Today on AirTalk, we'll discuss the effectiveness of the emotional arguments for and against gun control. We'll also talk about the Manti Te'o catfishing incident and how it might develop legally. Later, we'll consider sibling rivalry and extreme sport accident liability, plus David Wright joins us to speak about his new Scientology exposé.
The power of persuasion in the politics of guns
Are the emotional arguments in the gun control debate effective? In the wake of the Newtown school shooting, the U.S. push for gun safety reform has sparked passionate, emotional arguments from both sides of the debate. Testimony from grieving parents and frightened children has been cited in political discourse. President Obama read from the letters of schoolchildren in his speech about upcoming gun control legislation. Gun advocates have also approached the issue emotionally, with remembrances of heroic moments and elaborate stories about what could have happened differently if there were more armed “good guys.”
Perhaps the most stirring voice is that of former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in the head during a political rally in Arizona in 2011. Yesterday, Giffords’ Senate testimony called for immediate gun reform, and packed a heavy emotional punch. Are the impassioned pleas an effective part of the gun control debate? Politicians on both sides continue to discuss legislation, economics, and constitutional rights, but the slow-going nature of policy reform leaves plenty of room for interim theatrics. Sentimental arguments for and against gun control have been thrust into the limelight.
Are you persuaded by emotional arguments for or against gun control? Is sentiment an effective part of policy, or should the focus be on logic? Do personal stories sensationalize the issue, or are they crucial to understanding it?
Guest:
Tom Hollihan, Professor of Communication, University of Southern California Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism. Hollihan publishes in the areas of argumentation, political campaign communication, contemporary rhetorical criticism, and the impact of globalization on public deliberation. He is the author of several books including “Uncivil Wars: Political Campaigns in a Media Age, Arguments and Arguing: The Products and Process of Human Decision Making” (with Kevin Baaske)
Nancy Snow, Professor of Communications, California State University, Fullerton; adjunct professor at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. She is known for her work in the area of propaganda and public diplomacy studies. Snow is the author or editor of seven books, including “Persuader-in-Chief: Global Opinion and Public Diplomacy in the Age of Obama.” “American Propaganda” (LSU Press)
The psychology and legality of the Manti Te’o hoax
After many twists and turns, it looks like the Manti Te’o story is starting to become clear.
First, he had a long-distance girlfriend who passed away after the death of his grandmother. Then, he comes out and says she wasn’t real, at which other people are labeled as perpetuating a hoax against the football player. Now, the man who was behind it all is speaking out to provide his side of the story. In an interview with Dr. Phil, Ronaiah Tuiasosopo admitted to masterminding the plan because he was in love with Te’o. In an effort to get close to him, Tuiasosopo went so far as to create an online profile, establish a back story, and even use a woman’s voice on the phone when talking to Te’o, which he did quite regularly. Now that everyone knows the what, people are asking, “Why?”
What are the psychological aspects of this story? Why would someone create a fake profile and pretend to be someone else? How did Te’o fall for it, or sustain it? And what’s next? Some are saying that Te’o has legitimate grounds to sue Tuiasosopo for online fraud. Could he have a case? If it went to court, how would a jury view Te’o’s plight?
Guest:
Michael McCann, director of the Sports & Entertainment Law Institute at University of New Hampshire and legal analyst for the Sports Law blog
Dr. Clark Smith, MD, psychiatrist in San Diego specializing in addiction
Sibling rivalry and the 'SuperBro-wl'
You’re born, and your life is great. Then, you get a little brother or sister and everything changes. Suddenly, time with the family is ripped between the two siblings. Toys must be shared. The television must be split between two pairs of eyeballs. Then you grow up and go to school. You have to live in your older brother’s shadow, or worry about your younger counterpart tattling on you for doing something out of line. Everyone goes through the traditional sibling rivalry, and by the time you become an adult and start pursuing your own life, the conflict typically falls by the wayside.
