must have not been able to remember the events of that night. The crowning irony is that an equal number of classmates corroborated his statement in the same article!
This, however, has to be my favorite:
This article leads with a headline that suggests Kavanaugh is replying with a variation of “but everybody does this!” That is not the case. The quote actually comes from someone else entirely. Kavanaugh never said it, and has maintained since the beginning that he did not do the things of which he is accused. The headline, coupled with the picture paint a picture in your head. The picture is probably taken from one of his interviews when he was gesturing with both hands to make a point. In the context in which it is used, it conjures up an image of Kavanaugh groping a woman and saying, “But all boys do that.”
I find it hard to believe that these pictures and their headlines were chosen by accident. My most charitable interpretation is that they are clickbait, designed to get people to tune in to the latest political-drama from Washington. However, I also can’t help suspect a bias in these media sources against Kavanaugh, and a subtle (or not so subtle) choice of unflattering pictures and misleading pictures meant to bias people who are scrolling by and not reading carefully against this Supreme Court nominee.
Bear in mind that none of this has any bearing on whether or not he is guilty or innocent. I certainly don’t know the facts of the case, and I do not think any of us ever will. At this remove the best that we can look for in terms of evidence is circumstantial, alcohol fogged memories at thirty-years remove.
I do not know whether Brett Kavanaugh is guilty or innocent. I don’t really care. If he is, he should be punished appropriately. If he is not he should be exonerated. Neither is likely to happen in any event.
I am, however, quite certain that the purveyors of “news” chosen by the maker of my internet browser want me to think or at least feel that he is guilty. Or maybe he’s just creepy. It doesn’t really matter because we need to “stand with victims.”
I certainly agree on standing with victims. However, to support his accusers against him is to tacitly state not just that they are victims, but specifically that they are victims of him. It is no justice to either the women or to the man in this case to assume that he is guilty in the name of solidarity with victims.
But what really turns my stomach about the whole affair is just how obviously it is not about justice, or standing with victims, or prosecuting sexual offenders. It is about one thing and one thing only.
This is, and has only ever been about power. Observe the headline above about the GOP losing points with women, compared to the headline about Democrats calling for Kavanaugh to withdraw. The message is clear: “Republicans hate women and want to repress them. Only Democrats are willing to stand up for them.”
Despite the factual problems with that claim (i.e. Democrats care no more about women than anyone else does), it has entered the cultural imagination. It has been pushed there. The women in this case are being used as COGs.
COG is a technical term from U. S. Army Psyops doctrine. It stands for Center of Gravity and refers to anything within a population that can be used as leverage to sway the rest of the population one way or the other. In this case, the presence of a rumor of sexual misconduct in the context of the MeToo movement is enough to be a COG that democrats can use it as a COG to sway public opinion against their political enemy. They do not need a conviction. In fact, I think they are well aware that they will never be able to get one based on such scanty evidence. They have pushed this issue far enough that they now feel they can call on the court of public opinion to make him withdraw his candidacy.
Again, all of this is incidental to the question of whether or not he did it. The fact that that is a real issue does not change the fact that this whole affair is a strongarm play for political power. At best, if it punishes a sexual offender, that will be a happy accident. At worst it may do incalculable harm to the reputation and career of someone who, for all I know may be a good man, and quite innocent.
In the final analysis, there is nothing I can do about it either way, except to pray and fast for all concerned and encourage all of you to do the same.
The Man Who Would Be Knight 