# Do you believe Glenn Beck has any liability in the Poplawski murders? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 8, 2009, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450 "2009-04-08T23:28:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/61 "2009-04-09T17:57:38Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Okay, I’ll ask a third time: If Glenn Beck says things that will raise the level of fear in his audience, is he responsible if their level of fear is raised? Right. This is from the Democratic Platform, 2008: > [@](#): > > We can work together to enact and enforce common-sense laws and improvements, like closing the gun show loophole, improving our background check system and reinstating the assault weapons ban. Now, again by all accounts, this guy had a fear that his gun or guns would be taken away. So by what you’re saying, the Democratic Party is to blame. Right? I trust you can grasp how absurd you’re sounding. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/62 "2009-04-09T18:03:25Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > … like the anti-video game crusaders, … Funny you should mention that. Via Olbermann [here’s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5he23xJxGU) Glenn blaming video games (Grand Theft Auto in particular) and more specifically television for increases in the murder rate (starts at ~1). If they found a copy of GTA in this guy’s home previous incarnations of Mr. Beck would have had no problems connecting this act to that game. I believe Glenn is “hoist with his own petard” here. CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/63 "2009-04-09T18:08:28Z")
Osama bin Laden is not responsible for 9/11. He is completely innocent. After all, it wasn’t _him_ flying those planes. And he’s not responsible for any of the violence since then, either. Nope. I say this not because I think Beck _planned_ or masterminded these murders, but because I want to point out there isn’t always a bright line between “criminally culpable and bears at least a tiny measure of legal or moral responsibility” and “innocent catalyzing factor.” Look, I don’t think Beck is responsible for the actions of a lone nutjob. No way. There’s millions of people out there, and some of them are deeply flawed. You never know which ones they are, or what trigger is gonna set 'em off: a TV show, a comic book, a video game, a newspaper column, a book, a photo, a movie, a picture of a celebrity, a real-life incident or accident … but sure as shit, _something_ is going to set off those time bombs sooner or later. I _do_ find it fascinating that it is the generally conservative right who all these years have been crowing about protecting the family from Janet Jackson’s tits, from violent video games, protect the children from horrible Batman and Robin, save us from the word “ass” on television, redistributing movies on DVD suitably re-cut for “family values”, who want to strip Harry Potter books out of the library because it’s got witchcraft in it, who _suddenly_ apparently believe Beck is in no way responsible for the shit he spews on national television. Now, I don’t have evidence that it is these _same groups_ who said “OMG Harry Potter” and “OMG a nipple” and “OMG I saw somebody’s butt on NYPD Blue” and “Beck is a blameless and holy creature.” There is a danger of lumping _conservatives_ into an all-encompassing, homogenous lump of often contradictory positions. I do hate it when Dopers and pundits say “I heard some guy say X, and I figure he’s liberal, so I’m going to complain about all liberals everywhere as if they too support position X.” All I’m gonna say is this: get these people on record. Anybody who defends Beck as being entirely free of responsibility for his words has forfeited the right to complain about the need for responsibility in other media. You can’t have it both ways. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/64 "2009-04-09T18:19:17Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Right. This is from the Democratic Platform, 2008: > > Now, again by all accounts, this guy had a fear that his gun or guns would be taken away. So by what you’re saying, the Democratic Party is to blame. > > Right? > > I trust you can grasp how absurd you’re sounding. No, I’m not sounding absurd. Please cite anywhere that the Democrats said they would take away anyone’s guns. Please cite that the 1994 AWB took away anyone’s guns, or any proposed resurrection of it has said it would take away anyone’s guns? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/65 "2009-04-09T18:30:07Z")