But not for John and Jim Harbaugh. Who cares about some adult brothers who are still going at it? Well, John and Jim are the coaches of the Baltimore Ravens and the San Francisco 49ers, respectively. And it just so happens that those two teams are competing in this year’s Super Bowl. Winning this ultimate game would be the absolute pinnacle for any former athlete and professional coach. One of the brothers will win, and the other will lose, thus fueling an already likely sibling rivalry that will continue to go forward.
Fortunately, most siblings don’t have to play out their competition on national TV. But that doesn’t mean the conflict isn’t there. Have you ever been in a situation like this? Did you square off against your sibling in a business setting? Did you go into similar career fields and compete for the same jobs? What about academically? And twins face even more pressure. Have you and your sibling felt it? Call in and let us know.
Guest:
Dr. Jeanne Safer, Ph.D., psychotherapist and author of “Cain’s Legacy: Liberating Siblings from a Lifetime of Rage, Shame, Secrecy and Regret” (Basic Books, 2012) and “The Normal One: Life with a Difficult or Damaged Sibling” (Delta, 2003)
In the wake of XGames Snowmobiler Caleb Moore’s death, are extreme sports too extreme?
Last Thursday, at the Winter XGames in Grand Junction, Colorado, 25-year-old snowmobiler Caleb Moore failed to land a backflip on his snowmobile resulting in a gruesome crash which led ultimately to his death, which was announced by his family today. It’s natural for athletes to compete at the highest levels possible, and in the extreme sports community a sense of one-ups-manship drives competitors to push the envelope of what is considered “make-able,” but how far is too far?
Do we now find extreme sports on a big enough stage that it’s time to create commission to determine safety standards? Is it time to create laws in a community that’s always prided itself on not playing by rules?
Guest:
Lance Pugmire, sports reporter for the Los Angeles Times who wrote about Moore’s crash in Wednesday’s Times
Lawrence Wright’s 'Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood & the Prison of Belief'
Hollywood denizens know best that Scientology is at once celebrity-laden and secretive. Author Lawrence Wright tries to unfurl both in his controversial new book - so controversial it won't be published in the UK or Canada. This despite the fact Wright's unauthorized history of the church used prominent former church members, including Oscar-winning filmmaker Paul Haggis, as primary sources on the record. Wright cites reams of research in detailing the life of Scientology founder, L.Ron Hubbard, as well as 200 interviews with those close to the Church of Scientology who reveal unflattering, even frightening, accounts of the control the church wields over its members.
In response, Scientology officials state, "The book is an error-filled, unsubstantiated, bigoted anti-Scientology book." They refer to Wright's atheism and call him bigoted. Yet Wright isn't alone in this assessment.
On accusations by the church that Wright interviewed few current Scientologists, and that his most frequent sources were disgruntled ex-members of "dubious honesty":
"I talked to more than 250 people for this book -- the majority of them Scientologist or ex-Scientologists. And these people were many of them at the highest levels of the church before they left. They attained the highest point of the Scientology spiritual pyramid they're the experts on this subject. If they're disgruntled it’s because of the way the church has treated them.”
On ex-members of the church saying that the Church of Scientology is bleeding members and losing money:
"Well what the church has is a lot of money and lot of lawyers but it does not have a lot of members. At least as far as I can tell its bleeding membership like crazy, and according to poll data there are only 25,000 people in America that identify as Scientologists that's less than half that call themselves Rastafarians. I know the church claims 8 to 10 mill members worldwide, but the number of people who are in the International Association of Scientologists, which is the best judge for how many scientologists there actually are in the world, is about 30,000 according to former members.”
On if there is a reform movement within Scientology:
"Well there are people that have left the official church and they form a large body of what they call “Independent Scientologists” and it is certainly a growing movement and its demonstrable in the number of people that register their voices in different forums online, this much we know that there are a lof of people going into that. They feel - these people who call themselves “Independent Scientologists” - that the church itself has been wrenched away from the original genius that L. Ron. Hubbard had in mind for it. And then there are other people that have walked away and said “it was all a mistake” and they feel a lot of embarrassment and shame about the years that they spent in the church and the money they spent on it.”
On the Scientology’s attitudes regarding homosexuality:
"Well the church has a problem in that the founder, L. Ron Hubbard wrote at a time when homsexuality was widely seen as a perversion and by the mental association as being kind of a mental health problem. So he shared those prejudices and they’re embedded in the Scientology literature and lore even though they’ve tried to expunge some of that material. But in the culture there’s still a sense that Scientology can cure homosexuality and that is a problem for the church.”
On Wright's research into background of L. Ron Hubbard:
"There are two narratives: One is that he was a great war hero in WWII and was blinded and crippled and left essentially alone and medicine couldn’t help him and he healed himself using these techniques that he developed into dianetics. However his war record shows that he was never injured in the war and his military medical record showed that he had conjunctivitis and ulcers. So this is a legend that he manufactured about himself and that the church perpetuates.”
Wright's thoughts on Anonymous and their efforts against Scientology:
"I talked to some of the founders of Anonymous. And it's quite intriguing how they got aroused - I mean the whole movement really started with the Tom Cruise video and the attempts of the church to remove it from the Internet. It prompted this entire movement that swept across the entire world in reaction to the church's efforts. So I've been watching it with a lot interest and curious to know more about anonymous I'm following up on that.”
“Do you remember when there was a video on the Internet with Tom cruise in a black turtleneck and he was talking about what Scientology meant to him. And he was extremely fervent and he was speaking in terminology that many people just simply didn't understand it was Scientology jargon and he came across as a fanatic to many Americans. The church was embarrassed about it they tried to remove it from the Internet and in the process they stirred up this hornets best that is now called Anonymous.”
What is the basic belief of Scientology?
"Scientology belives that you can celar yourself of your old fears and neurosis which come sfrom previous experiences. And then you can climb this ladder of spiritual attainment. As you get up the ladder you learn that there was a galactic overlord named “Xenu” who had an overpopulated planet and he sent the surplus people -he froze them- took them to this prison planet named “Teegeeack”, which is earth, put them in a volcano, exploded them with nuclear weapons, captured their disembodied spirits, and reprogrammed them. But those disembodied spirits called “Body Thetans” infest us. Our bodies are filled with these spirits from alien beings and part of the goal of Scientology is to cast them out, like casting out demons, using the E-meter to survey your problems and see what kind of “Body Thetan” is behind it.”
Is this a literal belief?
"As in all religions there are gradations of belief. There are people that probably literally believe it and there are people that accept it as a belief in order to remain in the community of faith. I think Scientology is not different from other religions in that fashion. However they sell themselves not as being faith at all but a technology of spiritual enlightenment.”
On the meaning of the crucifix symbol Scientology uses:
"Well that's a cross that was created by the Church of Scientology when it was cloaking itself more as a religion in order to gain a tax exemption in 1993. That and the services in the church and ministers wearing Roman collars all of that was created in the campaign that culminated in the tax exemption”
So why did he pursue this subject? How does his research into Scientology compare to other religions Wright has focused on? What's his reaction to the accusations from Scientology representatives? And why does so much of this story come back to Hollywood?
Guest:
Lawrence Wright, Author, “Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood & the Prison of Belief;” Staff Writer, “The New York;” Wright won a Pulitzer Prize for “The Looming Tower”
The Church of Scientology's response to Wright's book:
Oscar-nominated Israeli documentary 'The Gatekeepers'
Israeli filmmaker Dror Moreh set out with an immodest proposal. He wanted on-camera interviews with all the former chiefs of Israel's secret service unit, Shin Bet, about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Somehow he pulled it off and secured lengthy, candid interviews with each of the six chiefs still alive. As Moreh explains, these were "the people with the power to shape history from behind the scenes. Living in the shadows, they have never spoken about their work in front of a camera before." Their perspective might surprise you.
How did Moreh make it happen? How does he compare a history told by Shin Bet to a history told by political leaders and civilians on either side of the conflict? How has the documentary been received in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories?
Guest:
Dror Moreh, Director, “The Gatekeepers,” Previously directed “Sharon” – a feature-length documentary about Ariel Sharon; Moreh has also worked as a Director of Photography and Cinematographer
Tomorrow, the film opens at the Hollywood ArcLight and The Landmark theater. It will have wider release on February 22. Click here for more showtimes.