> [@Fish](#): > > I _do_ find it fascinating that it is the generally conservative right who all these years have been crowing about protecting the family from Janet Jackson’s tits, from violent video games, protect the children from horrible Batman and Robin, save us from the word “ass” on television, redistributing movies on DVD suitably re-cut for “family values”, who want to strip Harry Potter books out of the library because it’s got witchcraft in it, who _suddenly_ apparently believe Beck is in no way responsible for the shit he spews on national television. The two parties are pretty much equal on the “won’t somebody please think of the children” bandwagon. Democrats don’t give a crap about Harry Potter, but Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman, to name two, are outspoken critics of deadly entertainment. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/66 "2009-04-09T18:36:53Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > The two parties are pretty much equal on the “won’t somebody please think of the children” bandwagon. Democrats don’t give a crap about Harry Potter, but Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman, to name two, are outspoken critics of deadly entertainment. One of the people you named is not a Democrat. What agenda do you think GTA is advancing, such that it is equivalent to a right wing mouthpiece fomenting unrest? ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/67 "2009-04-09T18:44:56Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > No, I’m not sounding absurd. Please cite anywhere that the Democrats said they would take away anyone’s guns. Please cite that the 1994 AWB took away anyone’s guns, or any proposed resurrection of it has said it would take away anyone’s guns? The first ban re-classified several shotguns as destructive devices. Those gun owners who owned them and lived in states where DD’s were not permitted for civilian ownership had their property legislated away. They were forced to destroy them or sell to out of state interests. On 9/12/94 I could own one. On 9/13/94, I could not. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/68 "2009-04-09T18:45:18Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Really? Which music and video games have been so banned? > > I’m glad I put effort into considering the issue as I did. You’ve clearly thought it through thoroughly. Sorry, I missed an “attempted”. I seriously don’t think you can hold the man responsible for actions he was not advocating. Beck did not at any time say anything even remotely close to “kill cops when they come to your house.” Frankly, I think responsibility for speech influencing others should be kept to a bare minimum and only in cases of a specific action being advocated. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/69 "2009-04-09T19:02:52Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > The two parties are pretty much equal on the “won’t somebody please think of the children” bandwagon. Democrats don’t give a crap about Harry Potter, but Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman, to name two, are outspoken critics of deadly entertainment. Like I said, rather than attempt to gather all the “conservatives” into one heap of contradictory beliefs, I’ll be interested to see which position individual people take on this. Do Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman each think Beck’s responsible for what he says? If so, that would be laudably consistent. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/70 "2009-04-09T19:03:39Z")
Beck? He’s a loser, baby, so… I won’t type any more for fear of implicating myself! ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/71 "2009-04-09T19:04:48Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > One of the people you named is not a Democrat. That’s irrelevant nitpicking. Lieberman is a registered Democrat, part of the Democratic caucus, even holding at least one committee chairmanship, and votes with the Democrats on most issues. The fact that he hasn’t been a elected to the Senate _on the Democratic ticket_ since 2006 doesn’t matter in this case. He WAS elected on that ticket in 1988, 1994, and 2000, and during that third term - probably earlier, too - he made comments specifically criticizing GTA. Are you of the opinion that none of that counts because of what’s hapened in the last two to three years? > [@](#): > > What agenda do you think GTA is advancing, such that it is equivalent to a right wing mouthpiece fomenting unrest? None, but the reasoning being employed is similar. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/72 "2009-04-09T19:05:28Z")
> [@Fish](#): > > Do Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman each think Beck’s responsible for what he says? If so, that would be laudably consistent. I’m of the opinion that it’s more like “consistently stupid.” ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/73 "2009-04-09T19:21:45Z")
We set the bar on speech crime very high, and for good reason. We are well aware that men will seek to silence an unpleasant voice for flimsy reasons, if permitted, so we go to great lengths to keep the definitions of illegal speech as narrow as humanly possible. But this places the burden of responsibility back on us, as it should be. Does Mr. Beck have reason to believe that his inflamatory speech is having an unintended consequence? I daresay he does. Having such good reason, is he therefore obliged to throttle back on the rhetorical hysteria? Yes. Unless, of course, he _sincerely_ believes that Obama is Mussolini Lite, and he must rouse the people to action by any means necessary. I very much doubt that, but I cannot peer into the squirming miasma of his mind, I can only judge by the tentacled, squamous horrors that issue forth. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/74 "2009-04-09T19:32:01Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’m of the opinion that it’s more like “consistently stupid.” No argument here. But at least _consistent_ stupidity has the virtue of looking like there’s a thought process, which means you can engage the person in debate. _Inconsistent_ stupidity just looks like hypocrisy. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/75 "2009-04-09T20:45:11Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > It seems like this killer was pretty far gone to begin with, and was just pushed over the edge by Beck’s stuff but was already clearly _crazy._ It could have been anything that pushed him over the edge. So I’m not sure Beck is to blame any more than Jodie Foster is for inspiring John Hinckley to shoot Ronald Reagan. Lunatics have their own crazy reasons for doing what they do. Although Foster had the decency to be quite distressed by the whole thing and spent some time removed from public life - in part because she was in college, in part because this really disturbed her. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/76 "2009-04-09T21:25:09Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > I’m with **Rand Rover** , scarily enough. Regardless of his rhetoric increasing the climate of fear, I think Beck WOULD be responsible in part if he’d said “shoot the police who come to your door, because (X)” or even “right-thinking people might soon have to shoot police”. > > The same as I’d hold him partially responsible if a would-be Obama assassin cited Obama’s similarity to Hitler, since that’s a view Beck’s specifically encouraged. > > I don’t think Beck’s statements in the latter paragraph have any real bearing on the nutter’s actual actions in the former paragraph. I don’t think commentators should be held partially responsible for acts potentially linked to their rhetoric unless those acts are either specifically advocated in the rhetoric or linked _directly_ to the rhetoric’s pronouncements. I’m going to third Rand on this one. Nuts are going to find the media to reinforce their beliefs, especially so in the day of the internet and 200+ tv channels. I think the real question is why does the demagoguery of these “commentators” find such an eager audience? The Becks of the world wouldn’t be out there if people didn’t want to have their own viewpoints reinforced. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/77 "2009-04-09T21:27:35Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Okay, I’ll ask a third time: If Glenn Beck says things that will raise the level of fear in his audience, is he responsible if their level of fear is raised? > > In general, I don’t think it’s very controversial to suggest that if a child watches Sesame Street, and ends up with an improved facility for the alphabet, Sesame Street has some responsibility for that. If I watch a show on the Hitlery Channel, and come away with a better understanding of the Kar 98 or the MP 40, I’d say the makers of that show have some level of responsibility for that understanding. Does anyone contend that a show designed to increase the knowledge of the viewer has some responsibility for the increase in knowledge of the viewer? > > Okay, let’s consider messages that not only involve fact, but emotion and motivation. > > What about a guy in my office who tells me it is raining outside? Is he responsible if the srength of my belief that it is raining has increased? Given that I was excited about taking a walk in the sunshine, is he responsible for me feeling a bit bummed, or if I grab my umbrella on the way out the door? > > How about if I watch a show made by Ed Begley, Jr., about the environment, and I end up feeling concerned that the environment is being harmed, and that I should do a better job of throwing my aluminum cans in the recycling bin, does Ed Begley, Jr. have some responsibility for my feelings and my behavior? > > If I watch a news report, and the Director of Homeland Security is shown telling me that I should buy duct tape and plastic sheeting because of the possibility that I might experience a chemical attack, is he responsible if I have an increased level of fear about a chemical attack and if I go out and buy duct tape and plastic sheeting? > > If I watch a show about the flu, potential consequences of the flu and the benefits of getting a flu vaccination, is that show responsible for my increased level of concern about the flu? Does it have any level of responsibility for my behavior the next day when I call to see where and how I can get a flu vaccination? > > I don’t think it’s very controversial to suggest that any disseminator of information has some responsibility when that information is received. If that information has a likelihood of impacting someone’s motivation and emotion, I think that they bear responsibility for that as well. When someone’s behavior is impacted by that, I think there remains a diminished but still meaningful level of responsibility on the part of the person who originally passed along the information. I thought the reason we educated people is so they can make critical decisions about the information they’re presented? ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/78 "2009-04-09T21:43:59Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Does Mr. Beck have reason to believe that his inflamatory speech is having an unintended consequence? I daresay he does. Having such good reason, is he therefore obliged to throttle back on the rhetorical hysteria? Yes. Yup, he’s not informing and coincidentally raising the level of fear, he’s raising the level of _anger_. Only a fool sees that as less than a hostile act on the part of Beck. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/79 "2009-04-09T21:55:15Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > What about a guy in my office who tells me it is raining outside? Is he responsible if the srength of my belief that it is raining has increased? No. And he’s not responsible if you go and blow your life savings on raingear either. > [@](#): > > How about if I watch a show made by Ed Begley, Jr., about the environment, and I end up feeling concerned that the environment is being harmed, and that I should do a better job of throwing my aluminum cans in the recycling bin, does Ed Begley, Jr. have some responsibility for my feelings and my behavior? No. And he’s not responsible if you go all eco-terrorist and bomb an oil refinery either. > [@](#): > > If I watch a news report, and the Director of Homeland Security is shown telling me that I should buy duct tape and plastic sheeting because of the possibility that I might experience a chemical attack, is he responsible if I have an increased level of fear about a chemical attack and if I go out and buy duct tape and plastic sheeting? No, And he’s not responsible if you bust into a mosque and shoot a bunch of muslims either. > [@](#): > > If I watch a show about the flu, potential consequences of the flu and the benefits of getting a flu vaccination, is that show responsible for my increased level of concern about the flu? No. And he’s not responsible if you refuse to get a flu shot, and then get sick either. > [@](#): > > I don’t think it’s very controversial to suggest that any disseminator of information has some responsibility when that information is received. Yes it is, if you are talking about an individual person. Becuase it’s all in the eye of the beholder. No matter what you say or do, people will perceive it differently, based upon their own ideas, thoughts and experiences. Now, if a multitude of people, all with different thoughts, ideas, and experiences, all take the same action based on information you disseminate, then I think you could argue that you bear some culpability, becuase the sole commonality between them would be your disseminated information. But if one person in 6 million takes an action that the 5,999,999 people didn’t, based on your information, I think it’s safe to say that it was their own thoughts, ideas, and experiences that influenced their course of action, not you. ---
**Author:** ![Driver8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5a626/32.png) [@Driver8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Driver8)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450/80 "2009-04-09T22:24:34Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Right. This is from the Democratic Platform, 2008: > > Now, again by all accounts, this guy had a fear that his gun or guns would be taken away. So by what you’re saying, the Democratic Party is to blame. > > Right? > > I trust you can grasp how absurd you’re sounding. I agree that the democratic party policy example is absurd. I also agree that Glenn Beck is not morally responsible for this lone nut. But I don’t think this is as clear cut as you make it out to be. The answer to “If Glenn Beck says things that will raise the level of fear in his audience, is he responsible if their level of fear is raised?” is definitely true in certain circumstances, just none that have actually happened yet. If Glenn Beck “raised the level of fear in his audience” by yelling “fire!” while his audience was in a crowded theater, it isn’t unreasonable to hold him responsible for the ensuing stampede. The question is, at what point does it cross over from being “absurd to suggest he is responsible” (the lone nut scenario) to “patently obvious that he is responsible” (the “fire” scenario)? I don’t know the precise answer to this question. If a commentator said “the current administration is a tyranny, Hitler youths will rise up and reeducate your children, rise up and attack the government with force” I personally believe the commentator would be responsible for the ensuing mayhem. But what if they left out that last bit? They technically haven’t called for violence. On the other hand, any reasonable person could predict that violence would be the likely outcome - after all, it would be perfectly reasonable to resist a government that was truly tyrannical! Is the commentator completely off the hook? I’m not sure they are ethically, although I do not know how you would create a legal framework that could capture this without being easily abused. Given that I have not done extensive research into finding examples of crossing this line from either end of the political spectrum, nor am I inclined to spend a lot of time doing this, I will happily give everyone the benefit of the doubt and assume no one has crossed it yet. But in the abstract it is not obvious to me at all that “raising the level of fear in their audience” is always ethically neutral. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-believe-glenn-beck-has-any-liability-in-the-poplawski-murders/492450.md?page=5)